cyrano01

Suspicions of Anglo-Saxon involvement were aroused when the remains of burnt cakes were washed ashore on the coast of Denmark. Amongst other suspects Æthelred is unready for questioning and Edward has already confessed.

Suspicions of Anglo-Saxon involvement were aroused when the remains of burnt cakes were washed ashore on the coast of Denmark. Amongst other suspects Æthelred is unready for questioning and Edward has already confessed.

Yes.

In your posts, the influence of Russian propaganda is noticeable. Obviously, frequent exposure to pro-Russian resources does not benefit the objectivity of judgments

Ahem, BF. Seeeee my ATGMers CAN spot and shoot from prone in tall grass... 

Careful, if the Russians read this we will be getting an anouncement from Moscow that the Ukrainian advance is an evil British plot involving NATO biological weapos and the notorious mercenary, special forces leaders Siward, Malcolm and Macduff.

Yes, most likely he knows. It is fairly well known episode. But like with many RU history episodes some inconvenient parts are missing. So, it is like this:
RU attacks Thin red streak tipped with a line of steel Some shooting Battle has ended 

Careful, if the Russians read this we will be getting an anouncement from Moscow that the Ukrainian advance is an evil British plot involving NATO biological weapos and the notorious mercenary, special forces leaders Siward, Malcolm and Macduff.

While I am away here is a map with highlighted roads RU most likely use to supply Lyman area (blue sort of circles are most probable UKR objectives).

 

The other factor is that Ireland is a non-permanent member of the UNSC right now and its diplomats have put in some pretty solid performances which the call for Russia to be booted out of the UNSC is its most recent example.

If you ever wondered how propagandists call Wagnerite retreat:
They continue to run deeper into Cooperative cottages. 

Those, who don't look at T-55 name, but at what inside the tank, say this is perfect tank, especially its gun with full digital FCS and APFSDS rounds, which have better penetration, than 125 mm Mango. I think, theese tanks can be placed to some air-assault or marines brigade either as "line tanks" or like "infantry support tank"  

Gawd, I hate when that happens.
Ok, that is a major unsupported leap of logic, and frankly we are get way too many of these in the last 50 pages - at some point this is going to devolve this venture into the same rhetorical and propaganda spaces we see all over the internet, and at that point I will be lobbying to close the thread down because it is no longer keeping people informed, it will have become a dogmatic platform.
If Russia employs battlefield nuclear weapons, there will be a response, there must be.  However, let's say hypothetically that the West backs down and says "ok, well now it is getting real - let's negotiate an endstate".  Yes, it is not a good thing for the future risk the employment of nuclear weapons may have on imperialist expansion.  Russia will likely try the same game elsewhere; however what is missing between the Baltic nations and Ukraine is certainty. 
If Russia annexes, invades or attacks a Baltic nation, and IF that nation declares an article 5 then Russia is not getting handsie on some side hustle, it is declaring war on NATO.  "Oh, sure but who says NATO will actually do anything about it?" some say cynically - well 1) NATO nations sure as hell have done something about Ukraine and 2) NATO is too big to fail, and 3) if NATO does fail - and don't take this too personally - but we individually won't give two figs what happens in Baltics or the entirety of Eastern Europe, and even more bluntly in North America, we might not even really care too much about all of Europe anymore - at least as far as collective defence goes.
1) You know, a simple "thank you for having our backs" would go a long way once and awhile.  Instead we get "well what have you done for me lately" and "what do you mean you are not willing to risk nuclear escalation for Ukraine?!  How dare you!!"  I am very grateful that those voices are in the minority.  NATO has already committed to the defence of Ukraine, the question is how far will that will last in a nuclear exchange...good question, but I suspect it isn't to drop everything and declare unconditional surrender.  But we are not likely to be interested in a bottomless pit of cost and risk either.  And before anyone crawls on a morality high horse - take a long look at Africa and the Middle East, we have and will let places burn to the ground outside of our orbit/key interests or if risk/cost gets too high - "change the channel Marge."
2) In NATO and out of NATO is a very significant different state - kinda why we make such a big deal about entry.  By definition NATO is a collective defensive alliance, supported by a very complex and political treaty.  NATO is, in effect, the military power of the western world and the hard power that backs up the western rules-based order.  Without it, that order starts to unravel.  If Russia pushes the West into "well let us do what we want, and NATO collapses" situation, we are living in the End Times.  Russia, as immensely stupid as they have been, has yet to try and back the West into a corner, even though they themselves are being rammed into one.  Why?  Because the West would crush Russia beyond recognition to protect itself...and NATO is central to that equation.  I expect that NATO would accept nuclear exchange losses, leaving Russia a radioactive wasteland for a few centuries, before it is going to allow itself to fall apart through direct force.  Oddly enough,  Putin was on the right track to actually defeat NATO by continuing to support narratives that "NATO was irrelevant" - NATO could have evolved into something less than it is now, that would have given Russia more....wait for it...options space.  But then they did this useless war and pushed NATO in the exact opposite direction.  Maybe Russia needs NATO to be big and strong and scary so that it can hold itself together, but they even have to be smart enough to realize...they just made NATO big strong and scary.
3) If NATO collapses under direct pressure.  The whole edifice falls apart.  Then, and try not to be too hurt, we got much bigger problems than Ukraine, the Baltics or Russia to worry about.  We would likely see a series of new collective defensive bodies arise from the ashes, and a fair number of them can't even find Ukraine or the Baltics on the map.  The EU might hold together militarily but Europe has a bit of shaky history in that regard.  I suspect it may fall back on internal alignment, most of which won't care what happens in the Baltics.  The bigger players will likely try to hold it together, 5 EYES+ for example but even then, the most liberal humanist nations are going to start to contract back to their own borders and interests.  This will have economic repercussions as we no longer have unified collective military power to secure globalization. I expect China will be invading Taiwan the following Tues - at which point all of this Eastern Europe/Russia noise is going to fade to background while we hit a singularity decision point in Asia. 
So as bluntly as I can - The Baltics are more important to NATO and the West because  they are in NATO under the collective defence mechanism that affords.  We will take far fewer risks or BS from Russia in these countries because  they are within that framework.  I suspect that there are more than a few politicians that are quietly thanking whatever gods they pray to that Ukraine is not in NATO right now because we would not even have the option to pull back. 
That said, the issue of having Ukraine in NATO is likely largely settled at this point, so once this war is over, it will also come under that collective protection - for the love of god, just take the freakin win!  Russia nuclear deterrence is working in this war, that is why we are not Shock and Awing Moscow, Bagdad Style.  In this game of chicken Ukraine may lose - I personally do not think that is the most probable outcome but, dare we admit it and not get yelled at for 15 pages - it is a possibility.
Lastly, I am going to put out the question of "what are we doing here?"  On this thread?  If we are continuing the collective and distributed objective analysis and assessment of this war as it unfolds, then let's do that.  I think we are safe to say that we all agree Russia's war is illegal and immoral and they deserve everything they are getting.  However, if this is turning into a maximalist Pro-Ukrainian propaganda machine, I am out - lock it down and people can go elsewhere for their information.

