How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[dan/california]

10 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

- all conscipts have to repay own ipothec loans during own service (in UKR conscripted don't repay loan percents)

Haiduk your english is usually better than mine, but could you clarify this one? It didn't come out right.

 

10 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I wish they would stop trying to make the war into a music video.

 

The bleeping youngns seem to THINK in music videos, and their taste sucks in every language i have had the "pleasure" of experiencing them in. Sadly the condition appears incurable.

Edited September 21, 2022 by dan/california

[Artkin]

13 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I wish they would stop trying to make the war into a music video.

 

That was my first thought too. Wtf?

[akd]

Hmm...

[Haiduk]

20 minutes ago, dan/california said:

Haiduk your english is usually better than mine, but could you clarify this one? It didn't come out right.

 

Ouh ) Misspelling ) Hypothec. I don't know how this thing names in western countries, but in Russia and Ukraine the bank credit (loan) for buying own housing names "ipoteka" in English I see similar word "hypothec". In Russia hypothec is just some sort of sacral gift from authorities - one of reasons to go to army is soft hypothec, because this is a single way for people from deep provicne to buy a new flat or even relocate to better place from own depressive regions. In UKR even a joke is roaming about killed Russian soldiers "his family has closed hypothec" 

Edited September 21, 2022 by Haiduk

[Twisk]

18 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I am not touching US politics with a 10 foot pole.  I will call you on the fact that the US is not the only nation in the western world and all of those nations have to deal with this phenomenon, particularly those that sent people to fight and die in Afghanistan.  Every nation has its own political dance to deal with and as this war drags on, or worse escalates, the calculus is more likely to change over time.

We are not just talking about US support here.

I think when you mention that we are "post-Afghanistan" it is directly linked to U.S. support.  But even while there are other countries in the western bucket key support pillars are U.S./U.k. and eastern bloc (Poland, Baltics). I see little evidence that U.S. or U.k. support is weakening and eastern bloc will want Ukraine to act as buffer against Russia (strong or weak) since it removes headache for them.

 

U.S./U.K. can support with low cost to selves and eastern bloc has real physical reasons to continue support.

[dan/california]

5 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

Ouh ) Misspelling ) Hypothec. I don't know how this thing names in westrn countriуs, but in Russia and Ukraine the bank credit (loan) for buying own housing names "ipoteka" in English I see similar word "hypothec". In Russia hypothec is just some sort of sacral gift from authorities - one of reasons to go to army is soft hypothec. In UKR even a joke is roaming about killed Russian soldiers "his family has closed hypothec" 

I think the english word is mortgage. The loan used to buy a house. Having to keep paying that if you take a big pay cut when conscripted would definitely put morale the rest of the way into the &E^&##@Q@

Edited September 21, 2022 by dan/california

[sburke]

6 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

Ouh ) Misspelling ) Hypothec. I don't know how this thing names in western countriуs, but in Russia and Ukraine the bank credit (loan) for buying own housing names "ipoteka" in English I see similar word "hypothec". In Russia hypothec is just some sort of sacral gift from authorities - one of reasons to go to army is soft hypothec, because this is a single way for people from deep provicne to buy a new flat or even relocate to better place from own depressive regions. In UKR even a joke is roaming about killed Russian soldiers "his family has closed hypothec" 

sounds like our version of a mortgage loan with a special rate for veterans.  We have a veteran's loan program here, might be similar concept.

Edited September 21, 2022 by sburke

[poesel]

15 minutes ago, akd said:

Hmm...

The words under the title say 'not for public use' - now those Russians are in trouble...

But I would really like to know the story behind that map and how it came to its use over 90 years later.

[Huba]

5 minutes ago, poesel said:

The words under the title say 'not for public use' - now those Russians are in trouble...

But I would really like to know the story behind that map and how it came to its use over 90 years later.

I was a bit involved in some archaelogical excavations around Poznan a decade ago. We were using Prussian military maps as default, quality was unmatched. 

Edited September 21, 2022 by Huba

[The_Capt]

1 minute ago, Twisk said:

I think when you mention that we are "post-Afghanistan" it is directly linked to U.S. support.  But even while there are other countries in the western bucket key support pillars are U.S./U.k. and eastern bloc (Poland, Baltics). I see little evidence that U.S. or U.k. support is weakening and eastern bloc will want Ukraine to act as buffer against Russia (strong or weak) since it removes headache for them.

 

U.S./U.K. can support with low cost to selves and eastern bloc has real physical reasons to continue support.

Well as a non-US or UK citizen who fought in Afghanistan I would encourage you to widen that aperture just a bit.  There were members from all across NATO on that mission and we all felt the loss when it went sideways.

