Thread: Russia launches Ukraine invasion

Originally Posted by sabang

Lets not even mention the peaceful dissolution of the Soviet Union

They peaceful dissolution of the Soviet Union? Dissolution? Like it was some kind of choice?

They were bankrupt after years of spunking millions on terrorising their own citizens and endemic corruption, and the people finally knew they could stand up to their oppressors.

Just what planet are you on?

In fairness mike, if the russkies are so short of ballistics- why on earth would they be sending dummy missiles (ie no warhead) to deplete Ukrainian aerial defences?

Originally Posted by sabang

In fairness mike, if the russkies are so short of ballistics- why on earth would they be sending dummy missiles (ie no warhead) to deplete Ukrainian aerial defences?

They are using them against Infra targets

A British think tank says it has obtained a four-part plan signed by Russian President Vladimir Putin outlining how the country's army would be able to overwhelm and seize military control of neighboring Ukraine within a 10-day window.

According to copies of orders issued to a range of Russian units outlined in a recent report by the Royal United Services Institute, the Russian military had plans to stun the enemy with overwhelming firepower, using an aggressive posture to force concessions from the international community to avert greater bloodshed, destabilize Ukrainian leadership, and clear the way for the Russian annexation of the country by August.

"The Russian plans for the invasion of Ukraine were detailed and offered solutions to most of the practical problems that Russia would face in occupying Ukraine," the report read. "If competently executed, these plans could have succeeded."

Obviously, things did not go as planned. Nearly 10 months after Russia's invasion of the country, a ceasefire remains elusive, while Russia has so far struggled to maintain its foothold in the country against the better-equipped Ukrainian defenses. Ukrainian political leadership remains intact. And while Russian attacks on critical infrastructure have occasionally been successful, its broader campaign has not, while the Ukrainian population has continued its active resistance against the invasion.

Russia's invasion of the country, the report read, revolved around the success of four key assumptions:

• That the invasion happens quickly, eliminating the ability of the international community to respond meaningfully.
• That Ukrainian leadership would be quickly deposed, allowing pro-Russian Ukrainians to assume positions of power under a veil of propaganda.
• That Russia would be able to seize control of the country's heating, electric (particularly nuclear power plants), and financial infrastructure, and
• That Russia—the "second most powerful army in the world," Russian General Valery Gerasimov said prior to the war's start—would dominate Ukraine on the battlefield.

All those assumptions, the report concluded, were largely based on Russian bluster. While the fundamentals of the invasion were sound—the points of entry, the size and scope of the invasion—the Kremlin, and Putin in particular, overestimated Ukrainian support for the regime, while its military units performed poorly on the battlefield, giving the international community ample time to mount a response via financial and military aid.

Also surprising: most officials did not realize they were mounting an invasion of Ukraine until it was already happening, in what the report described as an attempt to catch the country slacking.

According to the RUSI report, most Russian military personnel—even deputies under the Russian General Staff—were unaware of the intention to invade and occupy Ukraine until days before the invasion. Many tactical military units, spread thin across numerous points of entry, did not receive orders until hours before they entered Ukraine and were not properly equipped for a prolonged campaign. Per the report, many Russian soldiers arrived in towns without their weapons loaded.

"They were—for the most part[at]—not anticipating heavy fighting," the report read.

Most important of all was the fact the Russians appeared to underestimate their quarry.

"The plan itself—while theoretically plausible—compounded optimism bias in each of its stages and, most tellingly, offered no reversionary courses of action, indicated no decision points to determine whether conventional forces should adjust their posture nor envisaged any outcome other than its own success," the report read. "Neither did the plan account for the needs of those tasked with implementing it, nor afford any agency to Ukraine."

However, RUSI analysts concluded Russia's inaccurate assessment of Ukraine's response was much less consequential than the fact that there was "no evidence in the Russian planning that anyone had asked what would occur if any of its key assumptions were wrong." By limiting the circle of planners involved in the process, Putin's assumptions of how the invasion would go went essentially unchallenged.

