Kiev Is Burning

[Stuart Galbraith]

36 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

For someone who claims to see through all of the Russian disinformation bullshit, you really seem to cling to this one.

Actually that was a misguided attempt at levity.

Besides, everyone else seems to be constructing alternative realities to inhabit, I think mine is fairly innocuous compared to dumping Eastern Europe.

[Stuart Galbraith]

22 minutes ago, ink said:

Think tanks of all flavours usually don't do unbiased objective wargaming. So, there's always the danger they got the result they wanted.

Not that I'm saying they're wrong, necessarily. Just that caution is advised when quoting them.

 

I remember a book on the Global wargame undertaken in the 1980s in the US. The conclusion was that nuclear war was extremely  difficult to start, but almost impossible to stop. Of course, it probably suited everyone to believe that. They never wargamed Able Archer..

You are of course completely  right. I remember Daniel Ellsburg said in his book that RAND never really recovered from predicting a huge bomber gap. In fact, they refused to believe the first evidence from U2 overflights.

[Roman Alymov]

52 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

I agree with this, Biden has used Ukraine and Zelensky did lie to his own people as to his intentions towards Russia, and they voted for him on the basis of him doing one thing (Minsk) when in fact he intended to do the opposite, (a military offensive to crush the rebels).    

As we now know (thanks to kind revalations by major Western politicians) "Minsk" was in fact not an agreement but trick, and there was no way for ANY President of Ukraine to be "doing Minsk" - it was only for Russia to be doing it (and Putin&Co did followed this agreements, as they expected it to be their way to push Donbass back into Ukraine and return to idilic pre-2014 comprador status).  May be Zelensky was not competent enough to understand that (as he was just stand up comedian with nol political knowlege) - but there is no doubt his real master Kolomoysky was informed. 

    The only interesting thing here is majority of population of Ukraine have elected Zelensky with his "no war" program.

[Stuart Galbraith]

1 hour ago, glenn239 said:

You and I both believe the same thing - that Ukraine is on track to lose this war.   I thought that would be the case 10 years before the war broke out, while you seem to have only come around to the obvious after hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians are dead.  

Now, without missing a beat, you continue with your hustle, not because you believe a word you are saying, but because you understand that unless the US gets into this war, Ukraine will lose. 

No Glenn, you thought Ukraine would see Russian tanks rolling through Kyiv. I know you did, because I sure did.

As I asked you before, define 'lose'.

Ukraine will lose territory out of this war. They won't get it all back now, barring a miracle. Otoh, they took back half of what they lost, and unlike the first week of the war, there is little to no apparent chance of Putin taking Kyiv.

 Ukraine will survive. But the opportunity  to avert the next war has been squandered by Biden, and it will undoubtedly  come. I'd put money on it.

,

[Roman Alymov]

Lancets vs. two tanks, note basic decoy tank on the left https://t.me/rusich_army/12195

[Josh]

49 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said:

As we now know (thanks to kind revalations by major Western politicians) "Minsk" was in fact not an agreement but trick, and there was no way for ANY President of Ukraine to be "doing Minsk" - it was only for Russia to be doing it (and Putin&Co did followed this agreements, as they expected it to be their way to push Donbass back into Ukraine and return to idilic pre-2014 comprador status).  May be Zelensky was not competent enough to understand that (as he was just stand up comedian with nol political knowlege) - but there is no doubt his real master Kolomoysky was informed. 

    The only interesting thing here is majority of population of Ukraine have elected Zelensky with his "no war" program.

The Minsk agreement was something forced on Ukraine by Russia invading in the first place. Russia not only heavily supported the rebels, it also physically invaded when they were on the cusp of losing. Had Russia stayed inside its own borders, there would have been no war outside Ukraine's borders or need for Minsk.

Edited December 13, 2023 by Josh

[Roman Alymov]

Back to topic of old style additional gunpowder charges on Soviet/Russian mortar mines https://t.me/Sladkov_plus/9304

[Markus Becker]

 

 

 

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

Doesn't matter much, their  infantry was never much cop.Loss of all those officers is a real issue though.

 

 

[JWB]

22 hours ago, Murph said:

He did not and please do not be obtuse.  You know exactly what I was referring to in my post.

Not being obtuse. Just replying in kind. You need to divorce yourself of debunked conspiracy theories. 

[sunday]

18 minutes ago, JWB said:

Not being obtuse. Just replying in kind. You need to divorce yourself of debunked conspiracy theories. 

Is that peer-reviewed?

[BansheeOne]

2 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

As I asked you before, define 'lose'.

Ukraine will lose territory out of this war. They won't get it all back now, barring a miracle. Otoh, they took back half of what they lost, and unlike the first week of the war, there is little to no apparent chance of Putin taking Kyiv.

 Ukraine will survive. But the opportunity  to avert the next war has been squandered by Biden, and it will undoubtedly  come. I'd put money on it.

