Ukraine Conflict - "Only the dead have seen the end of war."

[xzar_monty]

13 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

This is a very  good and articulate  post, well said Monty 

I hope  2133 responds, I would like to see what he has to say 

Well we are, to an extent, speaking of different things that don't rule each other out.

[xzar_monty]

Yesterday, Russia promised a three-day ceasefire in Azovstal so that civilians can escape.

Today, Russia has already violated it by starting a new attack, and heavy fighting is going on.

Provided that both of these reports are true (I have read them from various sources that I regard as fairly credible), that went precisely in the way that could have been predicted.

[Mamoulian War]

11 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

Ukraine has made no progress around the areas that might actually threaten Izium though because there the western Russian defensive line is along highly defensible river and swamp.

Yes you are correct, there is a lot of Swamp and as I've mentioned, Russian are making best advancements around this area, but as I've said with situation around Kharkiv, it might help with disrupting at least some of the Russian opperation. And it has already happened after Ukraine seized back Staryi Saltiv. Also there are already emerging reports, that killing off general Semionov at Izyum might have sown some chaos into command line of the Russian forces at the area of Izyum. And almost all of the gains in Kharkiv area have taken place after the alleged general's demise as well.

Yesterday report from ISW: Ukrainian forces continued to threaten Russian ground lines of communication to Izyum along the E40 highway, destroying a Russian supply convoy in Vesele on May 3.

6 hours ago, kanisatha said:

Yeah the artillery being delivered is a big deal, per a wide range of military experts. And since their range and targeting accuracy is far superior to Russian systems they can be used quite effectively for counter-battery fire against Russian artillery. But as you correctly point out, protecting them from Russian air strikes is critical. And for the US at least, we don't have any systems we can give them for air defence other than old Stingers because apparently providing systems such as Patriot makes the squishies inside the Administration nervous. What would truly be a game-changer is if someone is able and willing to provide the Ukrainians with an AD system that can take out Russian aircraft and cruise missiles while they are still inside Russian airspace so Russia can't sit back within their own space and bombard Ukraine at will.

 

3 hours ago, xzar_monty said:

Who do you reckon would have the potential to do this? I mean, Andorra can't do it but the US can -- who else can?

Answer to both of you, there are rumours about Israel willing to offer Ukraine their Iron Dome, especially now after Lavrov went full anti-semitic. I have absolutely no clue how that might be plausible, so I am just posting it here as one of the theoretical options here.

3 hours ago, xzar_monty said:

Out of twenty Russian generals who initially took part in the war, ten have now died.

Not entirely certain given that one side has an interest in skewing the numbers one way and the other the other, but that appears to be approximately the size of it. Humiliating, in any case, like that fallen match that produced that fire on Moskva.

Two general's deaths is being disputed now, as they allegedly shown themselves on Russian TV after the alleged hit. But knowing Russian propaganda, this might be a prerecorded footage to deny Ukrainian claims. And of course this could be also Ukrainian propaganda to boost little bit their soldier's morale... And There are also two unnamed generals, who allegedly died during bombing of command outpost in Kherson area, with pretty high number of lower ranking officers dead as well. This attack has not yet been verified by independent parties though. So the number of dead generals is currently between 8-12.

29 minutes ago, 213374U said:

What I am disputing is the reductionist and caricaturesque view that Russia never stopped being the Soviet Union, that they always aimed to take over all countries that gained independence after 1991, and that the ultimate reason for this is that "orcs" with "Putler" at the head are stupid and/or insane. Because observed facts over the past two decades simply don't fit that interpretation and looking at international conflicts in terms of "the enemy isn't rational and barely human anyway" makes any sort of negotiated solution much harder. And in this context, the stakes are super high.

It has been explained before that, for Russia, war is simply another item on the diplomatic toolbox. As is propaganda. Despite the prevalent narrative as told by British tabloids, a land grab wasn't the point, but rather to massively increase the costs imposed on Ukraine to force them to change their stance on rearmament and the status of DPR and LPR. This is why we saw Ukraine and Russia in talks a few weeks ago, even before it was clear to what extent Russian performance wasn't so great: because for them war is on the same spectrum as diplomacy and one doesn't preclude the other. So, again, if they simply wanted to take more territory, talks would be pointless, and the timing is poor. There were no talks in 2014 when Russia annexed Crimea. That is also why Russia isn't yet doing all they can to flatten any city within striking distance -- because going full out actually reduces their leverage.

