How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Maciej Zwolinski]

31 minutes ago, Butschi said:

I was about to make a snarky remark but seriously you must realize that doing your duty in peacetime (when the alternative was going to jail?) is a different kind "bravery" than when joining the army means to actually risk your life.

Well, he wrote exactly that - that he served because it was a duty, not because it was a brave thing to do. However people who would not serve because they were not brave enough - that's by definition cowardice, isn't it? Not being brave enough to do what ought to be done? English is not my first language, but online Cambridge English Dictionary seems to  concur

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/cowardice 

[Butschi]

8 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

Whoa whoa whoa, let's not start degrading someone's military service, especially when we don't know anything about their service.  And they could've been in a shooting situation at any time under active service.  

I have no intention to degrade anyone's service but I for one think that you can't call people cowards when you yourself were never in their situation (which is what
@Aragorn2002 said himself).

But that's really just my opinion.

[Butschi]

15 minutes ago, Maciej Zwolinski said:

Well, he wrote exactly that - that he served because it was a duty, not because it was a brave thing to do. However people who would not serve because they were not brave enough - that's by definition cowardice, isn't it? Not being brave enough to do what ought to be done? English is not my first language, but online Cambridge English Dictionary seems to  concur

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/cowardice 

I think technically, i e. language-wise, you are right (though English isn't my mother tongue, either). My personal belief is simply that you should not call someone a coward for something that you yourself have never had to show your bravery, either.

Ok, I think I made my point, I really don't want to derail the thread with this.

Edited 5 hours ago by Butschi

[Aragorn2002]

According to the BBC 650 000 conscription aged men have left Ukraine for Europe. I will let this figure speak for itself.

 

 

Edited 5 hours ago by Aragorn2002

[sburke]

can we leave off deciding who is a coward or not?

[sburke]

Russia's economy is signaling a fate worse than recession (msn.com)

• Russia's central bank says inflation is rising while the nation's economy cools.
• These are the key ingredients for stagflation, a scenario that's harder to combat than a recession.
• Labor shortages and wartime spending are behind inflation's rise.

As Russia's GDP and inflation figures move in the wrong direction, the worst-case scenario for any economy looms large over Moscow.

"There are signs of cooling domestic demand. However, there is no reduction in inflationary pressure," Russia's central bank said in a summary of its latest policy meeting, translated by Bloomberg.

The unfortunate pairing, more often known as stagflation, is something policymakers prefer to avoid at all costs.

It's a scenario harder to thwart than a recession. When an economy slows down, central banks loosen interest rates to revive activity. But if inflation keeps rising, things become complicated. Since interest rates must stay high to cool price growth, governments are left paralyzed.

Though Bloomberg said the Bank of Russia didn't refer to stagflation, the conditions it described make it a sincere concern.

In a separate report this month, the bank projected that GDP would slow down sharply next year. Though Russia's economy has prospered under its wartime boom, sanctions, production-output limitations, and a severe labor crunch are bound to wear it down by 2025.

The policy summary suggests OPEC+ oil-production cuts are also denting Russia's growth.

Against this backdrop, inflation is still on a tear in Russia. The central bank elected to hike interest rates to 19% this month, as prior efforts have not slowed it down.

To blame is Moscow's aggressive defense spending, projected to remain at historic highs through 2025. The country's latest draft budget indicates the spending will decrease slightly in the following two years.

Also at fault are labor shortages. As the Ukrainian front has required Russians, businesses have had to push up wages to attract new workers. By the end of last year, the country was thought to lack nearly 5 million workers.

There's one caveat to the stagflation fear: If domestic demand continues cooling, the central bank expects inflation to fall alongside it.

Nonetheless, the conditions don't bode well for Russia. When stagflation last hit the US in the 1970s, the Federal Reserve was forced to initiate a deep recession to end the turmoil.

 

[The_Capt]

1 hour ago, Aragorn2002 said:

According to the BBC 650 000 conscription aged men have left Ukraine for Europe. I will let this figure speak for itself.

 

 

To my mind this is the central issue. We hear continuous reports of the UA being undermanned while the RA is still lining them up for cash, ideals, whatever. The only way for Ukraine to truly lose this war - and I am not talking about spectrums - is for it to collapse militarily. If the UA crumbles, the RA will advance all the way back to Kyiv. 

So out of 650 000 fighting aged males, you might get 10-20% who are actually fit and qualify for service. Physical and mental roadblocks. Trades and types of employment etc all factor in. So at best we are talking another 130k troops after equipping and training. But 130k troops would make a very large difference in continuing the war past the point Russia can sustain it. The UA need fewer troops on defence and have numerous force multipliers at play.

