Thread: Russia launches Ukraine invasion

Ahem:-

The United States has opposed Ukraine’s desire to hit targets within Russia since the war began, citing concerns about potential escalation. Given President Joe Biden’s strong stance, Kyiv promised Washington earlier this year that it would not strike Russian territory directly.

Follow ze Link-

Ukrainian Forces Hamstrung by Pledge Not to Fire Into Russia - WSJ

That quote isn't in your link, but this one is:

Kyiv has pledged not to target Russian territory with weapons provided by the West.

That quote isn't in your link, but this one is:


Kyiv has pledged not to target Russian territory with weapons provided by the West.


Right. Exactly what I said. Not appliccable for Ukraines own weapons.

Is Ukraine a manufacturer of drones now? Anyway, the same old logic applies- if Ukraine starts causing mischief in Russia's borders, it will likely escalate by upping the ante- targeting Kiev and maybe Lviv. I believe Kiev already has rolling blackouts- they could easily make it worse.

Yeah, so far the only party that keeps mentioning nuclear weapons ........

Putin: Nuclear risk is rising, but we are not mad

Vladimir Putin has said the threat of a nuclear war was rising, but insisted Russia had not "gone mad" and would not use its nuclear weapons first.

The Russian president insisted that his country would only use weapons of mass destruction in response to an attack.

Speaking at Russia's annual human rights council meeting, he also said the war in Ukraine could be a "lengthy process".

Western officials believe Putin initially planned for a rapid victory.

Russia's capacity to use nuclear weapons has come under increased scrutiny since it invaded Ukraine in February.

"Such a threat is growing, it would be wrong to hide it," Putin warned while talking about the prospect of nuclear war via video link from Moscow.

But he asserted that Russia would "under no circumstances" use the weapons first, and would not threaten anyone with its nuclear arsenal.

"We have not gone mad, we are aware of what nuclear weapons are," he said, adding: "We aren't about to run around the world brandishing this weapon like a razor."

Putin also boasted that Russia had the most modern and advanced nuclear weapons in the world, and contrasted its nuclear strategy to the US - who he said had gone further than Russia by locating its nuclear weapons on other territories.

"We do not have nuclear weapons, including tactical ones, on the territory of other countries, but the Americans do - in Turkey, and in a number of other European countries," he said.

Putin has previously insisted that Russia's nuclear doctrine only allowed for the defensive use of nuclear arms.

Could Russia use tactical nuclear weapons?

Appearing to recognise that his plan to claim victory within days of invading Ukraine had failed, Putin admitted the war could be a "lengthy process".

However, he said the results had already been "significant" - for example, the new territories Russia has illegally claimed after sham-referendums in four regions of Ukraine.

He boasted that the annexations had made the Sea of Azov - which is bordered by south-east Ukraine and south-west Russia - an "internal sea" of Russia, adding that this was an aspiration of Russian Tsar Peter the Great. President Putin has compared himself to the 17th and 18th Century ruler before.

But - despite claiming the regions of Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Luhansk and Donetsk as Russia's new territory - Moscow does not fully control any of those areas.

Last month, Russian forces were forced to retreat from Kherson city, the only regional capital they had seized since the February invasion.

more: Putin: Nuclear risk is rising, but we are not mad - BBC News

During a press conference with the US defence secretary, Lloyd Austin, and their Australian counterparts in Washington, the secretary of state, Antony Blinken, said the US had not 'encouraged nor enabled' Ukraine to strike inside Russia. His comments come after a string of strikes deep within Russian territory. Austin, however, said the US was not stopping Ukraine from developing its own long-range strike capability

• Russia-Ukraine war live: Blinken says US did not ‘enable’ Ukraine strikes inside Russia

US has not 'encouraged nor enabled' Ukraine to strike inside Russia, says Blinken – video | World news | The Guardian

As Western officials indicate that Russia will try to halt its war in Ukraine during winter, Ukraine may have "no choice" but to continue its own push against Russian aggression during the coldest season of the year, according to experts.