Notably, Russia's lack of a sophisticated surveillance system on the country left them unable to monitor troop movements or confirm successful operations against critical infrastructure like railways, or power plants, leading to the country taking a number of unnecessary risks that led to significant losses and deflated morale among their ranks.

Meanwhile, the Russian invasion's successes on the battlefield were unevenly concentrated in certain regions of eastern Ukraine like Mariupol, suggesting more competent planning could have resulted in a Russian victory. However, the length of campaigns in other places—like Donbas—allowed the introduction of combined arms like HIMARS obtained via allies that offered Ukrainian forces a much-needed advantage, and helped turn the tide of the war.

Ultimately, the report's authors chalked Russia's failures to three things: the unexpected resistance of Ukraine, the later involvement of the international community, and Russia's own incompetence.

Before the February invasion, Russia's potential adversaries, they wrote, assumed Russian forces would utilize their seemingly massive stores of fire and manpower with "a basic level of competence," in line with what they'd exhibited in smaller-scale military operations around the world in the recent decades.

But there were flaws in that assessment. RUSI analysts said there was too much focus on the quantity of equipment, rather than the quality of personnel, their leadership, training and motivations, leading countries like Britain and the United States to be reluctant to openly oppose Russian forces and laying the groundwork for invasion. Today, however, the mask is off.

"For all the new capabilities on the battlefield, the war in Ukraine has been marked by the usual miscalculations, uncertainties and human failings," the report concluded. "For Ukraine, victory is essential but can only be achieved with the ongoing support of its international partners."

https://www.newsweek.com/leaked-inva...-wrong-1764309

EU plans subsidy war chest as industry faces ‘existential’ threat from US



European industry is on an emergency footing thanks to high gas prices and new lavish subsidies for American rivals.dustry is on an emergency footing thanks to high gas prices and new lavish subsidies for American rivals.



The EU is in emergency mode and is readying a big subsidy push to prevent European industry from being wiped out by American rivals, two senior EU officials told POLITICO.


Europe is facing a double hammer blow from the U.S. If it weren't enough that energy prices look set to remain permanently far higher than those in the U.S. thanks to Russia's war in Ukraine, U.S. President Joe Biden is also currently rolling out a $369 billion industrial subsidy scheme to support green industries under the Inflation Reduction Act.

EU officials fear that businesses will now face almost irresistible pressure to shift new investments to the U.S. rather than Europe. EU industry chief Thierry Breton is warning that Biden's new subsidy package poses an "existential challenge" to Europe's economy.

The European Commission and countries including France and Germany have realized they need to act quickly if they want to prevent the Continent from turning into an industrial wasteland. According to the two senior officials, the EU is now working on an emergency scheme to funnel money into key high-tech industries.


The tentative solution now being prepared in Brussels is to counter the U.S. subsidies with an EU fund of its own, the two senior officials said. This would be a "European Sovereignty Fund," which was already mentioned in the State of the Union address by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in September, to help businesses invest in Europe and meet ambitious green standards.


Senior officials said the EU had to act extremely quickly as companies are already making decisions on where to build their future factories for everything from batteries and electric cars to wind turbines and microchips.


Another reason for Brussels to respond rapidly is to avoid individual EU countries going it alone in splashing out emergency cash, the officials warned. The chaotic response to the gas price crisis, where EU countries reacted with all sorts of national support measures that threatened to undermine the single market, is still a sore point in Brussels.


European Commissioner Breton especially has led the pack in sounding alarm bells. At a meeting with EU industry leaders Monday, Breton issued his warning on the "existential challenge" to Europe from the Inflation Reduction Act, according to people in the room. Breton said it was now a matter of utmost urgency to "revert the deindustrialization process taking place."


Breton was echoing calls from business leaders all over Europe warning about a perfect storm brewing for manufacturers. "It's a bit like drowning. It's happening quietly,” BusinessEurope President Fredrik Persson said.

