Machor

They just will assume this fact. Many will call our soldiers "fascists", "punishers", but... they will do nothing more. And will take own salary and pensions from our budget. This is their mentality. This already was on liberated Donbas territories in 2014. Relatively large amount of people will await "Russian liberators" anyway in Sloviansk, Kramatorsk, Druzhkivka, Konstianmtynivka and many other. For example almost all police in occupied Berdiansk defected to Russian side. 
 

Indeed the news are not confirmed, although they are still circulating in major news sites. I won't be surprised if this happens in future though given the increasingly russian influx. And we shouldn't trust russian words right? 
Honestly, about the NATO bases in Turkey , whatever I have read indicates a nearly idle situation and I haven't heard any major operation from Incirlik, contrasted to the past years which was very active. A lot has changed since. The Syria campaign, the coup against Erdogan with many in Turkey blaming some degree US involvement. The epicenter of US operations has shifted towards Greece with the new Alexandroupoli base and existing Suda Bay base. https://www.voanews.com/a/europe_us-military-base-turkey-has-uncertain-future/6180061.html
On the 1974 while you are correct, it was practically a pretext like what caused Russia to intervene in Donbas, though people here would prefer the word invasion. That doesn't change though the impression that Turkey has the attitude to act on its own against international law and its own alliances and getting away with it. Whatever measures the West took they simply weren't enough to punish Turkey for killing and displacing thousands of people and occupying 40% of the island for half a century now. It's an ongoing disgrace if you ask me. 
Ps. I want to add that I'd love one day all this hostility would belong to the past. We are very close as people. I have turkish friends that have fled the country because of Erdogan. Like in case of Russia there are mainly poor, rural areas that are mainly feeding support to the regime. 

This was Russian military analysts' hubris about the Ukrainian Neptune missile before the sinking of the Moskva:


And an interesting coincidence: If the last picture of the Moskva is indeed from April 15, this means it sank on the same day as the 110th anniversary of the sinking of the Titanic:
 

Grognard objection:  The Italian battleships were at anchor; the British were underway: Big difference for the RN. From "Death of a battleship: The loss of HMS Prince of Wales" (p.63):
"Prior to the deployment of the Prince of Wales and Repulse to the Pacific, the Royal Navy had been operating for over two years (September 1939 - December 1941) in the Mediterranean in the face of intensive attacks from German and Italian land-based aircraft. These airplanes were able to damage the convoys but not totally stop them. British battleships had been repeatedly attacked but never sunk. Based on that recent war experience, it certainly appeared risky but possible to operate in waters covered by enemy land-based air. What was not understood, due to a serious intelligence failure, was the fact that the Japanese bombers based in Indo-China were not an ordinary formation of aircraft but were a force especially trained and equipped for "ship killing". These planes were specifically stationed there because of the predicted arrival of Prince of Wales and Repulse in Singapore. No other enemy or allied air force had this equivalent capability at the time. As the war progressed, ordinary land-based bombers (US B-17s, the Germans and Italians in the Mediterranean) continued attacking ships at sea with limited success. The RAF, using torpedo and rocket-equipped twin engine planes against German coastal convoys, and USN carrier-based planes (using torpedoes and bombs) and USAF B-25s, using skip bombs against Japanese coastal shipping, would finally gain the equivalent potency of these Japanese land-based aircraft later in the war."

I just came across those photos. Yay or nay - is this Moskva? Are those legit and not photoshopped?
 

I'll see your Flight Simulator and raise you map army ...
MilitaryMap - Plan your Mission
I've been noodling around this one as well and am miles off finishing but I've done enough to work out in terms of ground alone that a Russian attack is going to be a big ask.