Paging 617 Squadron.  Not the bouncing bombs, the 'earthquake bombs': Tallboys and Grand Slams. Now, if the boffins can just work on how to deliver the package....
Kherson Cat

 

"The gap just under 20m is narrow enough to bridge using mobile bridges."

CMBS is fine....but if you really want to see where it all started in the modern era, try out CMCW....now available in the gift shop.

Good summary response. FWIW I would only add that you don't actually elect the party, you elect the individual representative of your constituency. Once elected they can, and do, change parties without being re-elected. Similarly, if that MP dies/resigns then there has to be a bye-election for a replacement, the party doesn't get to swap a replacement straight in.
 
Now back to our normal programmes more relevant to the situation in Ukraine!

You seem to have some misunderstandings as to how Elected Governments in the West work ?
The Monarchy has no power at all - its there for the Tourists  . The Prime Minister is always elected by members of his/her own party - works the same in all English based Parliamentary systems around the planet - You get to elect the party - not decide who is in  cabinet . The House of Lords is really  only a historical anomaly in the UK - and we commonwealth citizens generally  like our History . This particular part of the British system has not really been copied  over to  AUS/NZ/CAN  and elsewhere  - but we do get our Honors lists - and people like them .
Governments once elected are free to pursue whatever policies they like - but they do need to keep the electorates happy to some degree - since they are up for re-election again 3-4-5 years  . A Elected Government which chooses to follow unpopular policies won't be in Government for long .
 

Well done. Misunderstandinatin' 9/10. Nice work.

Data suggests otherwise ...
Democracy Data Explorer - Our World in Data
 

All very fraught questions.  I was thinking about the constitutional questions when I saw this post and it did occur to me that there is no universal rule that says that if a province/state/oblast or whatever has a majority of people in it in favour of secession then that gives it a right to secede. Clearly the situations vary hugely from place to place but there is a danger of coming at this from an anglocentric perspective. The UK has obviously taken the view that Scotland and  N. Ireland  do have such a choice having either held referenda or legislated for them. Similarly Canada has, by implication, the same view regarding Quebec. The approach of, say, Spain is significantly different when it comes to Catalan independence.  There are  plenty of constitutions  that declare a country to be indivisible, France for example.
Even in the UK I suspect that UDI for, say, Yorkshire might get short shrift from HMG.
I guess the question comes down to whether the Ukrainians feel that:
(a) They can occupy the territory
(b) That there will either be no significant partisan/insurgent hostiles or that if there are they can be suppressed.
If the answer to both of these is yes then 'welcome back to the Ukraine, your rights as citizens will be protected but secession will not be tolerated.'
Not sure it would end well but it might look a runner from Kyiv? Way out of my military history depth here I might add.
 