Speaking at a Financial Times Global Boardroom event on Wednesday, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said Russia was "trying to freeze the conflict" to "regroup and launch a bigger offensive later on." This is because "Ukraine now has the momentum" in the lasting war, he added.

Newsweek was not able to independently confirm that Russia is planning a winter "freeze," and reached out to Russia's Defense Ministry for confirmation and comment.

Dan Soller, former U.S. Army intelligence colonel, agrees that Russia appears to be trying to put the war on hold. He told Newsweek that it was important for Ukraine to maintain its pressure on Russia during the winter as Russia aims to regroup in preparation for launching a renewed offensive later on.

"The Ukrainians have no choice but to continue the offensive," Soller said.

Ukraine has seen success in recent months conducting counteroffensives on several fronts, such as the eastern and southern zones. Though some initially believed Russia would quickly secure victory when it invaded Ukraine on February 24, Russian President Vladimir Putin said Wednesday, more than nine months after he launched the war, that the conflict could take a long time.

Stoltenberg stressed the importance Wednesday of continuing to provide military aid to Ukraine because the war-torn country's performance on the ground is consequential for any future negotiations with Russia.

"Most wars, and most likely also this war, will end at the negotiating table," Stoltenberg said. "But we know that what happens around that table is absolutely dependent on the situation on the battlefield. So if you want an outcome of those negotiations, which ensures that Ukraine prevails as a sovereign, independent nation, we need to provide military support to Ukraine.

"If the aggressor wins, that will not give us a lasting peace," he continued. "So the paradox is that the more we want a peaceful negotiated solution ensuring that Ukraine prevails, the more urgent it is that we provide military support for Ukraine to create the conditions for a just, lasting peace in Ukraine."

Soller said there were several reasons that Ukraine must continue its offensive even if Russia attempts to carry out a "freeze."

On one hand, this is because the West is expecting Ukraine to do something with all of the equipment and aid it has provided, Soller said. Additionally, continuing to keep the offensive pressure on Russia can help give Ukrainians "heart" as they deal with Russian missile attacks, and keep Putin's army off-balance.

"If you give the Russians the opportunity to set defensive positions over the winter, they'll just get hardened in" and form new lines that will be "very difficult" for Ukraine to attack, Soller said.

He added that Ukraine "won't" and "can't" continue operations everywhere in the conflict during the winter. Some of the places it might continue its offensive push is in the east, the Kherson region and maybe even the Zaporizhzhia quadrant in southeastern Ukraine, Soller said.

William Courtney, adjunct senior fellow at the nonprofit, nonpartisan Rand Corporation, also told Newsweek that Ukraine would be smart to continue pressing on with attacks in light of a Russian pause.

"[Ukraine is] going to be frozen sometime soon, so that will be an opportune time for mechanized warfare, particularly for wheeled vehicles," said Courtney, who is also a former U.S. ambassador to Kazakhstan, Georgia and a U.S.-Soviet nuclear testing commission.

"The battlefield momentum now is with Ukraine," Courtney said, and it would not be in Ukraine's interest to give up this momentum. Additionally, allowing Russia the time to regroup over the winter can allow it to better prepare its soldiers for future battle.

Russia may try to "camouflage" this intent by making peace proposals in the meantime to press Ukraine to negotiate, but Russia hasn't signaled any "serious interest" in negotiations, Courtney added.

https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-has...olonel-1765488

You started it — not us, the visibly merry Russian leader claimed




Ukrainian forces were the “first” to target civilian infrastructure, a swaying Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed Thursday while drinking sparkling wine, a video of which has since gone viral.

“There’s a lot of noise right now about our strikes against the energy infrastructure of the neighboring country,” Putin said of Ukraine during a state awards ceremony to hand out honors including the “Hero of Russia” medal.

“Yes, we are doing it, but who started it? Who struck the Crimean bridge?” he added while rocking from side to side, referring to a blast in October, for which Ukraine never claimed responsibility.

He said an “informational confrontation” would not “prevent us from completing military objectives.”

