The Kremlin is burning?

[urbanoid]

1 minute ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Im not sure they even really need them. If Ukraine can establish a viable Flamingo production like (and considering the derisory delivery speed of TLAM then its not an exceptionally high bar to match), they probably have all they need to go after the targets they wish to hit.

As I said before, if Trump wanted to control what the Ukrainians are hitting, he could have sent the missiles. But not sending them, the Ukrainians are free to hit whatever they like, which I suspect if you are Trump and wanting to do a deal with Putin, is probably not what you want.

I assume the Ukrainians are coordinating with the US all the time, also that US recon assets play a role in those strikes. The US has other means of making sure to have large degree of control anyway. 

Given that the numbers floated were low, like several dozen missiles, I consider the issue to of far more political than military nature, breaking another 'barrier' for the future.

The Russians have been clearly displeased enough with such considerations that suspending the deliveries (maybe for a time or maybe that was a ruse all along) may result in them conceding something, e.g. refraining from provocations like with the drones over NATO countries. 

[Stuart Galbraith]

23 minutes ago, urbanoid said:

I assume the Ukrainians are coordinating with the US all the time, also that US recon assets play a role in those strikes. The US has other means of making sure to have large degree of control anyway. 

Given that the numbers floated were low, like several dozen missiles, I consider the issue to of far more political than military nature, breaking another 'barrier' for the future.

The Russians have been clearly displeased enough with such considerations that suspending the deliveries (maybe for a time or maybe that was a ruse all along) may result in them conceding something, e.g. refraining from provocations like with the drones over NATO countries. 

TBF, an awful lot of the work you can do just by looking on Google Earth. Some years ago I was taking CIA reports from the 1960's and using the coordinates to create markers how the sites look now. GE seems to be accurate enough the best I can tell. yes, for purely military targets, you need the Americans. I dont think thats the case for infrastructure targets, which have been on maps for donkeys years.

My view, Trump would have done better to have sent the missiles, a small number, and then withold their use. That really would be putting Putins neck on the chopping block in Hungary. But then I dont think Trump really is big on subtlety.

I think Putin is desperate, but he remembers the old Poker trick, if you are desperate, dont show it. I think he will refrain from doing anything silly till he gets the meeting. At the meeting he will try to drive another wedge between the US and Ukraine. And will it change anything? Not really.

 

[Mike1158]

They both appear as.......

 

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

He's a clapper end of no waiting zone?

[Josh]

5 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

One story has said they are down 1 percent production on last year. Which admittedly yes, doesnt sound a lot, but then these attacks I believe only started in August, and the year isnt over yet. Among the reasons given are an OPEC cut in production to stabilise oil prices, and a lack of workforce (Im guessing a lot of the roughnecks were conscripted, and I doubt foreign labour are going to Russia for obvious reasons). 

https://interfax.com/newsroom/top-stories/114341/

'MOSCOW. Oct 16 (Interfax) - Oil production in Russia in 2025 is expected to be 510 million tonnes, which is 1% lower than the previous year; the reduction is due to the country's commitments within OPEC+, President Vladimir Putin said during the plenary session of Russian Energy Week.'

 

Moreover, if they cant start getting refineries back online in a hurry (and from what ive read from people that worked in places like this, some of the most important   equipment is bespoke to the site and takes time to produce) the results are going to be cumulative over next year. More storage sites are going to be hit, more refineries are going to be hit, and, if the rescent stories coming out of india are true, then the Indians arent going to be consuming it.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce8gdl54n1go

 

 

 

Oil production is not being attacked at all and I would expect any changes in production to be completely voluntary on Russia’s part. The refinery attacks reduce the amount of actual finished POL products, primarily diesel and gasoline. This also has the effect of actually increasing the availability of crude oil, as oil that is not refined is sold or stored rather than being refined. The lack of refined products is a hit to the export income and if severe enough a hit to the local economy as prices rise and availability becomes less certain. Also eventually Russia might have an issue of not being able to sell or store its crude fast enough to keep up with extraction efforts. We clearly are not there yet, but it would be good to here any estimates of roughly how much refining capacity is operating currently; the attacks seem to be broadening and reattacks seem to keep many of the initial targets offline.

Edited October 20, 2025 by Josh

[Josh]

4 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Im not sure they even really need them. If Ukraine can establish a viable Flamingo production like (and considering the derisory delivery speed of TLAM then its not an exceptionally high bar to match), they probably have all they need to go after the targets they wish to hit.

As I said before, if Trump wanted to control what the Ukrainians are hitting, he could have sent the missiles. But not sending them, the Ukrainians are free to hit whatever they like, which I suspect if you are Trump and wanting to do a deal with Putin, is probably not what you want.

