FancyCat

Absolute ghoul. I wish she visits Kherson. Maybe cross the bridge during HIMAR time.

I've seen sentiment asking why Kiev governmental targets aren't being destroyed for a long while. Might this Crimea attack be prepping for Russia to devastate the Kiev government district? I dunno why Russia didn't outright attack it before, I think they should have precise missiles enough, and it's a military target.....tho the value of hardening Ukrainian resistance is probably significant. I hope Zelensky has a great bunker tho I'm sure the soviets built some good stuff for him to stay in. And I hear the Rada still meets in person? Ugh I hope security measures are still in place to keep them okay, a missile during one of their sessions would be horrible.

Is it just me or are Russian false flags quite bloodless now? Has Putin lost his touch? Don't get me wrong, lots of dead Ukrainian lives, I hope that cowboy hat wearing soldier dies very quickly, but not even one dead Russian soldier in the PoW camp attack? Consider that vs the apartment bombings that brought Putin to power. 300 dead. Recall the false flags done up to the invasion, no one died at all either. Consider also the explanations offered for the PoW bombing, Zelensky asked that the Mariupol defenders lay down their arms and made a country wide speech justifying the decision, that does not sound like a man who wants the Azov killed to keep quiet their war crimes. Ukraine was very happily trading Russian PoWs for Azov members in earlier prisoner exchanges just emphasize how ridiculous it is. (And happily saying so publicly just underscores how domestically it wanted them saved, and any foreign Azov concerns are not important) Why not say it was mistaken targeting? Much more believable. As the Theiner Twitter thread notes, wasting HIMAR on a target well within range of conventional artillery, no serious intelligence agency is going to ignore that, plus everything else like how it's not even akin to the explosions of HIMARS, it's just very shoddy work blaming Ukraine. UA intelligence stated this was done to cause domestic issues in Ukraine, is anyone in Ukraine convinced this was ordered by Zelensky to get rid of troublesome Azov? Is any EU or Western intelligence agency going to tell their political master, that Russia may not be wholly at fault?

Huh. You know, they do some pretty sweeping shots of the car. That 27 second clip is completely of the car. Dunno how long the segment is in total, but why spend 27 seconds on a car for any reason? Galeev so some salt but sweeping shot of the car is correct.

I'm not familiar with the conflict in Ukraine, has such a large number of PoWs in Russian custody been killed at once? How unprecedented is this? Making it so that every Ukrainian defender fights to the death, every Ukrainian civilian stays loyal to Ukraine is just a insane notion. It worked in Chechnya yes, but failed in Afghanistan.

Recall those prisoner exchanges where corruption/nepotism was involved, and the outrage that occurred. Poor soldiers with little connections to the rest of the Russian government/society are absolutely worth nothing to exchange, either by the Kremlin or on the mid-high tier of the Russian command looking for some money off of the exchanges. Chechens, are at least valuable blocking troops, not to mention part of Kadyrov's retinue. Pilots, likely to come from middle-class or higher ranking personnel, and are actually important militarily. Same for officers. etc.

Russia continues to do the opposite of giving Western doves ammo to lower support to Ukraine. Its like Russia wants Ukraine to smash them to pieces in Kherson. I can see whatever remaining Dove lobby in the White House just getting ignored as Defense Secretary Austin sends more HIMARS to Ukraine.

Essential steps for ensuring Ukraine is willing to reform to abide by EU rules are continuing to take place. This was a key point required by the EU. https://kyivindependent.com/news-feed/g-7-ambassadors-urge-ukraine-to-appoint-head-of-specialized-anti-corruption-prosecutors-office-vacant-since-august-2020

I am doubtful the regime will fall apart so in my opinion, war offers the best chance for Ukraine to regain territories without annoying calls for ceasefire and diplomacy. Also, if these reports emerging from Kherson oblast are correct, Russia has littered the occupied territories with war crimes, and cleansing of civilians and there is nothing like war crimes to drain international opinion. Bucha definitely tilted the scale internationally. I'm really not favorable on the opinion of the Russian Navy or Air Force to defend Crimea, not after they let Snake Island fall without so much a fight. I really don't think if Ukraine can beat Russia at Kherson, then run successful offensives into the Donbas, that Russia can both lose the Donbas republics yet hold Crimea. If anything, if not mistaken, I believe once Ukraine controls Kherson, and the rest of the right bank of the Dnipro, the Isthmus of Perekop is within range for targeting of HIMARS anyway.