The video of his remarks, which had been viewed more than 600,000 times as of Thursday evening, prompted some on social media to speculate that Putin appeared drunk. This behavior is unusual as Putin has a reputation for controlled abstinence — a point noted by Swedish economist Anders Åslund, who served as an adviser to the Russian and Ukrainian governments in the 1990s.

“This is the first time that I have seen Putin seeming drunk in any context,” Åslund tweeted. “He talks nonsense as usual, but he seems to realize that he is a loser. Very interesting & promising. All Russians will see that he is drunk & weak.”

Russian missiles have been targeting critical Ukrainian energy infrastructure for weeks, prompting Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to accuse Moscow of turning winter “into a weapon of mass destruction” in November.

During a meeting with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz last week, Putin said the strikes were “inevitable” given Kyiv’s “provocative attacks on Russia’s civilian infrastructure,” according to the Ukrainian English-language newspaper Kyiv Post.

https://www.politico.eu/article/puti...st-russia-war/

Boris Yeltsin is back in the building.

India to make Russia its number one oil supplier in move that could scupper impact of price cap

Russia is on its way to becoming India’s top oil supplier this month in a move that will likely undermine the impact of a price cap imposed by G7 countries and their Western allies.

Russian crude oil loadings bound for India climbed to the highest level in November as refiners purchased more than 1 million barrels per day (bpd), according to data provided to The Independent by commodities tracking firm Kpler.

The Narendra Modi-led government has been snapping up crude at discounted rates from Russia since the Ukraine invasion, as Western nations looked to pivot away from their reliance on Moscow for energy supplies.

From almost nothing in January and February this year, Russia’s oil exports bound for India climbed to 902,000 bpd by October and rose to a record high of a little more than 1 million bpd in November, according to preliminary data.

“This will likely result in Russia being India’s number one supplier in December,” Matt Smith, lead oil analyst at Kpler, told The Independent, overtaking its traditional Middle Eastern partners – Saudi Arabia and current top supplier Iraq – for the first time.

India’s ‘oil opportunism’ helps Russia get round energy sanctions

Delhi has not committed to the $60 per barrel price cap on Russian oil set by the G7 countries, including the European Union and Australia, in a bid to squeeze the Kremlin’s earnings from exports and stymie the money flowing to Vladimir Putin’s war chest.

It also comes as the European Union’s own partial embargo on Russian seaborne crude oil announced in May came into force on Monday, the same day the G7 enforced its price cap. The EU ban covers more than two-thirds of Russian oil imports coming into European countries.

India and China have become the two largest growing economies to buy Russian oil as Western democracies devised ways to squeeze the Russian economy and deepen its isolation. Delhi has repeatedly defended its imports from Russia, saying it has a responsibility to Indian citizens to get the best deal and that it will not be “pressured” by the West.

Rajeev Jain, additional director-general at India’s petroleum ministry, told The Independent that India’s ranking in Russia’s energy trade is “not a matter for our calculations” as Delhi’s only interest is in buying the cheapest oil.

“We will buy from wherever we get the cheapest oil. We are not concerned about becoming the number one or number two country [as] our interest lies in buying [wherever] we get the cheapest oil,” Mr Jain said.

He added that the G7 price cap will not affect Indian imports as the refiners buy through the best route and what is best available to them.

“We don’t negotiate on the route aspect. They buy as per their requirements and they negotiate as per the best rate available,” he said, referring to the entities involved in the trade.

India is now set to overtake the EU as the largest importer of oil from Russia, analysts say, with its purchases the major factor rendering the Western embargo measures ineffective.

“India will be the key contributor to ensuring the price cap is ineffective – they were a sporadic buyer of Russian crude prior to the invasion of Ukraine, but are now importing close to 1 million barrels per day, a third of Russian seaborne crude exports,” said Mr Smith.

more India to make Russia its number one oil supplier this month in move that could scupper impact of price cap | The Independent

Delhi has not committed to the $60 per barrel price cap on Russian oil set by the G7 countries

Doesn't want to pay that much.