Sure resolve is strong now...will it hold if we see dragging this out for a few more acres of blasted land?  I am not so sure.  And I am very sure that if Russia starts to threaten nuclear response and means it, we are going to have an internal conversation.

In the western circles, Crimea and Donbass have become grey areas, particularly Crimea.  I am not saying it is right, or fair but it is reality.  Both areas have strong pro-Russian support - hell LNR and DPR have units fighting for the RA right now, some forced and others - not so sure.  Can someone show some evidence that if Crimea had a fair and free election right now that it would vote to rejoin Ukraine?  Again, based on how 2014 went down, there is doubt, uncertainty.

So let me push this the other way.  How far do you honestly think the western world is willing to go for Crimea?  And be honest here, a limited exchange in Crimea (maybe), and escalation in the region to include Poland and the Baltics (less sure), New York City and/or Dallas (no f#cking way).

The point is that there is a limit and I am sure we are going to approach it, so try not to be disappointed when it lands.  If we are very lucky someone will take out Putin well before we hit this point, and things will work out - or at least the arguing will involve a whole lot less explosions. 

 

[Zeleban]

Heroes return home! 

 

I don’t know who Ukraine captured during the liberation of the Kharkiv region, but it seems that Russia is freeing the captured defenders of Mariupol. Erdogan said that Ukraine and Russia agreed to exchange another 200 prisoners.

[Battlefront.com]

3 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

Maybe I'm just daft or uninformed, but what would Ukraine gain from freezing the conflict just when they are finally rolling back the Russians? Why would it produce worse outcomes for them down the road?

Because they are NOT even close to being able to take back Crimea, Luhansk (at least in total), or Donetsk.  Not unless there's a catastrophic collapse, with Luhansk being the most probable.  The other two could be very, very bloody for Ukraine.  If Russia mounts a competent defense of Crimea, as it so far has in Kherson, it could take the better part of a year to retake it.

We also have to consider that if there is any chance of a tac nuke getting dropped, it will be because Ukraine tried to take back Crimea.

Pausing aspirations for retaking the 2014 territories gives Ukraine options.  Russia could be on the verge of collapse for economic and social reasons... maybe waiting a year and getting the territories back without a shot fired is an option.  Maybe Luhansk and/or Donetsk might be willing to negotiate if Russia stops sending them resources.  Etc.  Maybe Russia stays intact, but a coup (perhaps the second one) is willing to negotiate.  Maybe lots of things that we can't see happening today are around the corner.

Kherson will take the rest of this campaign season to clean up at the very least.  Then a couple of months of crap weather before the good weather in January (MAYBE a little sooner).  Things might be a lot clearer by then anyway.

Steve

[Haiduk]

Together with 10 fighters of Foreign Legion UKR brought back 190 own militaries and among them some heroes of Azovstal, including Azov fighters. In this time became knowingly about liberation of chief of Mariupol patrol police Mykhaylo Vershynin - his guys were almost single police unit of Mariupol, which fought to the end, when most of other policemen either fled or hide and further to defect to Russia

Also was liberated Kateryna Polishchuk "Ptashka" ("Birdy") paramedic of "Hospitaliers" volunteer medic unit, which became famous when uploaded own songs from besiged Azovstal

 

 

Edited September 21, 2022 by Haiduk

[poesel]

About the mobilization: since it has (nearly) no military use, it must be symbolic. To what purpose? To buy time, probably. But what for? What does get better for Russia if time passes?

Only thing I could come up is winter and the need to heat. I guess that is (still) the hope of the Kremlin, that gas prices will cause public unrest and force some governments to change their stance towards Russia.

Speaking for my own country, gas prices indeed are the number one topic here. My own advance payments for gas and electricity have tripled, for some they have quintupled and some won't be able to pay that. But apart from the extreme left & right parties, no one wants to call off support for Ukraine. The discussion is mostly about how the state needs to help those in need.
IMHO, that issue will be settled by the time the first new conscripts arrive at the front line. I don't think this ploy will work out as Russia thought.

[sburke]

12 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

So let me push this the other way.  How far do you honestly think the western world is willing to go for Crimea?  And be honest here, a limited exchange in Crimea (maybe), and escalation in the region to include Poland and the Baltics (less sure), New York City and/or Dallas (no f#cking way).

Hold the phone.... as an Eagles fan, born and raised in Philly (back me up here @BFCElvis) I'm okay with Dallas.  

[keas66]

5 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Well as a non-US or UK citizen who fought in Afghanistan I would encourage you to widen that aperture just a bit.  There were members from all across NATO on that mission and we all felt the loss when it went sideways.

