How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Haiduk]

17 minutes ago, Seminole said:

he will of the people of Crimea

Who are "people of Crimea"? It's a nationality? Maybe Crimean language exists? 

18 minutes ago, Seminole said:

If Crimea launched an insurgency against the Ukrainian government

Crimea? Really? Not Russia? 

[A Canadian Cat]

9 minutes ago, Seminole said:

What would be more galling to Western democracies:  A plebiscite to determine the will of the people of Crimea, or a war to compel them to live under a government they may not assent to?

Imposing a government against the will of people seems antithetical to democratic tenets.

LOL a fake plebiscite would be most galling. Many in the west are pretty upset about the 2014 invasion of Crimea and the following faked plebiscite results. So, it is pretty rich listening to you imply the results of that faked plebiscite mean that Ukraine taking Crimea back would via a "war to compel" the inhabitants under the Ukrainian government. If there wasn't so many people dying I would find it funny.

 

9 minutes ago, Seminole said:

Even if the people living there don't want that?  Why is ignoring them so simple, and why is their input so unvalued?

Again seriously. I am fully aware there have been issues of governance in parts of Ukraine but come on you cannot seriously think that people following this thread believe that the plebiscite you refer to is legitimate.

We don't know how the people living in Crimea would like to be governed. I would be fine with them getting to decide but before a fair plebiscite can be conducted you have to get the occupiers out of there and then you have to decide if the imported people should really get a say or sent home - tricky question. Not to mention the people displaced by the occupying Russians need to have the choice to return. Only then could you have a free vote. Honestly I'm not sure how that should look and I would leave that up to the Ukrainians and the citizens living in Crimea to decide. None of that can happen while its under Russian occupation.

[A Canadian Cat]

3 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

23 minutes ago, Seminole said:

If Crimea launched an insurgency against the Ukrainian government

Crimea? Really? Not Russia? 

Yeah, good point. Considering the insurgency in the Dombas was kicked off and nearly entirely manufactured by Putin it would be hard to say that any insurgency in Ukraine after removing the Russian occupiers would be truly organic.

[BlackMoria]

14 minutes ago, Seminole said:

Even if the people living there don't want that?  Why is ignoring them so simple, and why is their input so unvalued?

If Crimea launched an insurgency against the Ukrainian government, would NATO support their separation as in Kosovo, or would NATO help crush the rebellion?  It seems less simple than some would have it.

The annexation of Crimea and the subsequent influx of Russians in Crimea since 2014 has made this a particular complex and knotty issue.

Ukrainians claim Crimea is theirs.  Russia claims it is theirs.  Historical factors could validate either claim if both sides agree to the historical facts - but they don't.   So the 'legal' status is disputed.

Now, putting it to a vote is problematic.   Who is eligible to vote?   Any people who were resident in Crimea pre-2014 annexation?   Any people there now?   

Who conducts the vote?  Ukraine?  Russia?  Crimeans (which ones then)?  The UN?

The problem with a vote is Russian has front loaded russians moving into Crimea since 2014, so that well is poisoned now.  If you want a vote, the least objectionable protocol is pre-2014 legal residents of Crimea and conducted by the UN.  Anything else will likely never be accepted by one side or the other.   

[Haiduk]

2 hours ago, Beleg85 said:

Short thred about one of crucial Ukrianian positions- reason why muscovites are pushing through the town rather than around it.

More wide picture of this place, filmed by "Honor" company with drone (but turned upside down). Alsas, after "Honor" has withdrew to rotation, their positin, which they recaptured and then held was again captured by Russians.

[womble]

1 minute ago, BlackMoria said:

The problem with a vote is Russian has front loaded russians moving into Crimea since 2014, so that well is poisoned now.  If you want a vote, the least objectionable protocol is pre-2014 legal residents of Crimea and conducted by the UN.  Anything else will likely never be accepted by one side or the other.   

Russia (as currently constituted) won't even accept that "least objectionable" scenario. They'll caterwaul and impede it in the UN, and stamp their little feet. They'll hold their breath til they go purple, and scream and scream and scream until they are sick. Because they can. Then they'll fund and support pernicious insurgency and criminal activity to make Crimea a sore in Ukraine's Black Sea belly, to go with the Donetsk/Luhansk brace of septic thorns in her side. And in a decade they'll try again, and there's pretty much nothing can be done about that which isn't self-defeating.

[BlackMoria]

Well, I guess it is a Zelensky - Putin celebrity death match, where the winner get the loser's head and Crimea.  Does that work?

Note:  I am not serious.  Just some dark humor.

Edited April 21, 2023 by BlackMoria

[kimbosbread]

3 hours ago, womble said:

Interesting points, but I think you might've missed the context, namely "dropping the Kerch Bridge rail without destroying the road deck".