The lifeblood of any modern army is diesel fuel. Diesel fuel is used in most military vehicles as well as in the generators that provide electricity to command posts and living facilities.

Accordingly, the Russian military has required a steady flow of diesel flow to their units in Ukraine to maintain combat effectiveness. With winter approaching, the Ukrainian military appears to be making a concerted effort to cut off that flow of fuel.

The Russian forces in Ukraine require a tremendous amount of diesel fuel. Modern tanks consume diesel fuel at rates of less than 1 mile per gallon. Even when the vehicles are stationary, their engines remain running to provide power to targeting equipment, radios, and other electronics. Moreover, a massive amount of diesel fuel is necessary for generators, which provide electricity to all the electronics used by any modern army. A single Russian Battalion Tactical Group (BTG) carries approximately 10,000 gallons of fuel for resupply in its tanker trucks; this fuel is expected to support one day of combat operations. Russian logistics channels must supply fuel to over 100 BTGs in addition to a number of paramilitary groups.

The fuel issues will soon be complicated by the eastern European winter. The demand for fuel will increase as it is used in generators to provide electricity for heating in addition to being burned directly in heaters. Meanwhile, heavy snow and ice can shut down the resupply routes.

Thus far in the war, Russian forces have struggled with securing their fuel supply lines. Fuel shortages have been blamed for a number of issues including the large number of abandoned and captured Russian vehicles. Doctrinally, the Russian military is defensive in nature; as such, it is not structured to support sustained forward operations. Further, when the Russians have established forward fuel depots, they were quickly destroyed by Ukrainian artillery and drones. As a consequence, the Russians have been required to truck fuel into Ukraine from Russia.

The Ukrainians have exploited this vulnerability in the Russian forces by targeting Russian fuel resupply vehicles. To date, the Russians have lost 239 fuel tankers, primarily Ural 4320 and KamAZ 6x6 tankers. This is a large number of fuel tankers, given that each Battalion Tactical Group only has five tankers. They have also destroyed several trains and civilian tankers that were carrying fuel to the front. Even one of the recent drone strikes launched into Russia targeted a fuel depot.

Some of the fiercest fighting currently involves securing cities along major supply routes. For example, the Russian Army has been trying to take Bakhmut, a key transportation node in the Donetsk Oblast, since early August. Taking Bakhmut would allow the Russians to control a critical road junction that will allow them access through the Donetsk Oblast. However, the Ukrainians have put a stiff defense against the Russians and are expected to hold Bakhmut at least through the winter.

Elsewhere, the Ukrainian counter-offensive in the Luhansk Region has been focused on taking back the cities of Svatove and Kreminna. These cities are both key transportation nodes with major Russian resupply routes running through them according to the Institute for the Study of War. If the Ukrainians can capture these cities, the Russians will be limited in their ability to resupply Russian and paramilitary units in the Luhansk Region.

These efforts from the Ukrainians to deny fuel resupply to the Russian military will have large consequences on the war. Without a steady supply of diesel fuel, the Russian military will not be combat effective, since they cannot maneuver their vehicles on the battlefield. The Russian forces will be forced to take a purely defensive posture, effectively halting their forward movements. Even in a defensive posture, the Russians will require a steady supply of fuel, albeit less. Without fuel, the units will be quickly overrun by the Ukrainian counteroffensive.

More importantly, without fuel, Russian soldiers will freeze. With large portions of Ukraine without power, Russian forces need diesel fuel for their generators and heaters. Without a reliable supply of fuel, Russian forces will not be able to keep their soldiers warm. Hypothermia is not the only issue; diseases will spread through the force as well. Freezing, sick soldiers have historically resulted in low morale and high desertion.

The Ukrainians will likely be successful in their efforts to diminish the Russian ability to refuel their forces. In turn, this will reduce the combat effectiveness and morale of the Russian forces. Although this will not end the war, this move will allow the Ukrainian counteroffensive to make significant gains this winter. Regardless of the overall outcome, it will probably be a cold, chaotic, and unproductive winter for the Russian forces.