I like this succinct definitions by some Russian milblogger I saw quoted some time ago; might have been last year already.

If post-war negotiations are about

- political re-organization of NATO Europe: Russian knockout victory.

- political re-organization of non-occupied Ukraine: Russian victory.

- where the ceasefire line runs: draw.

- political re-organization of occupied Ukraine: Western victory.

- political re-organization of Russia: Western knockout victory.

[Stuart Galbraith]

Yeah, and I think broadly they are right to view it like that. Anything that allows them to hold onto what they have is a draw, allowing future action. And they will. They already have when they viewed Crimea as a stepping stone to the future.

Its like that map I posted long ago showing the Polish Lithuanian commonwealth. It didnt die in a day. It was over several decades, choping and cutting away at it. Unless Russia is deterred (and I dont think killing criminals or poor white trash qualfies) they will do it to Ukraine again. Or, conceivably, next time they will pull it where NATO or the west is weak. Because we let him get away with it, and like the Russians, setup a piss poor list of how we define victory.

For  Biden, I believe the list looks like his.

If I avoid thermonuclear war = Win

If I save Kyiv from occupation. = Win.

If I avoid Russian tanks in Warsaw = Win.

If I avoid giving the Republicans a case for saying I sent too much weaponry= Win

If Ukraine gets all its territory back, and Russia falls into chaos, loose nukes etc = fail.

Ok, I characteristically exaggerate. But not so much.

Edited December 13, 2023 by Stuart Galbraith

[glenn239]

4 hours ago, Roman Alymov said:

As we now know (thanks to kind revalations by major Western politicians) "Minsk" was in fact not an agreement but trick, and there was no way for ANY President of Ukraine to be "doing Minsk"

Doesn't really matter as far as I'm concerned.  Trick or not, it was the handiest way for Ukraine to get past the Putin era without a catastrophic war against Russia.

[glenn239]

4 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

As I asked you before, define 'lose'.

Destroyed infrastructure, huge debts, millions leaving the country and not coming back,  hundreds of thousands of dead Ukrainian troops, territorial losses to annexation, massive equipment losses, reduced to satellite status in the Sino-Russian orbit, cratered GDP.  

Just imagine what Zelensky can do if he gets a second term!

Quote

For  Biden, I believe the list looks like this.

Biden's list in Ukraine is if he gets reelected in 2024 = win.

 

 

Edited December 13, 2023 by glenn239

[Sardaukar]

"Sino-Russian orbit"  The fantasies you have. 

Russia is already in Sino-Russian orbit and it's not there voluntarily, more like economic colony. It is telling that China refused to pay for new gas pipeline, instead telling Russia to pay it (in addition to big discount in gas prices).

https://asiatimes.com/2023/10/china-russia-no-limit-partnership-punctured-by-power-prices/

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

13 hours ago, glenn239 said:

Destroyed infrastructure, huge debts, millions leaving the country and not coming back,  hundreds of thousands of dead Ukrainian troops, territorial losses to annexation, massive equipment losses, reduced to satellite status in the Sino-Russian orbit, cratered GDP.  

Just imagine what Zelensky can do if he gets a second term!

Biden's list in Ukraine is if he gets reelected in 2024 = win.

 

 

Yeah, funnily enough that is precisely what happens in a war. Stuff gets busted, people get killed. By that definition, Ukraine lost the war on day one, and presumably you would instead count it as a win if Russia got to Kyiv and rebuilt all it busted? Which im pretty sure it wouldnt.

Territorial losses to annexation. Again, they had already lost Crimea and the east of the country. You are making what happened in February 2022 as a novel departure. It was just more of the same, and the possiblity of stopping it continue in the same vein was squandered by the Biden administration.

Once more, you have to go on my list of people who just dont fucking get it. On this great site im sorry to say it grows ever longer as the adults depart.

 

Edited December 14, 2023 by Stuart Galbraith

[Sardaukar]

40 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Yeah, funnily enough that is precisely what happens in a war. Stuff gets busted, people get killed. By that definition, Ukraine lost the war on day one, and presumably you would instead count it as a win if Russia got to Kyiv and rebuilt all it busted? Which im pretty sure it wouldnt.

Territorial losses to annexation. Again, they had already lost Crimea and the east of the country. You are making what happened in February 2022 as a novel departure. It was just more of the same, and the possiblity of stoppin git continue in the same vein was squandered by the Biden administration.

Once more, you have to go on my list of people who just dont fucking get it. On this great site im sorry to say it grows ever longer as the adults depart.

 

You mean people don't have agendas here?

I am shocked, just utterly shocked... 

[Stuart Galbraith]

Yeah, its an eternal surprise to me how many people love to live with their head buried in the sand. But there we are.