All the "other rail interdiction" targets can be nailed whether the bridge is in range or not, if you want to just degrade rail comms. A large chunk of the terminal effects of "dropping the Kerch bridge" are symbolic as much as anything, and if they have to repair that rail link again, under fire from UKR rocket artillery... Assuming that symbolic is any use at all, that is.

Oh yeah, I was thinking in general, not the Kerch bridge. How does one degrade 100-1000s of km of railroad without spending ****loads of money, and with minimal risk.

The point of it is that Russia without rail will collapse. A siege of Crimea might take a while. If you can degrade Russian rail and thus society, military, push ethnic republics to "alternate" arrangements a la Galeev, that's a big win.

3 hours ago, womble said:

Mostly, though, Crimea's problem in a siege is water, and I don't imagine they can tanker in enough water (along with all the other feedstock of the war machine and fodder for the civilian population), even if the Kerch rail link remains up. Once the UKR have sealed off the peninsula's land approaches, that's the beginning of the end for the Crimea garrison.

100%

[Letter from Prague]

6 minutes ago, BlackMoria said:

Well, I guess it is a Zelensky - Putin celebrity death match, where the winner get the loser's head and Crimea.  Does that work?

Note:  I am not serious.  Just some dark humor.

I thought the possibility of solving war by single combat is why Ukraine invested in Klitchko?

[Haiduk]

"Predator", hero of famous video got light wound and filmed this. During he reloaded PKT, reworked for shooting with bipod, some sort of AGS burst exploded near him. He got four small framents. The video probaly for second part of March

 

[JonS]

4 hours ago, dan/california said:

Or was the Russian system just hopeless from the beginning?

The Russians obviously aren't completely useless - they did manage to muster several hundred thousand folks at jump off points, get them across the border, and largely keep them there despite global sanctions, heavy heavy losses, and a pretty sustained Ukrainian offensive against their theatre logistics. If they were hopeless - or had become hopeless - then the Russian forces would already be back across the 2014 borders and Sevastopol's resorts would be taking summer bookings for Kyiv's great and good.

What the Russians don't seem especially good at is offensive operations. Much like the Germans from 1941 through to 1943, their offensive aspirations seems to be on a pretty sharp downslope^. Whether that's because they just no longer have the manpower, logistic support, materiel, and strategic surprise, or because all the folks who knew how to do that have had smoking accidents, been defenestrated, or afforded a close but brief inspection of the sharp end of a HIMARS I don't really know. I suspect, though, that is a combination of reduced materiel ability coupled with reduced cognitive ability. Which is predominant is a matter of taste in the absence of real data.

 

^ Compare Op Barbarossa to Op Blue to Op Citadel, then compare Feb 2022 to the dry humping now (still) going on around Bakhmut.

Edited April 21, 2023 by JonS

[sburke]

8 hours ago, BlackMoria said:

The annexation of Crimea and the subsequent influx of Russians in Crimea since 2014 has made this a particular complex and knotty issue.

Ukrainians claim Crimea is theirs.  Russia claims it is theirs.  Historical factors could validate either claim if both sides agree to the historical facts - but they don't.   So the 'legal' status is disputed.

Now, putting it to a vote is problematic.   Who is eligible to vote?   Any people who were resident in Crimea pre-2014 annexation?   Any people there now?   

Who conducts the vote?  Ukraine?  Russia?  Crimeans (which ones then)?  The UN?

The problem with a vote is Russian has front loaded russians moving into Crimea since 2014, so that well is poisoned now.  If you want a vote, the least objectionable protocol is pre-2014 legal residents of Crimea and conducted by the UN.  Anything else will likely never be accepted by one side or the other.   

Actually the status of Crimea as recognized by Russia is it is Ukrainian territory.  The recent claim from Russia is really no different than the claim to the 4 Ukrainian oblasts they currently claim as "Russian".

Quote

 

During the 1990s, the dispute over control of the Black Sea Fleet and Crimean naval facilities were source of tensions between Russia and Ukraine. In 1992, Vladimir Lukin, then chairman of the Russian parliament's Committee on Foreign Affairs, suggested that in order to pressure Ukraine to give up its claim to the Black Sea Fleet, Russia should question Ukrainian control over Crimea. ^[66] In 1998 the Partition Treaty divided the fleet and gave Russia a naval base in Sevastopol, and the Treaty of Friendship recognized the inviolability of existing borders. 

 

so basically having a treaty with Russia is pointless.

Edited April 22, 2023 by sburke

[Seminole]

59 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

Who are "people of Crimea"? It's a nationality? Maybe Crimean language exists? 

Self-evident.  I just mean the people who live there.  Who should decide?  People that don't live there?

I consider myself a Floridian, but it's not a nationality and we don't have a Floridian language.

[JonS]

50 minutes ago, BlackMoria said:

Well, I guess it is a Zelensky - Putin celebrity death match, where the winner get the loser's head and Crimea.  Does that work?