Ukrainian Military Is Targeting Russian Fuel Supply Lines As Winter Approaches

Originally Posted by helge

Insist away, nutters

You really are an idiot if you are implying that the Ukrainians are actually shelling the power plant. Many sources have documented that the shells come from Russian held territory. You useful idiots really are loathsome creatures.



More than a dozen explosions rattled Europe's largest nuclear power plant over the weekend, as renewed shelling around the Ukrainian facility rekindled fears of a possible accident — or even a deliberate strike — that could cause a catastrophic release of radiation. The shelling around Ukraine's sprawling, Russian-occupied Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant came as the head of the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), warned in a "60 Minutes" interview that "urgent action" was needed to ease the "unprecedented" security threat posed by fighting around the facility.

In an exclusive interview, one of the workers held hostage by the Russian forces who've controlled the plant for months told CBS News the latest shelling had caused serious damage to the plant, and he said it appeared to have been a planned attack on the facility.

He said the angle and direction from which the shells came indicated they were fired from Russian military positions, not Ukrainian forces on the other side of the nearby front lines. The worker, who CBS News cannot identify due to the threat that he and his colleagues have worked under since Russia seized the plant early in its war on Ukraine, said he believed Russian forces had also detonated an explosive inside the facility.

Some shells fell perilously close to the plant's nuclear reactors over the weekend, and a storage building containing radioactive waste was damaged. The explosions prompted IAEA chief Rafael Mariano Grossi to warn that whoever was lobbing shells at the plant was taking "huge risks and gambling with many people's lives."

"We were fortunate a potentially serious nuclear incident did not happen. Next time, we may not be so lucky," Grossi warned in a statement on Sunday. He said it was a "close call."
Russian government spokesman Dmitry Peskov accused Ukraine's armed forces of causing the blasts, without offering any evidence.

"This cannot but cause our concern," Peskov told reporters on Monday. "We call on all countries of the world to use their influence so that the Ukrainian armed forces stop doing this."

The Zaporizhzhia plant worker told CBS News he believed Russia had attacked the plant in an act of sabotage, intended to make it useless in the event Ukraine's slowly advancing forces should manage to retake the facility.

More than a dozen explosions rattled Europe's largest nuclear power plant over the weekend, as renewed shelling around the Ukrainian facility rekindled fears of a possible accident — or even a deliberate strike — that could cause a catastrophic release of radiation. The shelling around Ukraine's sprawling, Russian-occupied Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant came as the head of the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), warned in a "60 Minutes" interview that "urgent action" was needed to ease the "unprecedented" security threat posed by fighting around the facility.

In an exclusive interview, one of the workers held hostage by the Russian forces who've controlled the plant for months told CBS News the latest shelling had caused serious damage to the plant, and he said it appeared to have been a planned attack on the facility.

He said the angle and direction from which the shells came indicated they were fired from Russian military positions, not Ukrainian forces on the other side of the nearby front lines. The worker, who CBS News cannot identify due to the threat that he and his colleagues have worked under since Russia seized the plant early in its war on Ukraine, said he believed Russian forces had also detonated an explosive inside the facility.



This photo taken on September 11, 2022 shows a member of the Russian security forces standing in front of the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant in Enerhodar, in Ukraine's Zaporizhzhia region. STRINGER/AFP/Getty Some shells fell perilously close to the plant's nuclear reactors over the weekend, and a storage building containing radioactive waste was damaged. The explosions prompted IAEA chief Rafael Mariano Grossi to warn that whoever was lobbing shells at the plant was taking "huge risks and gambling with many people's lives."

"We were fortunate a potentially serious nuclear incident did not happen. Next time, we may not be so lucky," Grossi warned in a statement on Sunday. He said it was a "close call."
Russian government spokesman Dmitry Peskov accused Ukraine's armed forces of causing the blasts, without offering any evidence.