FULL- https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-hits-emergency-button-to-save-european-industry/

The Archbishop of Canterbury has said Ukraine must not be forced to accept a peace deal with Russia, while on a visit to the war-torn nation.


The Most Reverend Justin Welby told the BBC "justice demands that there is defeat" of "an evil invasion".

He visited Bucha where evidence of atrocities and civilian killings were found after Russian troops withdrew.

It comes as millions of people remain without power or heating due to Russian attacks on Ukraine's power grid.

The most senior cleric in the Church of England was highlighting the need for support for the country ahead of a tough winter.

"I am clear that President (Vladimir) Putin chose to start the war and release the evil" that comes from that, he said.

It is proper to support a "victim nation" that is "being overrun by aggression", the archbishop continued, adding the international community had a "duty of care" to protect weaker nations.

The consequences of letting Ukraine down would be "infinitely worse" than of carrying on the support for Kyiv, he said.

"It would be more expensive and politically catastrophic because it will prove that Putin was right when he thought the West would not stand together for long enough for this to end justly and fairly."

The archbishop visited the city of Bucha which was occupied by Russian forces for just over a month earlier this year.

When troops retreated in March, evidence of civilians being killed - a war crime - were found.

At St Andrew's church, where a mass grave was uncovered, the local priest showed the archbishop a display of photographs of the atrocities committed during Russia's occupation.

These included the bodies of civilians shot in the head, a man lying dead on the verge beneath his bicycle, and a dog apparently waiting by his side.

Reminded that Russian officials claim the killings were all staged by Ukraine, Justin Welby pointed out: "And they tied their hands behind their backs?"

Outside, he paused quietly for a moment's contemplation in the church grounds at the spot of the former mass grave, now covered in snow.

One hundred and sixteen bodies were found there, when Bucha was freed by Ukrainian troops.

"I went over there to imprint it on my mind, so that whatever I hear, I don't forget that," he explained, referring again to Russian disinformation about the killings in Bucha.

He also visited the so-called Bridge of Hope - which was the only route out of Russian-occupied Bucha and neighbouring Irpin in March, and where local priests helped people escape under fire.

He suggested there could be no peace in Ukraine until Russia "stops lying" about what it is doing, including the massacre of civilians in Bucha.

"He's got to stop lying. Lavrov and Putin," the archbishop said, referring to the Russian president and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.

"There were atrocities committed here. There will be no peace until we stop lying.

"We have to tell the truth however painful. There can be no way forward based on lies."

Before leaving Bucha, the archbishop lit a candle in a chapel beneath St Andrew's church and began a prayer with the words, "our hearts cry out in anger and protest", and called for peace and for justice.

Archbishop of Canterbury: Russian invasion must not succeed - BBC News

Originally Posted by hallelujah

Just what planet are you on?

Just look at the websites he is posting here. The guy is totally lost.
Then again, when all this is over and Putler has been put in his place Sabong will claim that he was only entertaining us.

When this is all over, and it turns out that Ukraine has to cede territory, what will you have to say?

The long haul. I'm hoping not, but what will Vlad settle for, and what territory would Ukraine cede for peace? Both are as clear as mud right now. If Vlad insists on Kharkiv and Odessa, I doubt peace is achievable- he'll have to seize them. That won't be easy, and will make for a long war, and there is certainly no guaranty of success. If he's willing to settle Russia's claims within the Donbass, Zapo & (maybe) Kherson- well, something to talk around at least. Can only wait and see.

Originally Posted by sabang

When this is all over, and it turns out that Ukraine has to cede territory, what will you have to say?

Ukraine has already liberated half the territory that Russia occupied since February. As soon as the ground freezes over, they will liberate even more. Best keep your trap shut before you get caught with your foot in your mouth again.