The images above are different map/imagery sets of the same area with the red line being the approximate FEBA as of a few days ago.  The area shown is basically Izyum-Slovyansk-Kramatorsk.
The broad COAs for Russian are basically:
COA1 - Deep Envelopment. COA2 - Medium Envelopment. COA3 - Shallow Envelopment.
Of the three COAs - COA1 offers the best opportunity for manoeuvre and is the preferred COA.  COAs 2 and 3 both involve moving through severely restricted terrain and a battle for Slovyansk.  As a guesstimate, moving through the woods to Slovyansk will swallow up a minimum of three BTGs if the Ukrainians choose to disrupt the advance on the approaches to Slovyansk.  Slovyansk cannot be bypassed which means that if it is going to be defended, it will require a minimum of 4-5 BTGs to subdue.  A number of 22 x BTGs has been banded around for the force assembling in Izyum meaning that COAs 2 and 3 will expend nearly a third of the available combat power in Izyum covering the first 35km.  That is assuming that Russia can knock Slovyansk over easily for which there is little evidence to suggest that it is capable of doing so should it be defended.  It will also probably take at least a week to clear out the defenders which means that COAs 2 and 3 stand little chance of achieving a face saving "victory" by 09 May.  In fact COA 2 will definitely fail to deliver on that timeline.
Map Army Files are below if anybody wants to rummage around the detail bearing in mind this is WIP.
BAE.milxlyzRussian FLOT 10 Apr.milxlyz
 

UKR seems to be launching a lot of attacks today
Ukrainian military in Joint Forces Operation zone repelled 10 Russian attacks today. 15 tanks, 3 pieces of artillery, 24 armoured vehicles destroyed. 4 Orlan-10 drones and 2 cruise missiles shot down (16/04 PM) :

Ukrainian army counter-attack between Kreminna, Rubizhne and Sviatohirsk, Russian troops were pushed several kilometres to North-East (today) :
 
Ukrainian army conducting offensive operation at Kutuzivka, Bairak, and east to Mala Rohan (today) :
 
 
On Russian side :
Russian army attempting to advance at Liubymivka-Novozlatopil line :
 
Battle ongoing for Lozove village on the border between Donetsk and Kharkiv regions
 

 
 

There's some indication from reported ADS-B error signals that GNSS is being degraded over Ukraine, but I'm not convinced that it's Russia doing it.  When the US launched GPS, it was the only global satellite system available and "selective availability" was built in to give the US a military advantage.  A lot of the military turned out to be using consumer GPS in GW 1 and SA got turned off in 2000 partly as a result of that, partly at the request of FAA, and partly because other systems were coming online. There are now 4 GNSS systems (GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, and BeiDou).  Anybody who's capable of launching such systems is also capable of launching systems that will degrade their performance from space by spoofing signals.  
The Soviet Union had a bad relationship with maps, in which virtually all maps were seeded with significant errors to cause confusion in case of invasion.  This bad relationship went on for many decades and was only publicly acknowldged in the late 80s, shortly before the dissolution of the USSR.  According to a friend who spent a bunch fo time there, inaccurate maps predate the USSR for similar reasons.  So it's likely that Russia was going into Ukraine with Soviet era maps, at least for some levels/regions, and they may or may not have recognized the problem with that.  Ukrainians followed what appears to be standard eastern European practice of removing and/or rearranging street signs to aid their attackers. As defenders, Ukraine doesn't really need high quality GNSS - they have people who know the area and their own maps.  So if some space-capable nation with EW satellites decided to inject a few hundred meters of error into the GNSS signals over the region, it would likely make a mess for out of town visitors without completely wrecking aircraft nav safety.  I've been on backroads in the mountains in the US where there might be two fire roads that parallel each other for a while before going to very different places, and even with undegraded GPS it's not hard to get yourself onto the one that climbs an extra 1000 m of elevation before descending into the town with no restaurants instead of the one that descends into your planned lunch stop.
As far as NATO aircraft along the Ukraine border- Rooks and Kings is probably right that they're not doing active EW from the Growlers, but if you watch ADS-B exchange, there are a lot of NATO aircraft loitering in the neighborhood along the Ukraine and Kaliningrad borders.  There are a few types that usually are transmitting who they are: several types of SIGINT plane (various RC-135 versions, E-3, RC-12, Global Hawk drones, others, ), lots of transports going mostly to Poland, and a large number of aerial refueling planes.  Who we don't see at all is who's being refueled, but there are probably a lot of them, given the number of tankers.  To see who's getting refueled you probably have to be in Poland or Romania with a pair of binoculars.