"This cannot but cause our concern," Peskov told reporters on Monday. "We call on all countries of the world to use their influence so that the Ukrainian armed forces stop doing this."
The Zaporizhzhia plant worker told CBS News he believed Russia had attacked the plant in an act of sabotage, intended to make it useless in the event Ukraine's slowly advancing forces should manage to retake the facility.

Russian forces have held the plant's workers — at gunpoint according to some reports — for months. They have effectively tried to steal the plant's power capacity by linking it to Russia's national power grid, but they've failed. The worker said he believed Moscow's "plan B" was to simply sabotage the Zaporizhzhia plant, which has sat largely idle for months, so Ukraine can't use it either.

Given the amount of radioactive material still at the facility, however, that's an incredibly dangerous gambit. The staffer told CBS News the occupying Russian forces were behaving like "monkeys playing with hand grenades." He blamed them for all of the damage, not just over the weekend, but in a series of attacks since the spring.

If one of the plant's nuclear reactors is seriously damaged, the world will know about it quickly, he said, because it would likely spark an immediate nuclear catastrophe.

It's an unprecedented thing, really, in so many ways," Grossi told Lesley Stahl about the threat around the Zaporizhzhia plant for this week's "60 Minutes."

"This place is at the front line, which makes the whole thing so volatile and in need of an urgent action," Grossi said.

Before the war, the power plant supplied about 20% of Ukraine's power, and while its six reactors are now off-line, they still need a constant flow of water to keep the fuel at their cores cool, and that requires a constant supply of electricity. If they overheat, there could be a nuclear meltdown within hours.

Shelling around the plant has cut the main electricity supply from the nearby, Ukrainian-held city of Zaporizhzhia, multiple times, forcing the plant to rely on diesel backup generators to keep the water flowing for days at a time.

"And you don't want the biggest nuclear power plant in Europe — one of the biggest in the world — to be cooled with, basically an emergency system which is dependent on fuel," Grossi told Stahl, "because when your diesels are out, or whatever you put in it to make them work, then what happens? Then you have a meltdown. Then you have a big radiological nuclear emergency or an accident, and this is what we are trying to prevent."

Ukraine, its international partners in Washington and Europe and the United Nations, have all urged Russia to pull its military forces out of the Zaporizhzhia plant for months so a demilitarized zone can be established around the facility. Moscow has given no indication so far that it's contemplating such a move.

"I'm not giving up until this zone has become a reality," Grossi said on Sunday. "As the ongoing apparent shelling demonstrates, it is needed more than ever."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine...ea-close-call/

Retired U.S. Lieutenant General Ben Hodges predicted on Monday that Ukraine's army will be able to seize control of the occupied Crimea peninsula by August 2023 as the war-torn country continues to counter Russia's ongoing invasion.Serhiy Haidai, governor of the Russian-occupied Luhansk region, said Sunday that Ukrainian forces attacked a purported hotel base for members of Russia's mercenary Wagner Group and killed many of its members.

In light of the report, which Newsweek was not able to independently verify, Hodges wrote on Twitter that Ukraine will "continue to pound" Russian headquarters and lines of communication over the next few weeks through February. This is so that Ukraine can set the conditions for freeing Crimea from Russian control, which Hodges described as the "decisive phase of the campaign."

"I expect them to liberate Crimea by August," tweeted Hodges, who is also the former commanding general of U.S. Army Europe.

Russia illegally annexed Crimea in 2014, though Western countries have continued to assert that the peninsula is part of Ukraine. The same goes for the several regions of Ukraine—Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson—that Russian President Vladimir Putin annexed in late September. Foreign governments such as the United States have called this purported annexation illegal and illegitimate, refusing to recognize those Ukrainian regions as part of Russia.

Meanwhile, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has vowed that his country will free Crimea and all other Russian-occupied territory.

"This Russian war against Ukraine and against the entire free Europe began with Crimea and must end with Crimea - with its liberation," Zelensky said in an August 9 address. "Today it is impossible to say when this will happen. But we are constantly adding the necessary components to the formula of liberation of Crimea."

