Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-23 and Invasion

[Josquius]

That's a small relief I guess. Russia hasn't got quite so far as just dissappearing everyone.

[OttoVonBismarck]

I decided to wade into the world of Telegram chats with a mixture of Westerners and Russians, typically chats with a Russia focus. And yeah...the Russian posters are about as belligerent and zombified as most Russians I have had the misfortune to discuss political issues with on the internet at any time in the last 20 years.

[OttoVonBismarck]

I saw an analysis that the flood of anti-tank weapons into Ukraine may force Russia to adapt tactics, and it noted that in Syria in the face of anti-tank weapons Russia chose to use more infantry troops. The problem in Ukraine is Russia is already committed many times over the number of troops it committed in Syria, so there probably isn't a magic solution for dealing with anti-tank weapons--they are simply going to impose a cost on the Russian military. It is up to Putin to decide how much of that cost he is okay with.

[The Minsky Moment]

I saw an analysis that the flood of anti-tank weapons into Ukraine may force Russia to adapt tactics, and it noted that in Syria in the face of anti-tank weapons Russia chose to use more infantry troops.

In quality and quantity, Russia is facing a very different adversary on the ground then the motley crew of anti-regime partisans they confronted in Syria.  Frontal infantry assaults are going to pile up bodies really quickly.

[Sheilbh]

Same with the 15,000 Syrian "volunteers" Russia's enlisted - they're not used to fighting an opposing army which is going to be very different.

Interesting from Mark Galeotti (who wrote his PhD on the war in Afghanistan) noting that Russian censorship seems to be a lot less effective at the local news level where casualties are being far more openly reported and discussed. The point he makes is that, as in Afghanistan (when the USSR had far more control over information), propaganda and censorship will only get you so far if there are body bags or people with war wounds coming back which it seems the local press are reporting. He noted it might lead to a fraught spring conscription drive.

[Syt]

The German tank museum has a few videos with their director having a few thoughts about the war in Ukraine. He covered briefly the history of the T-64 => T-90 evolution, and that the design philosophy behind them was different than with Western tanks - Abrams, Chieftain, Leo etc. were designed around sustainability, i.e. keeping each tank and crew in combat as long as possible and allowing for easy repairs (e.g. how you can replace a Leo-2 engine in minutes).

The Soviet models were based on ensuring the formation can achieve its objective, and treating tanks (and crews) as expendable material. The idea being that 1:1 a T-72 wouldn't measure up to an Abrams, but massed formations would overwhelm them, creating gaps in the defenses that could be exploited. That led to smaller, mass produced tanks built for smaller (physically) crews. If there's technical problems or damage - often best bet is to just abandon it, because recovery/repair might be very unlikely or impossible - explaining why we see all those images of abandoned equipment.

He did point out as well that in the current situation with unclear front lines these tanks often wouldn't operate in their intended role of creating breakthroughs in enemy defense lines but rather in "old school" infantry support roles. He commented on the speed of the Russian invasion. He said that while they do seem to have logistical, organizational and morale problems, the Russians (militarily if not politically) can take their time because of the larger numbers and pools of equipment (not sure I 100% agree) and that they have taken chunks that look small but only because Ukraine is huge. He also mentioned that "quick" campaigns like Iraq 1991/2003 are the exception, not the rule. As to things like the famous convoy - he thinks it stems from the gross miscalculation that Ukrainians wouldn't resist much and might even welcome the Russians. To him the convoy was a sign of those units feeling safe and hence basically being in road march column (though I suppose they could have adjusted a lot sooner).

As to Putin being mad - he doesn't think so. He's in his opinion just returning to old-fashioned great power thinking and acting which Western countries post-WW2 have largely not engaged in, and that for Putin war really is just a different means of achieving political goals.

[The Brain]

Mad as in insane?

[Syt]

Mad as in insane?

Yes.

[Syt]

Meanwhile, the city of Hannover was moving to rescind Gerhard Schröder's honorary citizenship. He was chairman of the SPD in Hannover since the 80s, and was minister president of Lower Saxony in Hannover from 1990-98, leading into his chancellorship.

However, he's now written to the city, saying he resigns from his honorary citizenship of the city, and that he will not comment on their allegations.

[The Brain]

Mad as in insane?

Yes.

I totally agree there. Putin isn't insane, he's just out of touch and incompetent.

[Josquius]

Mad as in insane?

Yes.

I totally agree there. Putin isn't insane, he's just out of touch and incompetent.

Insane is probably too much but I do think he has some increasingly major mental issues.

[The Brain]

Meanwhile, the city of Hannover was moving to rescind Gerhard Schröder's honorary citizenship. He was chairman of the SPD in Hannover since the 80s, and was minister president of Lower Saxony in Hannover from 1990-98, leading into his chancellorship.

However, he's now written to the city, saying he resigns from his honorary citizenship of the city, and that he will not comment on their allegations.

I remember someone who lived in Germany in the Schröder period telling me what a total slimebag he was. Don't remember what the assessment was based on exactly, but it was certainly correct.

[The Brain]

Mad as in insane?

Yes.

I totally agree there. Putin isn't insane, he's just out of touch and incompetent.

Insane is probably too much but I do think he has some increasingly major mental issues.

It's called getting old.

[viper37]

I think that - as much as the Economist piece - gives a sense of his approach, I'm just not sure where nukes fit in because I think the world is very different from the run up to WW1.

I remember he's often stated that Ukraine should have kept a credible nuclear deterrence after becoming independent. Otherwise I mostly agree with him, a quibble here and there. Ukraine was and is a very corrupt country, run in many ways like Russia, with it's own oligarch class. Cynically used by the US and others to the point that the wastrel offspring of the US elite could be parked in random highly paid bullshit jobs.

Of course we should support them as we are doing now but I have to admit I'm very uneasy about funding, say, a massive insurgency on Ukrainian soil to bleed Russia after they've carved up the country. Smacks to me of us fighting down to the last Ukrainian.

They've been trying to fight against corruption, but it's not easy when a big chunk of your country is not under your authority while being nominally part of it:
Fight against corruption: Ukraine presents results and future steps

Why Ukraine's fight agaisnt corruption scares Russia

That's much, a thousand times much more than what Russia is doing.

[crazy canuck]

The Ukrainian President has just finished addressing a joint session of the Canadian Parliament and Senate by video link.