Lethaface

IIRC it was in news here after the initial fighting for the complex around Tjernobyl occurred. The gist of it was that attacking the installation is a warcrime, but that's void if there are forces defending the installation. And it seemed there were some troops defending it.

AFAIK they and him are already sanctioned on same level as Russia. By allowing Russia to invade Ukraine from Belarus, Belarus did defacto declare war on Ukraine.

I'd not try downloading such stuff unless in an isolated VM/separate machine.

The effort is better spend producing more new vehicles.

Thanks, interesting video. From what he says I can only salute his humanity and hope he will be able to get to his first booze soon! (and forget the stuff he wants to forget).

A few years ago @Haiduk was sharing movies of Ukraine mortars directed by drone, firing pinpoint accurate inside DLPR trenches and direct hits on BMPs.

Afaik Germany was at first 'skittish' but isn't anymore. Or more precisely they had a law against sending any weapons to any country at war (given their history I'd say understandable). I find the competition about who has the largest / send the most a bit weird. And even if it were true that Western Europe is 'truly the most skittish' (not sure on what that's based), USA or UK could have mightily fine send in heavy equipment by themselves without 'Western Europe' agreeing. IIRC it was the Pentagon who said the MIG deal wasn't going to happen. Anyway as far as I understand most countries have decided, also on request from Ukraine, not to give details about weapon deliveries. So who is sending what should be 'vague'. The reason for sending more heavy stuff is imo quite simple: the war is getting nastier and taking longer. Originally only 'defensive' weapons were send. Now Ukraine is on the offensive, offensive weapons are being considered. Those heavy weapons are more difficult to prepare and send. Also for things like tanks, not everyone has ex-soviet pact type weaponry lying around in a decent state or can only send them at the cost of their own readiness. And yes, if large parts of Ukraine had faltered in the first few days nobody would have send a thing.

Indeed, not to mention the likes of Orban. Although I'm pro EU, there were quite a lot of problems which need to be sorted out pronto. I have some hopes the current situation will unite Europe and EU on the larger issues that need to be dealt with. I hope so too!

I did see it. Do you have any knowledge about how the EU works?

I never said anything about not being responsible. And yes his country is under (brutal) attack, which is why I usually don't think/say too much about certain things. But he replied to me so I responded.

+1 like but I'm out ;-). PS Those frogs have been shot, poisoned and prisoned.

Well, we don't agree. Sociology is indeed a science, but like any other science it usually doesn't provide sweeping answers like 'X = true or false'. More like: when we observe something using A, we can see that X = true while Y = Z in a majority of cases. There are also 'hard' sciences and 'soft' sciences and sociology is in the 'soft' dimension along with psychology and other. Which basically means that it's difficult to proof stuff in practical fashion (empirical). Now that doesn't mean those sciences don't give any information. But the general 'poll factories' are for profit companies and not at all comparable with qualitative scientific grade sociologic research. Actually from psychologic research we know that there are three personality types: A - Troublemakers B - Oddballs C - Wimps It's not that people are either an A, B or C. But rather a person might be mostly of the B type in his work environment, while mostly A when he's with his football team. The most common behavior in any situation is the C type. A brainwashed, repressed populace conditioned into 'Wimp' behavior when it comes to state affairs, where troublemakers are either employed by the regime or jailed and oddball behavior probably gets you onto FSB lists and or into gulag quick. Good luck believing that all those people are evil butchers celebrating the slaughter that's taking place in Ukraine.

While I think @LongLeftFlank post was interesting and surely/hopefully >50% chance going forward, I'm not sure I agree with what you write here. I'm sorry to interrupt your George Washington dreams If Ukraine manages to kick out Russia from it's lands (Crimea another story) and does good on the internal cleansing of kleptocracy and other undesirable stuff, I think it will be able to attract large investments. Of course the EU will do something (as will US, UK, AUS, etc), they might even do a whole lot but they won't give a blanc cheque or give financial guarantees against Russian aggression (lol that would be really, really, stupid). The EU doesn't have unlimited moneys. So like LLF wrote Ukraine will also need private (for profit) investments. With a decent security lookout those will surely come! Also the EU isn't a moneypot membership where if you fight hard against Russians, you are allowed to become member and scoop it till the bottom . And unlike many people in the world seem to think, winning a war against Russia doesn't mean you can enroll in any coalition/union without meeting the requirements. EU membership is imo probably in Ukraine's hands IF they manage to achieve all the required preconditions. Fast forward 5-10 years. Personally I hope they manage. Sorry if I'm being negative but that's just not how the world works. And after reading for the n-th time how Americans (not only you ) write that Ukraine should be in the EU for fighting against Russia, I felt the need to address it.