Explosions were reported last week in Crimea, after which the governor of Sevastopol, the peninsula's largest city, said that Russian forces shot down a drone over the Black Sea.

This is only one instance of reported explosions on the peninsula in recent months amid the war in Ukraine. A series of explosions rocked a Russian airbase in Crimea in August, and several days later, another series of blasts hit an ammunition depot in Crimea and caused it to catch fire.

Additionally, an explosion in October damaged the Kerch Strait Bridge that connects Russia to the Crimean peninsula and acts a key supply route for Putin's troops. Moscow blamed Ukraine for the blast, though Ukraine has not formally taken responsibility.

Newsweek reached out to Russia's Defense Ministry for comment.

https://www.newsweek.com/retired-lt-...crimea-1766437

Putin cancels annual marathon year-end TV news conference

President Vladimir Putin will not hold his traditional televised year-end news conference this month, the Kremlin said on Monday, 10 months into Russia's stuttering invasion of Ukraine.

The event is a staple of Putin's calendar, giving him the chance to showcase his command of issues and his stamina as he sits alone on a stage in a large auditorium for a question-and-answer session with reporters that can last more than four hours.


But the war, which began on Feb. 24, has not gone well for Putin. His forces were beaten back from the Ukrainian capital Kyiv early on, and have suffered major battlefield setbacks in the east and south of Ukraine.


Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov was asked in a call with reporters whether a date had been set for this year's "big news conference", and replied: "No, there won't be one before the new year."

He said Putin would find other ways to communicate with journalists, noting that he had held other news conferences, including on his trips abroad.

Last Friday, Putin answered questions from reporters during a visit to the Kyrgyz capital Bishkek.


Peskov said the Kremlin would advise later on a date for another annual set piece, Putin's annual speech to both houses of Russia's parliament, similar to the U.S. president's annual State of the Union address.


Putin also traditionally holds a mammoth televised call-in every year with members of the public, called "Direct Line with Vladimir Putin", which was last held in June 2021.


Last year's year-end news conference took place on Dec. 23, almost exactly two months before the invasion began, as the Kremlin was denying Ukrainian and U.S. accusations that tens of thousands of Russian troops massing near the border presaged an invasion.


Putin used the occasion to say Russia wanted to avoid conflict with Ukraine and the West, but needed an "immediate" response from the United States and its allies to its demands for security guarantees.

Putin cancels annual marathon year-end TV news conference

Doesn't take four hours to say "I'm a c u n t and everyone wants me dead".

Originally Posted by bsnub

Many sources have documented that the shells come from Russian held territory.

But the Russians are arguing that those missiles come from ukrainian positions, then do a u-turn to pretend they come from russian positions.

Drones could do that, but these are missiles which can not.

Originally Posted by Takeovers

But the Russians are arguing that those missiles come from ukrainian positions, then do a u-turn to pretend they come from russian positions.

Yes, I saw that too. Utterly laughable to say the least.

August next year? Wow. One side will either run out of ammo or run out of men before that. Take your pick.

Originally Posted by sabang

Ukraine calls for Patriot missiles to defend its grid

Very good long range ballistic missile defense system but at 1 billion per system and 3 mil per missile damn pricey.

Originally Posted by Norton

Very good long range ballistic missile defense system but at 1 billion per system and 3 mil per missile damn pricey.

Zelensky will pay you back.

Lend and Lease

Originally Posted by helge

Zelensky will pay you back.

Lend and Lease

Back when I was gainfully employed selling Patriot to our friends in Asia we had no worries about payment. Our good Uncle Sam kindly paid us upfront.

Russia has already been using the tactic of firing dummy missiles to deplete Ukrainian anti-missile ammo- and at a cool $1mm a pop, it's pretty certain they will take the same approach with the Patriot system, and try to expose their location in the process- they will obviously be high value targets. Reckon a more sensible approach would be a numerically higher supply of manpads, Stingers and so on- cheaper, more portable systems. I don't think the much vaunted Patriot has much efficacy against those hypersonic missiles, either- we have no answer for them yet.