Originally Posted by sabang

If Vlad insists on Kharkiv and Odessa, I doubt peace is achievable- he'll have to seize them.

You live in a fantasy world.

“No Diplomatic Solution” to Ukraine War: Nobel Winner

There is currently no diplomatic solution to the war in Ukraine, a co-founder of the Nobel Peace Prize-winning Russian rights organization Memorial said Sunday.


"I am absolutely convinced that there is not a diplomatic solution with Putin's regime, so long as it is still there," said Irina Scherbakova.


"The solution that there will now be is a military one," said Scherbakova, who was presented with an award for her human rights work at a ceremony in Hamburg, Germany.


There would ultimately be some form of diplomatic resolution to the conflict, she said.


"But these decisions, this diplomacy will only happen when Ukraine believes it has won this war and can set its terms," she said.


Hasty calls for peace were "childish," she said, adding that things would not return to the way they were before the outbreak of the conflict.


"This war has turned so many things upside down, it will never be like that again," she said.


In Hamburg, Scherbakova was presented with the Marion Doenhoff Prize for her years of work on human rights in her home country by German Chancellor Olaf Scholz.


Scherbakova's efforts showed the way of a "better future for Russia," Scholz said, even if the prospect "still seems unlikely."


The war would not end with "a victory for Greater Russian expansionism," said Scholz, who has faced repeated criticism for not doing more to support the Ukrainian war effort.


Russia would, however, "still be there" after the end of the conflict, Scholz stressed.


Scherbakova's organization, Memorial, will be presented with the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo on Saturday December 10.


Memorial was awarded the prize along with fellow campaigners the Centre for Civil Liberties in Ukraine and the Belarussian activist, Ales Bialiatski.


One of the foremost Russian civil liberties organizations, Memorial has worked for decades to shed light on terrors from the era of Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin, while also compiling information on ongoing political oppression in Russia.


The group, founded in 1989, was forcibly shut down by Russian courts at the end of 2021 and Scherbakova left Moscow following the invasion of Ukraine. She is now based in Germany.

'No Diplomatic Solution' to Ukraine War: Nobel Winner - The Moscow Times

Russia’s ill-conceived invasion of Ukraine has so far failed to yield the goals set out by Russian President Vladimir Putin, and his top propagandists are struggling to hide their growing sense of panic.

On Monday, head of RT Margarita Simonyan appeared on The Evening With Vladimir Solovyov and admitted that the Kremlin’s collaborationist elite has concerns about the possibility of being tried for war crimes. After disingenuously claiming that neither the Russian leadership nor her fellow propagandists in the studio ever wanted to conduct strikes against Ukraine’s critical infrastructure, Simonyan said, “I am amazed by our people—and I unfortunately know many of them—including those in very high circles, who are afraid of this and are scared to call things by their proper names because of what people over there may think.”

Simonyan defiantly asserted: “We could spit on what they think over there! People who are afraid of the Hague—listen, you should be afraid to lose, to be humiliated and be afraid to betray your people. Let me tell you that if we manage to lose, the Hague—whether real or hypothetical—will come even for a street cleaner who is sweeping the cobblestones behind the Kremlin.”

In her rant, Simonyan contradicted her earlier claim of Russian forces not seeking to bomb civilian infrastructure and surmised that one more Kyiv district being left in the dark won’t change the potential of the future war crimes trials, or the “catastrophe” that will befall Russia if it loses its war against Ukraine.

Host Vladimir Solovyov immediately reverted to his old and tired routine of threatening nuclear strikes if things don’t go Russia’s way: “There won’t be any Hague if this happens, there won’t be anything at all. The whole world will be reduced to ashes.”

During Wednesday’s broadcast of 60 Minutes, host Olga Skabeeva carried on with the same theme. “God forbid, we can’t allow it and don’t even say it out loud but suppose that suddenly something happens and our country is unable to achieve victory: then we should proceed from the premise that everyone with no exception will be held accountable—whether they are located within the Russian Federation or abroad. Those abroad will most likely be immediately arrested. Whether he is a collaborator of Putin’s regime or was just passing by, it doesn’t matter. All of us will be considered guilty. What’s at stake is not only the existence of the country, but also the carefree existence of every citizen of the Russian Federation—our future is on the line.”