The girl - commander of SP-howitzer
 

Theoretically Russia could spare the troops.  The Taliban and Islamic extremist threat is over egged massively by both Russia and Tajikistan.  A couple of months back the Tajik President came out with the outlandish figure of something like 6,000 Islamic militants active in Afghanistan's north east which was 'confirmed' by Russia.  In reality the numbers don't even come close to what's up there in Afghanistan's Badakhshan, Takhar and Kunduz provinces - maybe 2,000 at best and even that would be an optimistic assessment.  Coupled with this is that the Taliban are keeping a lid on these guys.  However, it plays into a good narrative of being strong on terrorism and allows Russia to trumpet the CSTO as well as find good reasons to station its forces in non-Russian territory.

This was in response to Poland tearing down Communist monuments. The horrid thing is how they are comparing a cemetery of a massacre vs a monument.

More Moskva-related: Talk of a formal declaration of war by Russia:
The US has confirmed the Ukrainian account of the sinking:
One for the meme-war: 

More Moskva-related: Talk of a formal declaration of war by Russia:
The US has confirmed the Ukrainian account of the sinking:
One for the meme-war: 

A bizarre anti-Polish protest in Russia: 'Supporters' of the war in Ukraine gathered to destroy the Katyn memorial, but demonstrated their majesté by not doing so:
 

More Moskva-related: Talk of a formal declaration of war by Russia:
The US has confirmed the Ukrainian account of the sinking:
One for the meme-war: 

Ok, so apologize for what will be a longish post, even for me.  So welcome to The Capt's terrain analysis for the possible upcoming fight between Izyum and Donetsk.  Basically I wanted to get a view of the terrain this next major fight is squaring  off over and try and pull some deductions from that.  
So here is what I did.  I booked an MS Flight Simulator (MSFS) flight from Donetsk to Kharkiv roughly along this google maps line:

For reference you can see the ISW map of where this next great Russian offensive is spooling up:

They buried Donetsk under the legend but this is the area of concern.  So I did not use live weather as it is pissing rain there right now and based on what I am seeing it is a big reason the Russian have not started anything.  I flew at 1000 feet up but employed the drone feature to get down and grab a birds eye view.  Overall I would summarize the terrain in military terms as such:
On the 8th day, while recovering from a hangover God looked upon the earth and said to himself "You know these shaved apes are going to go at each other the second I turn my back so I may as well make it interesting.  Let there be tank country!"



These shots are just south - southwest of Izyum.  So on the surface you can immediately see a lot of room for manoeuvre tailor made for armored warfare.  I mean I can see frontages of kms just aching for big ol tank formations to come charging through with all sorts of room for bypassing, flanking and all that good stuff.  But then go a bit deeper:

So if you take a look at that last one, check out the VFR map in the upper right.  There are a lot of water features distributed all over this area and in the spring they are going to be deep and muddy.  Little lakes and rivers just about everywhere that amphib IFVs can probably bounce but tanks, arty and logistics are going to have trouble with.  So what?  Target the engineering stuff with all them fancy switchblades, then arty, then C2...we will get to logistics.  Next how about all them rectangles:
 Yep, a lot of these little and big squares all over the place...damn Ukrainian real estate laws.  For armored warfare these are going to be a problem.  Easy button answer...arty them all!  Well no one on earth has enough arty for that as these things are everywhere.  Each one a short range tank hunting dream, with ready made tractor trails to boot off on once you have fired off a couple NLAWS and are falling back to the next one to re-set.  These thing will soak up attacking infantry to sweep and will slow things down a lot.  Oh wait there is more:
These are not CM3 previews (but we can dream) but in MSFS you can drop right down to eye-level and wow.  First off this area is not flat. "Undulating" is the term we would use, with lots of small hills and ridges, all of which give some sightlines we normally only see in a desert.  So if I had a smart, fire and forget ATGM system with a listed range of 4.0km and was trying to sell it, these are the marketing shots I would take.  I found these everywhere along the route but more so towards the south end of the likely Russian advance (or North from Donetsk but that is all trench country from the last war, so not likely). 
Ok so what? 
- First off if this thing goes off it will be a conventional battle for the history books.  I mean the next one with this sort of potential is likely Armageddon itself.  We have a near perfect storm of mass meets mass forming up.  The collision on this has potential to be heard around the world. 
- Second, this will be a major exam for conventional armored warfare.  "End of Tanks: No They Are Not" may very well be settled in this one.  You cannot really find much better terrain for armored warfare on one hand.  While on the other, this is also excellent terrain for an mobile defence.  The Russians should be able to create a break out with overwhelming mass here, if they play it right.  While at the same time between prepared defenses and a combination of short and very long sightlines the Ukrainian defence should be able to stop them cold - that is an epic collision in the making. 
- Third, so much of this will hinge on C4ISR it is looking more like an aerial dogfight than a traditional land-battle.   The side that can see first at the tactical level will likely hit and win first.  We should see more exchanges like were seen in the Nagorno-Karabahk which were very long range and then working in for the dirty work.  
- Fourth, the Russian offence is going to have to evolve.  They cannot bring their last fight to this one.  They will need to rethink C4ISR collection and sharing, logistical planning - pushing a lot more forward faster, and targeting.  The UA can keep doing what it was to be honest but it had better have made use of this pregnant pause to put in a lot of AT minefields that tie those water obstacles and rectangles together, they had the time and I can only hope they have the resources; this country is set up for nightmare defensive belts.
- Fifth, this will also be an exam for artillery, ATGMs, self-loitering and unmanned systems.  This will show what they can really do together, primarily in the defense but let's not forget the offence as well.  There are sightlines that can make full use of the ranges these systems can come bring to bear.  Honestly if I were the UA, I would stick with hybrid at the front end, and then wait for my moment for a conventional c-attack because it could be a bone crusher.  Given enough gas, a UA formation could drive right into the Russian rear areas and cry-freakin-havok back there looking at this terrain.
- Sixth, the awkward conversation about airpower.  This is perfect CAS country, the Russian's need it, the UA needs to deny it. With full on air superiority this country would be a challenge for an attacker, without it we could be looking at a nightmare. 
Finally, I would close by saying that I also get the sense that this is perfect terrain for an operational trap - it is what I would do.  

#1 - Resist Russian main axis of advance...but just enough to attrit but give them hope.  I would use obstacles to keep them on those axis and help channel them to what they want.

#2 - Oh look at how happy they Russian are, they have their great pincer BUT do not give them time for reorientation or to dig in, or they could use this country against you.
#3- Bil Hardenberger.  That old bastard has snap the jaws closed on me more times than I care to remember.  This country is made for a conventional c-attack to cut that corridor up and off.#4 - Feeding time.
This terrain supports this and the Russians have given the UA a lot of time to set it up.  Higher risk but the payoff is intense. 
Just spit-balling here and I have every confidence they UA commanders on the ground have a grip on this but for a defender that 1) knows what they are doing, 2) are well resourced and 3) have the time to prepare, this could make for a textbook defence that could be turned into something else.

Putin's very own Alfred Rosenberg, great.
I'd sooner get a root canal than listen to anything this scumbag has to say.

This is the typical story, and is wildly innacurate. It's an "enhanced radiation weapon". The idea behind it is that the enhanced radiation will penetrate the thick armor of tanks, and yes, kill or incapacitate the crew. However, they are STILL nuclear weapons, with massive blast effects. The "neutron bombs" planned were about the same power as normal thermal fission weapons of the time. They just cause LESS destruction than a comparable thermal fission weapon of the same size, but LESS is a very nebulous term when you are talking about multiple KT range nuclear weapons. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were 10-20KT weapons. A neutron weapon would cause maybe 30%-50% the blast yield of those. Dwell on that nugget for a while.
There is no leave the cities and towns intact unless the weapons are detonated in the middle of nowhere. 
Another point is that gamma rays are like extremely high energy X-rays. Neutrons are bullets. AND they activate elements making them radioactive. Steel and it's constituent alloys, for example (Iron, cobalt, manganese). They then become radioactive with varying half lives depending on isotopes. The Cobalt used in hardened steels is the most concern because of its 5.27 year half life. Most of the others are in the neighborhood of an hour to 6 weeks or so. 
Since there is blast there is also downwind fallout. Prevailing weather I believe, is not favorable to the Russians for fallout (but do they even care, really?)
Anyway, the whole neutron bomb leaving the infrastructure intact stuff is a wild exaggeration.