Something to emphasize, if Ukraine reaches the point where it can launch offensives, and can therefore end the puppet republics, Ukraine must do so even if the loss of Russian prestige causes Russian escalation and intense actions against Ukraine? Why? Because as long as Ukraine claims the republics territory, and as long as they exist, Russia will hold a powerful card to interfere in the affairs of the Ukrainian state. Why it didn't annex the republics is in contrast to Crimea, Russia has no use for the republics being part of Russia, their goal is for these republics to drag Ukraine down and provide justification for Russian intervention in Ukraine. Removing them removes the cancer of Russia from Ukraine.

Ukraine will retake the Donbas before Crimea. It is important to note, while Crimea is more important than the Donbas puppet republics, those republics and Crimea are such high levels of prestige that Russia losing the republics will hurt just as badly as Crimea. I've emphasized that Russia's narrative in Ukraine relies on holding Kherson. Once they lose Kherson, Putin must mobilize or the Russian people are going to start asking, "if we are losing, why aren't we going all out to win?" If he does not mobilize, he has to some way turn the remaining occupied territory into a stalemate and force a ceasefire, stalemate and ceasefire he might get away with some excuses. If Ukraine can illustrate the ability to launch a offensive and take Kherson, I see no reason why offensives into the rest of the occupied territories isn't possible. Without mobilization Russia does not have the ability to hold any Ukrainian territory. At some point, mobilization will be too late. There is a possibility it's too late already. Ukraine will be able to reach and conquer the puppet republics. If Putin cannot mobilize, and save Kherson, unless he's absolutely stupid and getting the most misleading information from his military, mobilization to save the puppet republics won't make it in time to stop Ukraine. That he seems absolutely terrified of telling Russians it's time for mobilization, indicates that the support for dying in Ukraine, hell dying for the puppet republics is paper thin. Therefore, I'm gonna disagree with you on speed, and on the feasibility of taking Crimea. If Ukraine retakes the puppet republics, then the Ukrainian military is probably sufficient to invade Crimea. If Ukraine takes the republics, the Russian military does not have the ability to defend Crimea. If Ukraine takes Kherson and Putin does not mobilize, unless he's just getting the most incompetent advice from the General Staff, he's more afraid of mobilization than the loss of the Donbas republics. At that point, with no mobilization, the impending loss of the Donbas republics means the circular firing squad starts getting into motion in Moscow. If I were Ukraine, I would rush into Crimea and retake it while Putin and the rest of the Russian government fight over the blame and control of pro-war Russia. Let time pass, Russia will sort out it's internal problems and reinforce Crimea and status quo will entrench. No, even if it hurts, the best chance for Ukraine to retake Crimea is militarily, and quickly before Russia can sort itself out. If Russia mobilizes, the equation changes but mobilization takes time to occur and so that window gets smaller depending on how Ukraine does on the offensive.