Sure resolve is strong now...will it hold if we see dragging this out for a few more acres of blasted land?  I am not so sure.  And I am very sure that if Russia starts to threaten nuclear response and means it, we are going to have an internal conversation.

In the western circles, Crimea and Donbass have become grey areas, particularly Crimea.  I am not saying it is right, or fair but it is reality.  Both areas have strong pro-Russian support - hell LNR and DPR have units fighting for the RA right now, some forced and others - not so sure.  Can someone show some evidence that if Crimea had a fair and free election right now that it would vote to rejoin Ukraine?  Again, based on how 2014 went down, there is doubt, uncertainty.

So let me push this the other way.  How far do you honestly think the western world is willing to go for Crimea?  And be honest here, a limited exchange in Crimea (maybe), and escalation in the region to include Poland and the Baltics (less sure), New York City and/or Dallas (no f#cking way).

The point is that there is a limit and I am sure we are going to approach it, so try not to be disappointed when it lands.  If we are very lucky someone will take out Putin well before we hit this point, and things will work out - or at least the arguing will involve a whole lot less explosions. 

 

That's a bit Disappointing  Captain ?

Seems to me like you are basically saying Putin/ The Russians  has/have won  - Letting the Russians hold onto the Ukrainian Territory taken by force  and not supporting the Ukrainians in their fight to re-establish their original Borders   over fears of  escalation . After reading your in-depth analyses over the last 8 months - this seems like an odd turning back to acceptance of the idea that Russia needs to be tolerated/negotiated with  ... just because they have Nukes .

I'm pretty sure we argued that particular idea to death several times on this thread - and how it would do nothing but encourage like minded despots around the globe to  try similar strategies with their neighbours

[Bulletpoint]

8 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Because they are NOT even close to being able to take back Crimea, Luhansk (at least in total), or Donetsk.  Not unless there's a catastrophic collapse, with Luhansk being the most probable. 

I see your point about it might being better to hope for political change in Russia than to fight for the whole territory. But isn't it quite likely that we are looking at imminent collapse of the Russian Army - at least in Donetsk and Luhansk? I think it's been predicted here on the thread since late spring, and the Russian Army is now a shadow of what it was back then.

[FancyCat]

45 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

This is about "winning enough" so we can get off this thing before it goes into dark places.  There is going to come a point where we are going to have to play the western nuclear card and simply say "ya go for it and see what happens" - and mean it.  I am not sure Donbass and Crimea are it.  Look and I get if people are sore and pissed off, disappointed but hear it from me, given with love and tenderness.  I am also not sure that the political calculus of the western world supports dragging this war out for years to re-take the Crimea or Donbass under the current conditions.

It may change as things unfold.  For example if Russia does use battlefield nuclear weapons - we might balk, or we might double down, hard - "Here you go Ukraine, here are 100 HIMARs systems with ATACMS and a Wing of F-35s.  We have been weirded out by the effect this war has had on tanks, so here is a Brigades worth of M1A1s to test things out".  The West has in fact been remarkably restrained in its support - too restrained according to many - for this war.  There are likely veils in the C4ISR world that we have not crossed as well.

Anyway, whether we like it or not, all war is negotiation, and we are going to need to negotiate on this one.  Probably earlier than many want to, sorry, it sucks but at the end of the day every nation has to protect the interests of its own citizenry.  We want Russia back in a box, we do not want an uncontrolled nuclear escalation over the freakin Donbas.  Nor do I think we want a 5 year grinding campaign to re-take the Crimea - we have been to that movie. Should every Ukrainian in Donbass and Crimea who want to live free of Russian oppression be able to do so, absolutely - we will pay billions to build them new cities to live in, they just might be in another place.

Now if the UA were to take them very quickly, and Russia backs off...well we will all claim that great victory together. 

But hey, let's not get all down and despaired here.  Ukraine took on a global power and is crushing it on the battlefield - I mean the UA is re-writing the book on modern warfare. Russia has been blunted, even if they do not know it yet, for at least a couple decades.  I mean they are literally a punchline and this debacle rivals 1905 - now if we can just keep it from rolling into WW1, we are laughing.    

I understand your viewpoint but I think it needs to be emphasized that this is already very dark and I'm just not sure if your understanding it, but tbf your in good company, it might be questioned if the governments of France, Germany, etc don't either. Millions of Ukrainian citizens are under occupation. 

For example, Finland has a population of 5 million. Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, about 6 million. In the LPR and DPR, its about 3-4 million, Crimea, 2.5 million, add in the seized areas since February. Maybe 5 million at least? We have 5 million Ukrainians displaced across Europe. When you imply that the LPR, DPR, Crimea should be let go, you have just broken NATO. You have just signaled the abandonment of the Baltics and Finland.