The Ukrainians will still use their own weapons against whatever targets they like. Tomahawks were never going to be provided in sufficient numbers to be decisive anyway. The ERAM program could be far more impactful, though the shorter range means that the target set likely is more tactical and less strategic.

[Stuart Galbraith]

1 minute ago, Josh said:

Oil production is not being attacked at all and I would expect any changes in production to be completely voluntary on Russia’s part. The refinery attacks reduce the amount of actual finished POL products, primarily diesel and gasoline. This also has the edge of actually increasing the availability of crude oil, as oil that is not refined is sold or stored rather than being refined. The lack of refined products is a hit to the export income and if severe enough a hit to the local economy as prices rise and availability becomes less certain. Also eventually Russia might have an issue of not being able to sell or store its crude fast enough to keep up with extraction efforts. We clearly are not there yet, but it would be good to here any estimates of roughly how much refining capacity is operating currently; the attacks seem to be broadening and reattacks seem to keep many of the initial targets offline.

No, but the pumping stations and the pipelines from them are.

https://www.reuters.com/graphics/UKRAINE-CRISIS/RUSSIA-ENERGY/gdpzbxkgwpw/

 

[Josh]

2 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

No, but the pumping stations and the pipelines from them are.

https://www.reuters.com/graphics/UKRAINE-CRISIS/RUSSIA-ENERGY/gdpzbxkgwpw/

 

This affects the exports but not the production. But it also potentially exacerbates the storage problem.

[Stuart Galbraith]

1 minute ago, Josh said:

The Ukrainians will still use their own weapons against whatever targets they like. Tomahawks were never going to be provided in sufficient numbers to be decisive anyway. The ERAM program could be far more impactful, though the shorter range means that the target set likely is more tactical and less strategic.

If the Ukrainians had access to Tomahawk in numbers, the Russians would have to refrain from hitting the Government district in Kyiv, because the Ukrainians could flip them back. There would be quite an attitude adjustment if they thought every hit there could be responded to in Moscow.

If none of the missiles even flew, they would have quite an impact on Russian targeting from a reflection that whatever target they hit, could be hit in their own country. And I suspect that is precisely why Trump was talked out of it by Putin, because he thinks Russia is key to the deal, the bloody fool.

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

Just now, Josh said:

This affects the exports but not the production. But it also potentially exacerbates the storage problem.

Well yes, I think I already agreed that.

I dont think there is any potential about it, its clearly already happening. Along with other factors yes, but its an ongoing process. If they are struggling to find roughnecks to work the fields, you have to wonder how many people they have to rebuild the pipelines, the pump stations, even the refineries.

[Roman Alymov]

2 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

If the Ukrainians had access to Tomahawk in numbers, the Russians would have to refrain from hitting the Government district in Kyiv, because the Ukrainians could flip them back. 

   First, for some reason "Government district in Kyiv"  is intact after four years of big war and 8 years of "just war" beforr that" (as pro-Western rulers of RF are reluctant to fight real war), while pro-Ukrainians had allready attempted to hit Pitin's office windows

2 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

 There would be quite an attitude adjustment if they thought every hit there could be responded to in Moscow.

What about Russian cities like Donetsk, Belgorod, Kursk, Lugansk, Sevastopol, Rostov-on-Don. Kazan, Saratov and many others where millions of Russians are living for years under constant danger of airstrikes? Or you, like "Rissian liberals" truly believe "there is no life outside of Moscow highway ring"?

2 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

If none of the missiles even flew, they would have quite an impact on Russian targeting from a reflection that whatever target they hit, could be hit in their own country. And I suspect that is precisely why Trump was talked out of it by Putin, because he thinks Russia is key to the deal, the bloody fool.

   Exactly opposite: this strikes (or, better say, public reaction on them) would make it impossible for RF officials to continue negotiations with their Westyern masters while imitating war efforts. You grossly underestimate how much public credibility "collective Putin" have allready lost inside Russia due to its weak and undecicive actions since 2014. They could hardly afford any more weakness. 

[Stuart Galbraith]

16 hours ago, Roman Alymov said:

   First, for some reason "Government district in Kyiv"  is intact after four years of big war and 8 years of "just war" beforr that" (as pro-Western rulers of RF are reluctant to fight real war), while pro-Ukrainians had allready attempted to hit Pitin's office windows

What about Russian cities like Donetsk, Belgorod, Kursk, Lugansk, Sevastopol, Rostov-on-Don. Kazan, Saratov and many others where millions of Russians are living for years under constant danger of airstrikes? Or you, like "Rissian liberals" truly believe "there is no life outside of Moscow highway ring"?