So we can slam Europeans and cry foul because the US won’t let Ukraine ATACM the Kremlin. But at the end of the day it is on the Ukrainians themselves to sustain the will and means to fight. We can give them all the guns but without fingers to pull the trigger…

That, or we start thinking about western direct intervention but I do not see that happening. So this is bigger than young men “wanting to live”, it is about the survival of a nation. If Ukraine cannot convince this diaspora to fight, then we may very well see the worst come about - the UA running out of gas before the RA.

[dan/california]

45 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

To my mind this is the central issue. We hear continuous reports of the UA being undermanned while the RA is still lining them up for cash, ideals, whatever. The only way for Ukraine to truly lose this war - and I am not talking about spectrums - is for it to collapse militarily. If the UA crumbles, the RA will advance all the way back to Kyiv. 

So out of 650 000 fighting aged males, you might get 10-20% who are actually fit and qualify for service. Physical and mental roadblocks. Trades and types of employment etc all factor in. So at best we are talking another 130k troops after equipping and training. But 130k troops would make a very large difference in continuing the war past the point Russia can sustain it. The UA need fewer troops on defence and have numerous force multipliers at play.

So we can slam Europeans and cry foul because the US won’t let Ukraine ATACM the Kremlin. But at the end of the day it is on the Ukrainians themselves to sustain the will and means to fight. We can give them all the guns but without fingers to pull the trigger…

That, or we start thinking about western direct intervention but I do not see that happening. So this is bigger than young men “wanting to live”, it is about the survival of a nation. If Ukraine cannot convince this diaspora to fight, then we may very well see the worst come about - the UA running out of gas before the RA.

 

Quote

 

https://www.politico.eu/article/poland-begins-training-of-ukrainian-brigade-of-enlisted-volunteers-foreign-minister-said/

The Polish government will train a unit of Ukrainian exiles to be deployed in their home country, Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski said on the sidelines of the NATO summit in Washington.

"In Poland, we are beginning to train the first Ukrainian brigade composed of volunteers from inside Poland. We have up to a million Ukrainians of both genders, and several thousands of them have already registered for the draft,” Sikorski said during a NATO Public Forum on Wednesday.

 

As a practical way to address this problem, this initiative In Poland seems like by far the most likely to work. Set up a solid three month training program, and send people to Ukraine in formed units with rifles that they know how to clean, as well as load. 

Obviously it needs to be expanded, three brigades at a time, with next batch getting lined up seems about right, and just maybe doable.

Edited 3 hours ago by dan/california

[ArmouredTopHat]

Some interesting thoughts. 

[ArmouredTopHat]

Continued frustrations with Russian operating methods abound. 

[Battlefront.com]

10 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Whelp that didn’t take long:

https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/donald-trump-says-ukraine-is-dead-and-dismisses-its-defence-against-russia-s-invasion-1.7052360

I am not sure how making America great includes tucking tail and giving a genocidal dictator concessions. Maybe I do not understand the subtle nuances of the American political scene. I am starting to wonder if this whole drama wasn’t a ploy to flush Trump out.

Yup.  And his ramblings now are consistent with everything said in the past, so only a fool (and I mean that in the kindest way) can make an argument that a new Trump Admin would be anything other than OPENLY HOSTILE towards Ukraine.

Steve

[LongLeftFlank]

10 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Yup.  And his ramblings now are consistent with everything said in the past, so only a fool (and I mean that in the kindest way) can make an argument that a new Trump Admin would be anything other than OPENLY HOSTILE towards Ukraine.

Steve

I thought we were dropping this topic?

Cuz if you want ramblings, I got ramblings (and not in a Good way, but interesting). But I didn't say anything cuz you said: drop it.

Edited 1 hour ago by LongLeftFlank

[dan/california]

https://www.reddit.com/r/DroneCombat/comments/1fq25kk/ukrainian_fpv_drone_takes_down_a_zala/?utm_source=embedv2&utm_medium=post_embed&utm_content=whitespace&embed_host_url=https://community.battlefront.com/index.php

 

Ukrainian fpv drone takes down a Zala reconnaissance drone by getting stuck to it and not detonating. From Magyar.

[dan/california]

I forgot the to click display as a link, and now it won't let me fix it, apologies. On the plus side it is just Magyar talking, and not death metal, or something even worse than that.