Skabeeva added: “In order to avoid the Hague tribunals, the initiation of criminal cases, compensation, reparations—in order to avoid all this, we need a total intensification of military actions, we have to squeeze and pressure them so much that they approach us about a truce or a peace process… Otherwise, they will insist on capitulation.”

During the most recent broadcast of Sunday Evening With Vladimir Solovyov, Margarita Simonyan put in another appearance and delivered the new directive: in order to protect Russia’s already tattered image as a military superpower, any supply problems concerning equipment, weapons and ammunition are to be discussed behind closed doors and not on-air. She unwittingly confirmed that the said issues were systematic and serious by urging the government to take extreme measures to secure the funds for the troops.

Simonyan described those who are not mobilized to serve on the frontlines as the people who aren’t fulfilling their duty to their country. “How can we sleep while knowing that we aren’t sharing and aren’t participating?,” she asked. “Rich people should get a hold of themselves and remember that we can’t continue living the way we’ve been living since the disintegration of the Soviet Union. We have to restore social equality.” RT’s head urged the rich to forego buying Chanel purses and “adopt” dozens or hundreds of needy families for whom they can provide.

Describing herself as a well-to-do person, Simonyan said she had a hard time looking at people who refuse to share their wealth, many of whom she knows personally. “I am calling on you, citizens: you have to share!,” she urged.

Never daring to question why the country’s exorbitant military budget has proven to be for Russia’s wartime needs—while Putin’s circle has no shortage of palatial abodes or yachts—Simonyan noted that the invading troops are being supplied with donations from the civilian population. Deeming that to be inadequate, she demanded “an involuntary vaccination of conscience,” adding, “Raise the taxes on the rich and the well-to-do people. What is there to be afraid of? Raise the taxes!”



https://www.thedailybeast.com/russia...es-on-state-tv

Originally Posted by Norton

Minimum of 4 years but could be 7 or 8 imho.

Originally Posted by sabang

The long haul. I'm hoping not, but what will Vlad settle for,

The war will be bounded by the time Putin has left to live, without him Russia will not continue

Originally Posted by russellsimpson

^^Sure hope your wrong about that Norton.

Did you ever think we would see a majore conflegation like this in our lifetimes?

I hope for a quick ending as well but history just in my lifetime indicates this war will go on for many years.

Hoped this war would not happen but deep down I knew it or another would.

Originally Posted by malmomike77

The war will be bounded by the time Putin has left to live, without him Russia will not continue

Seems the majority concensus but Putin's demise politically or otherwise while a factor may not end the war. Will depend on who gains power in Putin absence and the demands of the powers that be in the Ukraine.

I have to agree with you Norton and whilst Putin appears to mentally deranged and most western leaders put the blame squarely on his shoulders I no doubt suspect even more war mongering freaks are waiting in the wings to take over in the event he falls from power.

Originally Posted by Loy Toy

I have to agree with you Norton and whilst Putin appears to mentally deranged and most western leaders put the blame squarely on his shoulders I no doubt suspect even more war mongering freaks are waiting in the wings to take over in the event he falls from power.

You mean like the one he keeps poisoning and putting in jail?

^ Is he a war mongering freak Harry?

Originally Posted by Loy Toy

^ Is he a war mongering freak Harry?

No, but he's probably the one would who win a free and fair election.

Originally Posted by Takeovers

What I am afraid of is that Russia will not concede then but continue a low level war with border attacks and some level of long distance drone and rocket strikes, denying peace. Ukraine is not strong enough to end this by advancing towards Moscow.

Yes that plus sepratist mercenaries in the areas now occupied by Russian forces.