[Sardaukar]

12 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Yeah, its an eternal surprise to me how many people love to live with their head buried in the sand. But there we are.

People do believe because they want to.

No matter what facts are present will change that.

And there are obviously totally malicious people like me who think that some resemblance of reality might be good when people give atrocitious (is that even a word) claims from Kreml and Peking (yes, not Beijing)

[seahawk]

13 hours ago, glenn239 said:

Destroyed infrastructure, huge debts, millions leaving the country and not coming back,  hundreds of thousands of dead Ukrainian troops, territorial losses to annexation, massive equipment losses, reduced to satellite status in the Sino-Russian orbit, cratered GDP.  

Just imagine what Zelensky can do if he gets a second term!

Biden's list in Ukraine is if he gets reelected in 2024 = win.

Nobody in the West cares about the Ukraine or Ukrainians. The Ukraine is a big scam to fill the pockets of oligarchs like Zelensky and corrupt criminals like Hunter Biden. They get richer and the US taxpayer pays the bills.

[Stuart Galbraith]

You know, Im aware Seahawk is an AI parody account, but that is, in parody, what a lot of people seem to think Maybe people are so sophisticated these days, they think it wise to distrust everyone and everything. For Americans post watergate, post Trump, I can get that. Is it healthy? No. And one has cause to reflect, whatever the flaws in our national institutions, at least we still have them. Go, take a long hearty look at Russia and recognise what happens when you remove them.

I dont believe Zelensky is anything as corrupt as the Fox media machine would have us believe. If anything I think the narrative that he is a guy trying to reform the system, like the Schoolteacher he once played, is the correct one. And if one thinks Ukraine is corrupt and it doesnt matter, one has to ask why its the exception, when we quite happily stepped forward to defend the Baltic states, and at one time, were very close to stepping forward to defend Georgia. We defended Kuwait, which is an absolute monarchy for crissakes. Why is Ukraine different? Because Putin wants us to believe it is, and no more.

I realise nobody is going to read this shit, and I realise far more that even if they do, they wont comprehend it. But anyone whom thinks Ukraine isnt a referendum on the West and its desire to defend democracy, needs to reflect on the Kuwait war, and how it was perceived by the entire region on the United States willingness to defend despots. We either stand by Democracies, or we get alternatives. And we arent going to enjoy the alternatives very much.

I give up. I spent nearly 10 years trying to sell the dangers of giving in to Vladimir Putin. If people are so dead set on not listening, I reflect there is zero point spending further time trying to convince them. Swim in your own misinformation and drown in it for all I fucking care.

[RETAC21]

13 hours ago, glenn239 said:

Just imagine what Zelensky can do if he gets a second term!

The local surrender monkey blaming the victim, quelle surprise...

"If you didn't want to be raped, you shouldn't have gone out on the street"

Edited December 14, 2023 by RETAC21

[seahawk]

35 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

You know, Im aware Seahawk is an AI parody account, but that is, in parody, what a lot of people seem to think Maybe people are so sophisticated these days, they think it wise to distrust everyone and everything. For Americans post watergate, post Trump, I can get that. Is it healthy? No. And one has cause to reflect, whatever the flaws in our national institutions, at least we still have them. Go, take a long hearty look at Russia and recognise what happens when you remove them.....

 

Who says that powers in the West want to defend democracy and freedom? They want to primarily preserve their position of power. It is no coincidence that we see a rise in support for authoritarian governments in the West and that we see this weak support for the Ukraine. So I dare say that the vote on the question if the West is willing to defend democracy has been cast and the result was: "Not so much - at home and abroad."

There is no other conclusion, when you consider that the return of armed conquest to Europe and the open attack on a democratic country is not enough to create a strong unified position between countries and over party-lines. Putin and Xi will note, that defending the Ukraine is about as important as building a border wall or supporting the purchase of BEVs.

[Stuart Galbraith]

37 minutes ago, seahawk said:

Who says that powers in the West want to defend democracy and freedom? They want to primarily preserve their position of power. It is no coincidence that we see a rise in support for authoritarian governments in the West and that we see this weak support for the Ukraine. So I dare say that the vote on the question if the West is willing to defend democracy has been cast and the result was: "Not so much - at home and abroad."

There is no other conclusion, when you consider that the return of armed conquest to Europe and the open attack on a democratic country is not enough to create a strong unified position between countries and over party-lines. Putin and Xi will note, that defending the Ukraine is about as important as building a border wall or supporting the purchase of BEVs.

Which in the 1930's, during the cold war, and now, amounts to exactly the same thing. Though ill grant you, they generally are so fucking clueless, they dont see it that way.

Im far from certain there are any definite results of Ukraine as yet. All we have now is a multi tier level of possiblities, reminicent of what Paul Atreides conjures up in Dune. Though we are rapidly running out of all the best conclusions, largely as a result of apathy, cluelessness and self interest.