Yes, yes, Ukraine is not in NATO. Yes, yes, NATO would mop up Russia. Right now tho, the fight between NATO and Russia is in Ukraine, acting like the French and British letting the Poles fight without a offensive in the West is not the way to go down history. You don't strengthen NATO unity if you tell the Baltics they don't matter, anymore than France or Germany did earlier this year. 

Russia, as you have pointed out asking if it's worth it to flip the nuclear switches for the Donbas and Crimea, I'm going to ask you if the Baltics and Finland are worth flipping the nuclear switches and staring down Putin. Either we stop Russia right now in Ukraine, or one day down the line, we will suffer thru this again. And you can bring up how Russia is condemned to a decade or more of economic destruction, it's been 31 years since the USSR fell, 30 years is not a lot time away in the future. 

[sburke]

6 minutes ago, keas66 said:

That's a bit Disappointing  Captain ?

Seems to me like you are basically saying Putin/ The Russians  has/have won  - Letting the Russians hold onto the Ukrainian Territory taken by force  and not supporting the Ukrainians in their fight to re-establish their original Borders   over fears of  escalation . After reading your in-depth analyses over the last 8 months - this seems like an odd turning back to acceptance of the idea that Russia needs to be tolerated/negotiated with  ... just because they have Nukes .

I'm pretty sure we argued that particular idea to death several times on this thread - and how it would do nothing but encourage like minded despots around the globe to  try similar strategies with their neighbours

He's talking hypothetical and to Steve's point What is Ukraine willing to pay to get that territory back by force of arms?  There have been no indications Russia is doing anything more than saber-rattling.  However, suppose they saw actual signs that Russia was preparing nukes.  Would everyone here still be all in to push the edge?  There are other non-military options to keep pushing.  I think the point is now that a UA victory seems all but certain, what are the options Ukraine has to restore its territorial integrity?  Military solutions are not often the best and honestly seem to usually end up as a less satisfactory conclusion for more complicated issues like this.  Time is on Ukraine's side so why the rush?

Edited September 21, 2022 by sburke

[Haiduk]

In last two days Pravdyne village in Kherson oblast became an arena of fierce clashes - UKR troops seized the part of village (or even whole) on 18th Sep, but Russians moved there units of 76th air-assault division and counter-attacked, pushed UKR forces back. New attempts of UKR atatcks failed. As result we lost enough armor

 

[A Canadian Cat]

14 hours ago, Letter from Prague said:

Man, every time they say "we're fighting the whole West and NATO", I think, I wish you really were.

I seem to recall at one time the Russian government's propaganda said they could destroy all of NATO if they needed to. So, where is the problem? /s

[FancyCat]

5 hours ago, The_Capt said:

I am an expert on US/5EYES and NATO

pre-invasion, it was all the rage, a Russian mechanized spearhead slicing thru the Suwałki Gap and allowing the occupation of the Baltic states with Russia daring the rest of NATO to grind itself down for the little Baltics. I seriously question your expertise and judgment on NATO if this is what you got you all worried about about, one year of paying some bills for Ukraine to shed its blood and ensure the safety of NATO for....oh, lets say 30 years?

[Zeleban]

I told you that the main task of mobilization in Russia is to exert moral pressure on the West. Judging by the latest posts of some participants, this strategy is successful.

[Zeleban]

The commander of the Azov regiment was also released. Victor Medvedchuk was given in exchange for neither captured Azov fighters and foreign legion fighters

Edited September 21, 2022 by Zeleban

[billbindc]

19 minutes ago, keas66 said:

That's a bit Disappointing  Captain ?

Seems to me like you are basically saying Putin/ The Russians  has/have won  - Letting the Russians hold onto the Ukrainian Territory taken by force  and not supporting the Ukrainians in their fight to re-establish their original Borders   over fears of  escalation . After reading your in-depth analyses over the last 8 months - this seems like an odd turning back to acceptance of the idea that Russia needs to be tolerated/negotiated with  ... just because they have Nukes .

I'm pretty sure we argued that particular idea to death several times on this thread - and how it would do nothing but encourage like minded despots around the globe to  try similar strategies with their neighbours

The Captain is making the cost benefit analysis that you can be sure is also being made not just in London, Paris and New York but also in Kyiv. Should the war continue to go in Ukraine's favor and should it take back everything to the 2014 line, it's going to have a choice. The choice will be either to continue a much harder war for terrain it may decide it doesn't need or an immediate settlement within NATO and the EU. If that choice takes the potential for nuclear weapons off the table, all the better. That is very much *not* status quo ante. That's a Ukrainian victory of great import...if not a total one. And it's not one Zelensky will ever articulate until the day the Russians sign the document.