The last war in Europe was in the 90s, the Balkan conflicts, different populations, different realities, but my impression is certainly European support for Ukraine is certainly outclassing any support for Balkans, military or otherwise aid to civilians, etc. Obviously of course, things have changed, with Eastern Europe having functioning economies, but it is notable no? That the support to Ukraine is this weighty? I wonder if the experts in predicting the Russia vs Ukraine conflict, are relying on factors that may not be coming true in reality? Certainly, say we placed Ukraine vs Russia and cut out the rest of the world, instant Ukrainian defeat, or such a destruction and grind down of Ukraine by Russia that the military collapse appears in due time simply from the destruction of the home front and hardship of civilians and the resulting inability for the military to operate on top. Both in a psychological and material sense, the support that the West provides Ukraine is very important. No doubt Ukraine would fight with or without European support but with it, certainly the bombastic assertions of the Ukrainian government in seeking the withdrawal of all Russian forces from Ukraine as conditions for a ceasefire are closer to reality than dreaming. Edit: I think despite it being not enough, and being too slow, that it's important to recognize that this aid is a game changer, that it is unique, that it marks significantly important milestones in the European project and Western unity.

Truly, the Eastern European alliance will rival France-Germany once Ukraine gets in the EU and with UK and USA in defense related matters, a impenetrable eastern flank of the EU will be formed defense wise. France and Germany have completely screwed up. Whatever benefit isolating Poland will be cancelled out by this strong showing for Ukraine. Only positive is that French-German financial support bulwarks Ukraine and it would be inconsiderate to not recognize that this financial support is the only thing keeping Ukraine from a collapsing home front due to bad economic conditions. On one hand, the lack of military aid to bring Ukraine to victory is extremely a negative factor, on the other, their willingness to not toss Ukraine into complete economic destruction and pave the way for easier Russian conquest I suppose does need to be considered. (Yes, the country can fight on with collapsing economy and lack of money but no? A country suffering food shortages, lack of energy, unable to rebuild due to lack of money importing, I think it's important for the defenders of Ukraine to know the home front is in decent condition, in the same way that millions of Ukrainians are out of harm's way in the rest of Europe, the ability of the Ukrainian state to operate in the non-frontlines is essential to maintaining morale and retaining unity) Certainly if Ukraine had been abandoned by Europe, the struggle would be much harder on the rest of Ukraine so in that sense, the support from the EU is essential in maintaining the home front. Can our Ukrainian friends provide info on how the home front is? I recall in the Balkans, how war causes hardship even in non frontline areas due to rise in prices, the shortages, stuff like that, economic hardship and collapse, my impression of Ukraine, I'm not seeing a lot to indicate extreme pressures akin to the Balkans in the 90s. It helps of course most of Ukraine is not in the frontline anymore, and Ukraine is a exporter of food, but my impression is EU support is keeping Ukraine in a situation better than most countries facing total war no?

A note on the hitting with the enemy as hard as possible, Ukraine seems intent on a situation where Russia withdraws it's personnel but must give up it's vehicles and everything else. That's a pretty good deal, probably a amazing deal. In that sense, the death or capture of the Russian forces on the wrong side of the river, is less important than the seizure of that land according to Ukraine's actions. At the end of the day, Ukraine needs the land and civilians back, not the dead or surrendered Russian soldiers to be victorious. The destruction or capture of Russian equipment is more important than even killing them.

Reuters has released a report on traitors in Ukraine. Some interesting tidbits. SBU head Bakanov (former now that Zelensky dismissed him) left Kiev for at least 3 days after the invasion, with indications that SBU staff were unable to maintain contact with him during that time period. SBU shot and killed a member of the Ukrainian negotiating team while trying to arrest him, early in the war, but the Military Intelligence Agency of Ukraine, GUR, says Denys Kirieiev was a officer of theirs, Reuters has a source stating that Kirieiev had access to the highest levels of the Russian government and was providing vital info on the invasion back to Kiev. Tbh I'm not sure if defending the approach to Kiev by turning Chornobyl into a war zone is a good idea that requires punishment of the people who surrendered rather than defend it as asserted in the Reuters piece. https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/ukraine-crisis-russia-saboteurs/

I’ve always been incredulous regarding Chechen “blocking” troops existing, but if a Russian junior officer can get executed for the mere act of protecting a civilian from death on the literal first day of the invasion, when one would think discipline would be at the highest point….. huh, actually a Lt. Colonel ordered them killed. And the troops obeyed without question. On the first ****ing day of the invasion. Christ. I was thinking a fragging incident happened but this is way beyond that. On 2nd thought maybe blocking troops isn’t so outlandish to occur, firing on their own.