 
 

No, it is not. Do not go there.

No whispers on my end and I could not use them even if there were.
Striking back and taking back are two very different things.  I stated this way back, btw, but it got lost.  I have always been concerned over the Crimea and how it fits into a Ukrainian victory.  I think the UA can hammer away at clear military targets in Crimea with abandon.  It is when/if the UA actually arrives in Sevastopol that I start to wonder.
Again, if Russia collapsed as a state or a new government come in, well all bets are off.  However, with the current regime in power the loss of Sevastopol is about as palatable as the loss of Norfolk would be to the US. That has nothing to do with the noises coming out of the Kremlin, it is a real consideration going into this war.  It has been from the start.
Look, lets go absurdum here for a moment.  Let say the UA rolls right over the border and Belgorod.  Based on the law of armed conflict, they are perfectly within their rights to attack legitimate military targets that support or act as staging bases in that city.  Belgorod is about 30km from the border and well within what the UA has demonstrated it is capable of - then why aren't they?  Well, likely because they know it would risk triggering an escalation that no one wants.  Ok, maybe the Russians are full of crap and the UA takes Belgorod and Russia does nothing...onto Moscow?  I know it is stupid and never going to happen but the point is that Russia does have an existential line somewhere that leads us into very dark places.  Places where the cost of admission far outstrips this entire war.
So, is Crimea one of those places?  I honestly do not know.  Even before 2014, when Crimea was part of the Ukraine, the Russians had freedom to use Sevastopol.  I am pretty sure that deal is off the table, so Crimea back in Ukraine very likely means no Sevastopol for Russia, which makes me very nervous and always did.  We can debate back and forth on this; however, we will not solve it here. This will be part of some very cold calculations in capitals across the west and the Kremlin itself.
And again, I could be totally wrong.  Maybe it is all bluster and BS, and Russia knows its nuclear arsenal is as effective as its mob of tanks in storage were.  Or maybe there is no "red-line" for Russia and we are self-restraining for zero reason.  However, from my point of view at least, there is a seed of doubt/concern, and I would be remiss not to put it out there so people can stay informed and use it, or not, in how they come to terms with this war for themselves. 
I would close this off with a bit of advice - avoid people who always and only tell you what you want to hear, they are most likely lying to you.
 

They needed the sights because they fought in the shade.

It's a great news! 
Commander of Azov Denys Prokopenko "Redis" is free!
Deputy of Azov commander Sviatoslav Palamar "Kalyna" is free!
Acting commander of 36th marines brigade Serhiy Volyna is free!
 
 

Herein lies the central problem - we are living in a post-Afghanistan world.  We are also living in a post-pandemic world - our resolve is shaken and will remain shaken.  The single biggest fear for the West now in Ukraine, is that it becomes another Afghanistan.  You have hit the nail directly on the head why western resolve is shakier.
Hell, we can barely stand each other post-pandemic, let alone bighting off yet another war on the other side of the planet. Let alone one that could escalate into something really bad. This is the reason why a journey into pre-2014 lines, or dragging this out carries so much risk.  The US and the West have been the global police force for 30 years and all it got us was unsolvable ethnic-based messes that we had to pay for and f#cking terrorism in our back yard.  We are tired of doing this but are kind of stuck with it - turned out winning the Cold War meant holding the bag.  China is in the backfield waiting for its moment and we want hands on the pens that re-write things so we are, again, stuck with the job.  However, we do not want any more misadventures - they days of a great new world order and shining city on a hill are over - humanity is crazy and we are tired of managing it, especially when we have our own crazy to deal with.
We need to stay committed and in this fight because it matters; however, the second it looks like it does not you can count on people voting with their...well, votes.  We need to finish the job, but that job likely does not include what you are proposing under the current conditions.  So everyone put on your negotiating shoes.  You do not have to like it, nor does it make it "right", but it is the reality.
I honestly hope I am wrong and either the RA falls, timed perfectly with a soft Russian power vacuum and Ukraine can take back those lines, and magically all those people that live there who prefer to be Russian either leave or change their minds.  Then we can have peace and happiness.  Russia will abandon autocrats and embrace real democracy and we can all link arms as we try and then put China back into a box - I can see the Federation starships from here. 
Just don't try and be too disappointed when that does not happen and we have to settle for bad and not worse.