   Exactly opposite: this strikes (or, better say, public reaction on them) would make it impossible for RF officials to continue negotiations with their Westyern masters while imitating war efforts. You grossly underestimate how much public credibility "collective Putin" have allready lost inside Russia due to its weak and undecicive actions since 2014. They could hardly afford any more weakness. 

There isnt any negotiations going on. There is Russian officials laying down terms for the capitulation of Donbas into their posession, and US Officials stupidly passing them on to Ukraine as a diktat. Thats not negotiation, thats telling Ukraine to come to terms, something you have been trying to do since February 2022 and failing. Negotiation implies you settle for less than you want, something that Putin nor anyone else in your country seems to grasp. You want all of Donbas, go and take it. No reason for the Ukrainians to make that easy for you.

Constant danger of airstrikes? Well you made ALL of Ukraine a warzone, I see nothing in what the Ukrainians are doing as an effort to go after the civil population. The nearest they get is going after your electrical supply, again, another method started by yourself.

This to me commends sending TLAM,  because he only way Ukraine can stop you doing dumb things, is threaten to do the same dumb things themselves. Oh sure, they dont have the capacity to go and use anti carrier weapons on apartment blocks, and wont get them either. The electrical grid? You are going to really wish you hadnt started that kind of warfare, particularly in the middle of winter.

[Stuart Galbraith]

Oh dear. 

 

[Josh]

Yes, the flight will likely be very round about. You can bet the Ukrainians will be looking for any opportunity to shoot it down as well, so any time over the Black Sea must be taken with precautions.

[urbanoid]

Just now, Josh said:

Yes, the flight will likely be very round about. You can bet the Ukrainians will be looking for any opportunity to shoot it down as well, so any time over the Black Sea must be taken with precautions.

No, they won't, or rather wouldn't for a gorillion reasons.

[Stuart Galbraith]

Ive looked at a map, the only way I can see them going is via Germany, Czech Republic and Slovakia. If any of them say no, its not happening.

Doent know why they didn't pick UAE or Dubai.

[Stuart Galbraith]

Well that will work, Serbia will let him overfly.

 

[urbanoid]

Germany>Austria>Hungary or Bulgaria>Serbia>Hungary are other options.

[Mike1158]

On 10/20/2025 at 9:49 AM, Stuart Galbraith said:

He's a clapper end of no waiting zone?

Just a bell end.

[Mike1158]

Do, to put in what he did to an old friend?

 

One way to shorten the invasion.  What will they actually use to do the deed, nationalists out of control was done by put in against a civilian airliner so suppose tit for tat might work.

 

"Welcome to 'wherever', here is your allotment, add fertiliser"?

Edited October 21, 2025 by Mike1158
Knackered tryping figners.

[Stuart Galbraith]

22 minutes ago, Mike1158 said:

Just a bell end.

I know, I was being willfully obtuse.

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

1 hour ago, Josh said:

Yes, the flight will likely be very round about. You can bet the Ukrainians will be looking for any opportunity to shoot it down as well, so any time over the Black Sea must be taken with precautions.

Ukrainians would be willing to lose a squadron to kill the son of a bitch. And over the Black sea of course, no reason no to have Awacs on hand to give them a datalink. 'Oh that! Darn, we forgot to turn it off.'

Anyway, it appears that after talking to Lavrov, they have gone told on it because they Russians still have a maximalist approach. No deal when someone just wants to win.

[mkenny]

16 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Ukrainians would be willing to lose a squadron to kill the son of a bitch.

All I can say is 'if you think you are big enough then try it'. I can't see NATO coming out from behind the sofa and giving it a go. 

Must be  depressing when the dream of latest unstoppable war-winning   game-changing western wunder-waffen is so cruelly snatched from you. 

Are you lucky enough to still have a Samaritans near you?

[Mike1158]

42 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

I know, I was being willfully obtuse.

 

If I did not have so much snot in my face I would have noticed.  Gargling mouthwash, fine but, gargling snot not so much.

[urbanoid]

44 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Ukrainians would be willing to lose a squadron to kill the son of a bitch. And over the Black sea of course, no reason no to have Awacs on hand to give them a datalink. 'Oh that! Darn, we forgot to turn it off.'

Anyway, it appears that after talking to Lavrov, they have gone told on it because they Russians still have a maximalist approach. No deal when someone just wants to win.

Any replacement would likely be more radical, not necessarily because they want to, but because they'd feel they have to, especially that their predecessor was killed by the enemy they're waging a war against. That plus the fact that the position of the replacement wouldn't have been nearly as strong as Putin's is, so they'd have to make up for that with 'hawkishness'.