There'd have to be multiple rounds though, right? Karate in the first, a bare-chest off in the second, and finishing with sick burns in an improv comedy round.

Edited April 21, 2023 by JonS

[Letter from Prague]

5 minutes ago, Seminole said:

Self-evident.  I just mean the people who live there.  Who should decide?  People that don't live there?

I consider myself a Floridian, but it's not a nationality and we don't have a Floridian language.

So if I violently invade your house, kick you out, and when you try to get back, you get told "sorry, the people who live in the house decide", that is fine and dandy? Good to know, where do you live?

EDIT: the fact that the openly pro-Russia+pro-China commenter is actual Florida Man tickles my stereotyping brain in a funny way.

Edited April 21, 2023 by Letter from Prague

[Haiduk]

Very rare video of UKR Tor work.

Unknown it's captured one or Ukrianian. In 1991 Ukraine got as Soviet legacy 24 Tor SAMs. Though, they were of very first batches , so had many technical issues. There wasn't technical support and opportunity for maintenanne or repairing, so in mid of 2000th all Tors were decomissioned and stored. Since war began in 2014 there were attempts to reanimate some Tors and missiles for it. First Tors appeared in ATO zone in 2017, but only in 2019 officially was announced that battery of Tors returned to service. In 2020 L'viv radio reparing factory has mastered maintenance of Tors.   

By Soviet shtat Tors should form SAM regiments for tank or motor-rifle divisions. Each regiment should have 4 batteries per 4 launchers.  

[sburke]

16 minutes ago, Seminole said:

Self-evident.  I just mean the people who live there.  Who should decide?  People that don't live there?

I consider myself a Floridian, but it's not a nationality and we don't have a Floridian language.

last time Florida tried to secede as I recall it didn't go so well.

[Beleg85]

2 hours ago, Seminole said:

I doubt Thomas Jefferson would be considered a 'pro-Moscow propagandist', but the assertions in the American Declaration of Independence raise an important question regarding who rightly decides the question.

Mate, I really, really don't want to sound rude...but you get that bringing Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine or XVIII-cent. issues of American Declaration of Independence into local context full of charming characters like Igor "Devil" Bezhler or Alex 'The Surgeon" Zaldastanov may sound a little...how to say it... well excessively pompatic?

I am quite sure nobody from them ever heard about Thomas Jefferson and his ideas. Maybe some older ones know Jefferson Airplane, though.

Btw. how you imagine validity of such referendum till at least one Russian soldier is in Crimea? Are expelled and persectued Tatars able to vote? People who flew to Ukraine? Or illegally settled Russian military colonists- can they vote? How do we know if buses of thousands of voters that just "reminded themselves" of their ancient Crimean identity and came back from Russia are legit or not? Whose military forces-and how- would secure at least minimal validity of such plebiscit? Mysterious Green Men riding in BTR's on the streets "for voters' own safety" ?

Edited April 21, 2023 by Beleg85

[danfrodo]

2 hours ago, Seminole said:

What would be more galling to Western democracies:  A plebiscite to determine the will of the people of Crimea, or a war to compel them to live under a government they may not assent to?

I think this is covered above but had to say that while this sounds great it isn't quite the case.  Putin chased out everyone that didn't like RU and brought in a bunch of Russians and now we have a vote?  It's like kill everyone in a village, bring in new people, have them elect a sheriff from their own who then gets to decide whether to prosecute for the murder of the villagers.

Edited April 21, 2023 by danfrodo

[Jiggathebauce]

25 minutes ago, Seminole said:

Self-evident.  I just mean the people who live there.  Who should decide?  People that don't live there?

I consider myself a Floridian, but it's not a nationality and we don't have a Floridian language.

Your sniping is exasperating. Take an L. 

[Haiduk]

16 minutes ago, Seminole said:

Self-evident.  I just mean the people who live there.  Who should decide?  People that don't live there?

I consider myself a Floridian, but it's not a nationality and we don't have a Floridian language.

Constitution of Ukraine clearly says about this case - any secession of territory is possible after all-Ukrainian referendum.

I think, Florida also can't claim neither independence, nor rejoining back to Spain or Cuba. 

35% of neo-sovoks and pro-Russians, as well as just Russian citizens, who arrived to Crimea to participate in "referendum" in terms of actually occupation, who voted several times in different places is not reflect "the will of Crimeans", which I repeat were in mass indifferent which flag is over Simferopol.  

[Seminole]

1 hour ago, IanL said:

We don't know how the people living in Crimea would like to be governed. I would be fine with them getting to decide but before a fair plebiscite can be conducted you have to get the occupiers out of there and then you have to decide if the imported people should really get a say or sent home - tricky question. Not to mention the people displaced by the occupying Russians need to have the choice to return. Only then could you have a free vote. Honestly I'm not sure how that should look and I would leave that up to the Ukrainians and the citizens living in Crimea to decide. None of that can happen while its under Russian occupation.