Dave

@BeondTheGrave @OldSarge @G.I. Joe
And other, who asked about Neptune ASM
The missile R-360 of Neptune complex is not a version of Kh-35U, though has similar parameters. Yes, it has very similar hull, and initially since R&D works have started as far as in 2013 or earlier, the missile should be as  localized and upgraded analog of Kh-35. This gave to Russian propagandists a reason to claim "Stupid Ukrainians proud because could copy old Soviet missile ahahaha!", so far like their claims "BTR-4 is reworked BTR-70". Russians in own chauvinism believed that without Russia all industry in Ukraine completely declined and we can't develop nothing own, but upgrade USSR lagacy. But Soviet/Russian Kh-35 was really "long played" project, started as far as in 1977, first prelimilary design was ready only in 1983, brought to tests only in 1992 and adopted to service in 2003! And Kh-35U with some improvements, like coordinates transmittion via satellite, was adopted in 2015
Currently Russian navy use this missile in next versions: Kh-35 (AS-20) for planes and helicopters, Bal (SSC-6) - coastal missile complex, Uran (SS-N-25) - ship-bases missile complex
Turning back to Ukrainian R-360 - since 2013 the missile have changed at least homing heads (or even three) and many more. First test launches were in 2018, but despite on success, there were found many problems in homing, flight stability also sea-skimming mode had enough hight altitude of flight. In 2019 new tests with new homing head and some constructive changes were conducted, but anyway missile demanded many finalization works. Also there was main problem - previous launches were conducted with USA aid - they detected target and transmitted coordinates to launcher vehicle via own sattelite. Ukraine has been developed own targeting radar Mineral-U, but encountered with many R&D problems, so manufacturer tests were passed only in October 2021 and two radars has been preparing to state test program, but unknown either it was started before a war or not. So, in present time Mioneral-U is nor adopted, but probably can be used in test mode. So, the strike at "Admiral Essen" and  "Moskva" could be done both via US satellite and Mineral-U tergeting. 
Also results of test showed that the carrier of missile complex and radar, based on 8x8 KRAZ-7634NE has low reliability and because of bad financial situation on KRAZ plant, technological problems and inability to provide timely technical support and implement constructive changes, there was assumed a decision to change the carrier to Tatra T815 (Chech Republic). Both Mineral-U radars were produced on Tatra chassis, but crossing of RK-360MC on Tatra took some time, so first battalion of Neptune have to be operational in April 2022 only. To this time the unit, armed with this complex - 65th coastal missile battalion had on armament only one launcher on KRAZ chassis and support vehciles. There is unknown either was a missiles or not, because in 2021, when this battalion was established, there was an information he had only dummy of missiles and first real nissiles have to arrive also in 2022. So, this is one possible answer, why Neptunes have awake only now. First reason - they got a missiles only now, second reason - they could have very short number of missiles and kept its for case of enemy landing attempt n Odesa area. But since new missiles issued and UK/Norway offered own ASMs, they could fire free.   
So, about R-360 pararameters: 7 ... 280 km range, 150 kg warhead, velocity - 900 km/h, radar/satellite coordinates and targeting aquisitoin, seeker field of viev +/- 60 deg (even more than Harpoon), sea-skimming mode, seeking during maneuvering, EW protection, maximum range of launcher from the sea shore - 25 km
Composition of battalion:
Three batteries per 2 launchers: 6 launchers USPU-360 (each has 4 tubes of R-360), deployment time 15 minutes
Technical battery:
6 transport-loader vehicles TZM-360 (4 R-360 missiles on each), deployment time 10 minutes, reloading time 20 minutes
6 transport vehicles TM-360 (4 R-360 missiles on each)
1 mobile command post RKP-360, deployment time 10 minutes.
1 targeting radar (optional) Mineral-U
So one battalion should have 72 missiles. Full salvo in 24 missiles simultainously is possible.
First version of launcher USPU-360 on KRAZ-7634NE 