[Silentkilarz]

Just now, dan/california said:

I forgot the to click display as a link, and now it won't let me fix it, apologies. On the plus side it is just Magyar talking, and not death metal, or something even worse than that.

Whats wrong with death metal? I cant headbang in here now? lol

[sburke]

3 minutes ago, Silentkilarz said:

Whats wrong with death metal? I cant headbang in here now? lol

too many injuries reported after striking the monitor.  OSHA called.

BFs wall

Days of no injuries from headbanging  -  0

 

[Silentkilarz]

Just now, sburke said:

too many injuries reported after striking the monitor.  OSHA called.

BFs wall

Days of no injuries from headbanging  -  0

 

Nah thats from coding and not from the music lol

[CHARLIE43]

Inside Ukraine’s Effort to Win Over Donald Trump

https://time.com/7023450/ukraine-effort-donald-trump/

"In their view, the victory of Kamala Harris would likely prolong the policies of the Biden administration, which Zelensky and his advisers see as overly cautious and indecisive in standing up to Russia. Trump’s victory, on the other hand, offers both risks and opportunities for the Ukrainians, according to four people familiar with their outreach to the candidates."

Interesting look inside the Ukrainian perspective.

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, LongLeftFlank said:

I thought we were dropping this topic?

Cuz if you want ramblings, I got ramblings (and not in a Good way, but interesting). But I didn't say anything cuz you said: drop it.

The topic before was the fight over whether Zelensky was smart or dumb to call out Trump for not being supportive of Ukraine.  That was, thankfully, dropped.

What we now have is a brand new event, which is Trump being even MORE explicit about his views on Ukraine.  I never, ever suggested that we could never ever again talk about Trump's view of Ukraine, even when Trump is out there saying things about Ukraine.

All clear now?

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

27 minutes ago, CHARLIE43 said:

Inside Ukraine’s Effort to Win Over Donald Trump

https://time.com/7023450/ukraine-effort-donald-trump/

"In their view, the victory of Kamala Harris would likely prolong the policies of the Biden administration, which Zelensky and his advisers see as overly cautious and indecisive in standing up to Russia. Trump’s victory, on the other hand, offers both risks and opportunities for the Ukrainians, according to four people familiar with their outreach to the candidates."

Interesting look inside the Ukrainian perspective.

Good read.

I get how they're not totally looking forward to a continuation of Biden's policies in the abstract.  Meaning, for sure it could be a lot better.  So it's understandable that they would rather an alternative where they get more support and quicker.  But...

What I really don't get is where anybody with any sense of Trump, or the MAGA movement, sees any "opportunities" for Ukraine.  A peace settlement?  There's zero indication that Putin is interested in anything other than a total surrender.  Ukraine can achieve that all on its own without Trump's help.  For sure, factually, Trump has not even once outlined what he thinks he can do to end the war.  So what do Ukrainians think Trump can do to make a better "opportunity" for them than they could achieve on their own?

Steve

[Offshoot]

And right on cue:

Trump to meet with Ukrainian president
 

Quote

 

Donald Trump said he would meet with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Friday morning at Trump Tower.

Yesterday, the former president attacked Zlenskyy directly and accused him of “refusing” to negotiate a peace deal with Russia’s Vladimir Putin. “The president of Ukraine is in our country. He is making little nasty aspersions toward your favourite president, me,” Trump said. “We continue to give billions of dollars to a man who refuses to make a deal: Zelenskyy.”

 

 

[Battlefront.com]

And another "this just in".  Trump has agreed to meet Zelensky tomorrow morning:

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4902333-trump-zelensky-meeting-new-york/

Steve

[dan/california]

5 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Good read.

I get how they're not totally looking forward to a continuation of Biden's policies in the abstract.  Meaning, for sure it could be a lot better.  So it's understandable that they would rather an alternative where they get more support and quicker.  But...

What I really don't get is where anybody with any sense of Trump, or the MAGA movement, sees any "opportunities" for Ukraine.  A peace settlement?  There's zero indication that Putin is interested in anything other than a total surrender.  Ukraine can achieve that all on its own without Trump's help.  For sure, factually, Trump has not even once outlined what he thinks he can do to end the war.  So what do Ukrainians think Trump can do to make a better "opportunity" for them than they could achieve on their own?

Steve

I mean they have to pretend to try with Trump, right? It is just diplomacy 101. 

 

[danfrodo]

deleted

Edited just now by danfrodo

[Battlefront.com]

Easy guys.  Let's stick to the part that's relevant to this thread, which is Zelensky visiting the US looking for support and what's directly related to that.  A wider political discussion is not on topic.

Steve