I don't consider the plebiscite conducted by the Russians after their invasion to be legitimate, conducted as it was literally 'under the gun'.  I suspect there was a boycott by what would have otherwise been no votes.

But on the question itself, polling has been conducted before and after.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Crimean_status_referendum

From March 12 – 14, 2014, Germany's largest pollster, the GfK Group, conducted a survey with 600 respondents and found that 70.6% of Crimeans intended to vote for joining Russia, 10.8% for restoring the 1992 constitution, and 5.6% did not intend to take part in the referendum.^[41][42] The poll also showed that if Crimeans had more choices, 53.8% of them would choose joining Russia, 5.2% restoration of 1992 constitution, 18.6% a fully independent Crimean state and 12.6% would choose to keep the previous status of Crimea.^[41]

Gallup conducted an immediate post-referendum survey of Ukraine and Crimea and published their results in April 2014. Gallup reported that, among the population of Crimea, 93.6% of ethnic Russians and 68.4% of ethnic Ukrainians believed the referendum result accurately represents the will of the Crimean people. Only 1.7% of ethnic Russians and 14.5% of ethnic Ukrainians living in Crimea thought that the referendum results didn't accurately reflect the views of the Crimean people.^[43]

In May 2014, Washington, D.C., pollster Pew Research published results of a survey that encompassed Crimea, Ukraine, and Russia, in which it was reported that 88% of Crimeans believed the government of Kyiv should officially recognize the result of Crimea's referendum.^[44]

Between December 12 and 25, 2014, Levada-Center carried out a survey of Crimea that was commissioned by John O'Loughlin, College Professor of Distinction and Professor of Geography at the University of Colorado in Boulder, and Gerard Toal (Gearóid Ó Tuathail), Professor of Government and International Affairs at Virginia Tech's National Capital Region campus. The results of that survey were published by Open Democracy in March, 2015, and reported that, overall, 84% of Crimeans felt the choice to secede from Ukraine and accede to Russia was "Absolutely the right decision", with the next-largest segment of respondents saying the decision to return to Russia was the "Generally right decision". The survey commissioners, John O'Loughlin and Gerard Toal, wrote in their Open Democracy article that, while they felt that the referendum was "an illegal act under international law", their survey shows "It is also an act that enjoys the widespread support of the peninsula's inhabitants, with the important exception of its Crimean Tatar population" with "widespread support for Crimea's decision to secede from Ukraine and join the Russian Federation one year ago". Their survey also reported that a majority of Crimean Tatars viewed Crimea's return to Russia as either the "Absolutely right decision" or the "Generally right decision"

[Seminole]

17 minutes ago, sburke said:

last time Florida tried to secede as I recall it didn't go so well.

The Florida State University Army ROTC, Seminole battalion, actually has the 'unique privilege of a battle streamer on its colors' subsequent to the Battle of Natural Bridge.

[Lethaface]

1 hour ago, Seminole said:

Self-evident.  I just mean the people who live there.  Who should decide?  People that don't live there?

I consider myself a Floridian, but it's not a nationality and we don't have a Floridian language.

So if Cuba invades Florida and claims it is Cuba now because many Cubans live there, will a referendum, among the mainly Cuban people remaining in Florida after the invasion, be 'legitimate' ?

[quakerparrot67]

6 hours ago, kimbosbread said:

There is nothing I know that exists currently that does this out of the box. To degrade the system without the pain of destroying the rail:

• If you knew where all the signals and control boxes were (gps) that are difficult to replace, and had suitably long range small drones with 1kg HE, you could cause significant degradation to the rail network, but that's because you are knocking out difficult to replace stuff all over.
• Alternatively, hit the rail yards and destroy enough locomotives, again with your long range drones/cruise missiles/saboteurs.

Let's say we want to take out a 100km line of rail. That's a ton of steel, wood, dirt and gravel to move, and it's easy and fast to fix.I can imagine two possibilities to "move":

• [Mechanical] A track unlayer, which rides the rails and somehow tears up the track behind it (explosive, or just mechanical)
• [Explosive] Drones that drop charges at periodic intervals along the track (say every 5-10m), for several km. Agricultural drones already can drop/plant seeds in complex patterns; in this case it's a matter of can you carry enough charges that each can cause serious damage to a section of track. Imagine an airborne UR-77, if you will.

I don't know enough about trains to know if there's some other target; I guess if you had time you could wait for them to run out of spare parts.

 i think he specifically meant the road/rail bridge that was blown a while back- if it would be possible to destroy the rail bridge without tipping the more delicate road bridge right next to it.  i could be wrong, though...

 

cheers,

rob