Serial version of launcher USPU-360 on Tatra T815

Transport-loader vehicle TZM-360 first version (KRAZ)
 
Serial versin of transport-loader vehcile TZM-360 (Tatra)

Transport vehicle TM-360 (KRAZ)

Transport vehcile TM-360 (Tatra), serial variant

Mobile command post RKP-360, first variant

Mobile command post RKP-360 (Tatra), serial variant

Mineral-U radar

Looks like regular, the testing scenario also incorrectly put the scenario at day time, clear weather condition. 
I did a testing myself. Even with correct parameter, night time, heavy rain , sea state 5, a novice Moskva can easily defeat a salvo of 16 subsonic Harpoonski.
An EMCON D Moskva can detect the ASM at 16nm away and begin the engagement at 12nm away.
An EMCON A Moskva first detect ASM at 10nm away , the ASM turn on the weapon seeker radar there, broadcast their presence to Moskva . With a 18 seconds OODA cool down SAM left the tube at 7nm away. Most of ASM will be intercepted.
 
But, there is one trick to make a two Harpoonski strike successfully penetrate a radar silence Moskva's defense. Don't use automatic fire. Use BoL fire.  First do a calculation to predict where the Moskva will be when the ASM reach that area. Mark a point on the map then make the ASM aim at that point , in BOL mode ASM will turn on their radar there. It is supposed to be somewhere very close to Moskva.    They will hit the Moskva before her OODA cool down.

I'm tempted to revisit the Russo-Japanese War - hopefully not going too much OT - not least because @Kinophile has also been musing about it, and @LongLeftFlank has posted the racist cartoons that preceded the Russian defeat. Certainly, the fact that Russia provoked that war with nothing but racist hubris, and got dealt a decisive defeat that lead to quasi-regime change, invites comparisons with the current situation in Ukraine. However, that leads us to the teleiosis [I canz use big wordz] of the Russian defeat: Tsushima. What I find most fascinating about Tsushima isn't the fact that an early industrial fleet got obliterated after sailing halfway through the globe, but that the 2nd Pacific Squadron was ordered to sail forth from Madagascar AFTER Port Arthur had already fallen: They were supposed to sail to Vladivostok and continue the fight against the Japanese from there, but... If you've played Norm Koger's Distant Guns, you'll know that this was a hopeless strategy. The Russian leadership at the time gambled away their nation's decades-long gains in becoming a naval power for a face-saving operation that would not have brought back Port Arthur, and Russia gave up its international status as a naval power after Tsushima.
TL;DR: Russians are bad losers, even if they like to recast this in their movies as being 'hard learners' *cough* The Barber of Siberia *cough*. It's one thing that the forum and a host of experts have concluded that Russia has been defeated in Ukraine; it's another thing when Russians themselves will be able to acknowledge that.

I'm tempted to revisit the Russo-Japanese War - hopefully not going too much OT - not least because @Kinophile has also been musing about it, and @LongLeftFlank has posted the racist cartoons that preceded the Russian defeat. Certainly, the fact that Russia provoked that war with nothing but racist hubris, and got dealt a decisive defeat that lead to quasi-regime change, invites comparisons with the current situation in Ukraine. However, that leads us to the teleiosis [I canz use big wordz] of the Russian defeat: Tsushima. What I find most fascinating about Tsushima isn't the fact that an early industrial fleet got obliterated after sailing halfway through the globe, but that the 2nd Pacific Squadron was ordered to sail forth from Madagascar AFTER Port Arthur had already fallen: They were supposed to sail to Vladivostok and continue the fight against the Japanese from there, but... If you've played Norm Koger's Distant Guns, you'll know that this was a hopeless strategy. The Russian leadership at the time gambled away their nation's decades-long gains in becoming a naval power for a face-saving operation that would not have brought back Port Arthur, and Russia gave up its international status as a naval power after Tsushima.
TL;DR: Russians are bad losers, even if they like to recast this in their movies as being 'hard learners' *cough* The Barber of Siberia *cough*. It's one thing that the forum and a host of experts have concluded that Russia has been defeated in Ukraine; it's another thing when Russians themselves will be able to acknowledge that.