Yeah my response was more to the recurrence of posts about polls of Russian support for the 'special operation'. And indeed often anonymous polls aren't that anonymous at all.

I don't get the focus on polls performed with unknown methodology, in an unfree state about an imaginary subject (there is no 'special operation', it's called war). Even in peacetime in free countries polls are often problematic. No control questions, non-representative samples, insinuating methods of interview, unclear questioning/interpretations, etc.

"Secretary of National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine Danylov on explosions in Belgorod: "It was not us. People of Belgorod People Republic starts to realize something. It could be anywhere in RF. We did not start this war." Nice trolling, it's 1 april after all

Well at least here over here there is such a thing as 'red' diesel (lower taxed), earmarked for shipping and agriculture tractors among other stuff (not road-going). Then there's stuff like V Power etc etc. Many military diesel engines might have different requirements for the specific properties of the refined product (be it less / more refined). Anyway I'd expect the military to have separate deals for their fuel supplies, and don't go to the 'pumpstation' to fill up the fuel trucks unless **** really hits the fan. So there might very well be a difference between fuel earmarked for civilian / military use.

Russia has been hitting Ukrainian oil depots and other strategic infrastructure deep inside (western) Ukraine. Among other things mentioned, imo this strike signals that 'two can play that game'. I can see Russia aiming to destroy as much as strategic infrastructure along 'their way out'. Now Ukraine having shown to also posses this capability might be useful in negotiations.

The problem I have with this take is that Russia already has large reserves of gas/oil. They were relatively doing rather good economically pre 2014. What they lack at this moment and for the foreseeable future is a stable market for their produce, among other things. The marginal costs for each extra cubic meter of gas they might be able to 'acquire' thus seems rather high (cost of invasion + sanctions / boycots + establishment of shale extraction operation). Not to speak of the very large risks for 'project success' and 'longterm reputation damage'. So from a business perspective I don't see the genius of this 'heist'.

looks like someone didn't have the Ikea manual for K1 ERA installation so just gave it a best effort.

Well supposedly not *all* the troops on the Kiev axis are 'in contact' or directly on the frontline. So if there's let's say somewhere like 70k troops there they might be able to withdraw quite some troops from there, IF those in contact / on the frontline remain in position and cover the withdrawal. The remaining troops would become very fragile though and whatever support / logistics still in place will also be further strained. Another challenge would be to reintegrate the hodge podge of various units withdrawn into the forces fighting in the east/south, even if they're not shattered yet that will be a non-trivial administrative/reorg task. One thing which is interesting imo, is the fact that they publicized this. Normally you wouldn't want to communicate a withdrawal because... well withdrawing forces are rather vulnerable imo. So if there wasn't some kind of agreement with Ukrainians it might just be a deception aimed at internal politics: no troops will be withdrawn but this is how some can explain the lack of progress; "in our noble wisdoms and to show our peaceful nature we decided to not push any further on Kiev"

Plus IF Russia moves away troops from Kiev axis, Ukraine can also move reserves and reinforce other area's. Also, I'd say that top German leadership of the 6th Panzer Army under Balck and others was rather superior compared to what's leading Russian CAA remains.

In a 'peer' conflict that would seem logical to me. Even in the CMSF2/CMB2 context and timeframe with limited drone capabilities compared to now, moving mass in the open in an area with plenty of Javelins (or AT-14/Skif/etc) isn't going to end well. Perhaps the only exemption is APS equipped mass against non-Javelins. So in PBEM QBs with all the goodies in play that's already 'how to play', imo. Turning up the drones, adding switchblades and giving every side APS defeating ATGMs would make 'armored trusts' even more risky. With or without the armaments provided by the west? Although I guess either way it wouldn't be a walk in the park at all.

Have you seen the progression of Atlas robot over the years? Now think of that big fat algorithm Google has been working on. If we're still as ethical as today in 30 (arbitrary number) years from now, it might come with an optional semi-automatic target kill acknowledgement UI, with default/fallback behavior being full autonomous decision making based on a predefined 'pre approved' ruleset. Who knows in our lifetime eBay might offer such full-service vacationers, with the optional 'custom ethical module' offered at a premium

If other sectors are an indication, the most disruptive 'trend' will be software aided driven research/design, development and flexible mass production. If the rumor is true that the next generation US fighter has already made flight hours and has been designed and prototype produced in a record tempo, that's an indication of how disruptive that can be. The biggest question on that regard is, imo, whether the bureaucratic procurement / requirements processes are ready for that sort of change.