Russian opposition media has published a article on a Russian officer's death from the first days of the invasion and apparently how Russian media used it to pretend he died heroically from saving civilians from Ukrainian fire, I remember the circumstances of it cause of this reddit thread from the first days of the invasion, the 2 women, mother and daughter were stopped at a checkpoint, and two Russian soldiers, the officer and enlisted man tried to keep them from being killed, but instead Russians shot at all 4, killing the officer and mother, the soldier, wounded, was brought to a hospital by the woman and turned over to Ukrainian forces, he was interviewed and you can find that on YT. https://old.reddit.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/t10y4g/modern_warfare_girl_do_instagram_video_with/

So far Russia has been seeking to gain territory at the expense of battlefield terrain or better lines, decent change they finally are switching to a stance where they can give up territory to better improve their lines, or allow Ukraine to potentially overextend.

A bit confused, Mayor-General, as in Major General?

Not sure if civil war is in the books. The way Russian elites like to kill each other seems more of the backstabbing kind than the public executions or arrests kind. Maybe governors and regions will gain more power but what will drive regional elites to fight each other and Moscow?

This is some high grade apologia to defend Russian imperialism. One, "Ukraine slipping away from Russia", aside from denoting Ukraine as Russian owned, entitled to, "slipped" is a funny way of saying for punishment for seeking closer relations with the EU, Ukraine gets invaded and it's citizens killed and economy damaged in 2014, (not to mention the current invasion) it's "slipping away", Russia has done far more to give Ukraine reasons to run for EU and NATO membership by acting as violently (genocidal) as it has to Ukraine seeking NATO membership that does nothing to threaten Russia proper, and EU membership that is democratic, and peaceful and only threatens Russia via making the Russian people ask why they live like this when the EU lives like that. "National interests" "next to it's borders" "Russian dominated areas" horse****. Russia before the invasion, demanded as part of ensuring it's "protection from NATO" that was driving supposedly it's reasons to invade Ukraine, that NATO withdraw forces back to 1997 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prelude_to_the_2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine#NATO–Russia_security_talks Meaning the withdrawal of NATO defense from Poland, the Baltics, the Balkans, the map below shows it, so your saying Russia has the right to consider Belarus to be part of its borders? Ukraine? I guess Russia owns Serbia and Bosnia too considering they wanted the withdrawal of NATO from all neighboring states. "National interests" "next to it's borders" "Russian dominated areas" bull****. Let's not even get into the bull**** that is Russia thinking NATO is going to invade Russia. There is no national interests being secured via the withdrawal of NATO from Poland, much less Czechoslovakia, Romania, etc, etc. I understand the need to be critical, but realize that Russian demands for preventing the invasion of Ukraine were maximal as hell, and sure as hell not emblematic of a Russia seeking security, but emblematic of Russia seeking imperial domination it once had.

I saw this on /r/credibledefense, a rundown of CIA director Burns' remarks recently, where he was much publicized as stating Putin was "too healthy". To be frank, those were the least interesting remarks. As referenced in the reddit thread, Director Burns previously served in the State Department, with long experience in Russia including as Ambassador, and up to Deputy Secretary of State, also led the Iranian nuclear talks that resulted in JCPOA, he is extremely experienced with Putin. https://www.russiamatters.org/analysis/cia-chief-putin-betting-attrition-ukraine-will-lose-his-bet-again A few major points from Burns, he has a imperial mindset, and believes his own rhetoric on Ukraine. Obviously a realist vs someone who believes in their destiny to reconquer Ukraine for Russia to regain imperial great power status, you will see differing approachs to dealing with them from the U.S. Might explain some of the seemingly endless U.S delaying on new and more powerful equipment.