I'm tempted to revisit the Russo-Japanese War - hopefully not going too much OT - not least because @Kinophile has also been musing about it, and @LongLeftFlank has posted the racist cartoons that preceded the Russian defeat. Certainly, the fact that Russia provoked that war with nothing but racist hubris, and got dealt a decisive defeat that lead to quasi-regime change, invites comparisons with the current situation in Ukraine. However, that leads us to the teleiosis [I canz use big wordz] of the Russian defeat: Tsushima. What I find most fascinating about Tsushima isn't the fact that an early industrial fleet got obliterated after sailing halfway through the globe, but that the 2nd Pacific Squadron was ordered to sail forth from Madagascar AFTER Port Arthur had already fallen: They were supposed to sail to Vladivostok and continue the fight against the Japanese from there, but... If you've played Norm Koger's Distant Guns, you'll know that this was a hopeless strategy. The Russian leadership at the time gambled away their nation's decades-long gains in becoming a naval power for a face-saving operation that would not have brought back Port Arthur, and Russia gave up its international status as a naval power after Tsushima.
TL;DR: Russians are bad losers, even if they like to recast this in their movies as being 'hard learners' *cough* The Barber of Siberia *cough*. It's one thing that the forum and a host of experts have concluded that Russia has been defeated in Ukraine; it's another thing when Russians themselves will be able to acknowledge that.

I'm tempted to revisit the Russo-Japanese War - hopefully not going too much OT - not least because @Kinophile has also been musing about it, and @LongLeftFlank has posted the racist cartoons that preceded the Russian defeat. Certainly, the fact that Russia provoked that war with nothing but racist hubris, and got dealt a decisive defeat that lead to quasi-regime change, invites comparisons with the current situation in Ukraine. However, that leads us to the teleiosis [I canz use big wordz] of the Russian defeat: Tsushima. What I find most fascinating about Tsushima isn't the fact that an early industrial fleet got obliterated after sailing halfway through the globe, but that the 2nd Pacific Squadron was ordered to sail forth from Madagascar AFTER Port Arthur had already fallen: They were supposed to sail to Vladivostok and continue the fight against the Japanese from there, but... If you've played Norm Koger's Distant Guns, you'll know that this was a hopeless strategy. The Russian leadership at the time gambled away their nation's decades-long gains in becoming a naval power for a face-saving operation that would not have brought back Port Arthur, and Russia gave up its international status as a naval power after Tsushima.
TL;DR: Russians are bad losers, even if they like to recast this in their movies as being 'hard learners' *cough* The Barber of Siberia *cough*. It's one thing that the forum and a host of experts have concluded that Russia has been defeated in Ukraine; it's another thing when Russians themselves will be able to acknowledge that.

A socioeconomic dive into the Russian army ranks:
"What do we know about background and social position of #Russian soldiers, who are deployed in #Ukraine? BBC analysed publicly available info about 1083 Russian servicemen, who were killed in action. Here are some tendencies were found out."
"Regions that reported the highest number of the losses are so called depressed or semi depressed, ie areas with high unemployment and a low standard of living. In Dagestan (93 reported deaths) or Buryatia (53 rep. deaths) it’s very hard to find a job (let alone well paid job)"
"In #Dagestan unemployment rate is 15% (compared to average 4% in #Russia), average salary - 400 USD. If one joins army as private they can around 500 USD, but army also provide them food, uniform and a place to live. So a bigger part of the salary remains in your pocket"
"During “special operations” salary of a private infantryman of Russian army can reach 2.200 USD because of bonuses. Or even 2.600 USD if you are a sergeant or corporal. This is huge money for those living in the regions"
"20% of officially confirmed losses come from 10 Russia's depressed regions (plus Dagestan). If we add numbers from semi-depressed regions - it will be roughly 80% of all losses reported by Russian official sources (ie local officials, media and schools)."
"Striking example - there are zero(!) reports about military casualties from Moscow. Even Ukrainian sources never mentioned anyone from Moscow city, who was captured or killed in Ukraine."