Putin was not in the previous 20 years hidden without contact to other people. Since the start of COVID, he spent almost entire 2 and half years completely isolated with very few people able to contact him. Even the strongest people might get mental health problems when isolated for such a prolonged time.

Also speaking about the Russian negotiations, well, their tactics since Syria is to pretend, that they want to negotiate with you, just to divert your attention to somewhere else, so they can stab you in the back at the first possible moment. But it looks like, that the West have learned hard lesson from Syria. Any negotiating efforts from Russia could not be taken seriously. Especially with all the gas and ores around Crimea and Donbas... Negotiations is just another means of waging their war.

In Syria Russia offered deescalation in one of four areas of control in Syria, for the start of "negotiations" and while west was busy and happy about that one area, Russia snatched three others and obliterated them. And in the meanwhile, they were having "negotiations" with UN as well, which ended up with UN not having any significant reaction to Russian onslaught of civilians and civil infrastructure.

The excerpt from one of many articles on how Russia is misusing "negotiations" to deceive the other side:

"Negotiate As If There Were No War and Bomb As If There Were No Negotiations

In 2015 Russia decided to take advantage of the vacuum left by Western actors and engaged in Syria on three levels simultaneously: militarily, diplomatically and politically. One of the common features of the wars in Syria and Ukraine is the Russian strategy of negotiating as if there were no war and bombing as if there were no negotiations. On all three levels, Russians have outdone their Western counterparts. Highly capable Russian diplomats have upheld political dialogue and, at the same time, kept the military option open. Both reinforced each other. Sitting at the table opens options in case they are needed. During the talks a peaceful narrative could be fed to the media, reducing international outrage and allowing a regrouping of forces."

Full article:
https://blogs.prio.org/2022/05/putins-blood-trail-from-syria-to-the-ukraine-western-failures-in-the-face-of-power-play-propaganda-and-de-humanization/

Note, that the same strategy was deployed during Phase 1 of Russian invasion of Ukraine, but thankfully, they failed this time to spark the international outrage against bad west trying to sabotage the peace talks...

 

[213374U]

46 minutes ago, Mamoulian War said:

Putin was not in the previous 20 years hidden without contact to other people. Since the start of COVID, he spent almost entire 2 and half years completely isolated with very few people able to contact him. Even the strongest people might get mental health problems when isolated for such a prolonged time.

Note that not even the US have made any definitive statements about Putin's supposed mental state. Conjecture is all well and good but let's not lose perspective that that's all it is.

 

48 minutes ago, Mamoulian War said:

Negotiations is just another means of waging their war.

Yeah, you're not wrong. But the converse is also true, war is another means of conducting negotiations for Russia. This is nothing new, and it's been repeated to death that Russia follows the old Clausewitz maxim that war is a continuation of policy with other means. You may disagree with their goals and condemn their methods, but that's still way more useful than chalking everything up to insanity and drawing tired, facile parallels to Hitler.

Interesting read, by the way.

[Mamoulian War]

14 minutes ago, 213374U said:

Note that not even the US have made any definitive statements about Putin's supposed mental state. Conjecture is all well and good but let's not lose perspective that that's all it is.

Yes I agree on this. All I have said, that such a long time in separation of other people can lead to serious mental issues. Especially in conjunction to fear of getting sick of COVID. I've seen a lot of people broken from quarantine where I work, so even if we do not know his real health state, it is highly plausible, that he might have some mental issues as all the other people I've met. And if you take into the account, that there were around him this whole time only people who are afraid to say No, then this might theoretically lead to some serious mismanagement or misjudgement on his part.

Edited May 5, 2022 by Mamoulian War

[xzar_monty]

7 minutes ago, Mamoulian War said:

Yes I agree on this. All I have said, that such a long time in separation of other people can lead to serious mental issues. Especially in conjunction to fear of getting sick of COVID. I've seen a lot of people broken from quarantine where I work, so even if we do not know his real health state, it is highly plausible, that he might have some mental issues as all the other people I've met. And if you take into the account, that there were around him this whole time only people who are afraid to say No, then this might lead to some serious mismanagement or misjudgement on his part.

In Putin's case, the potential mental problems caused by the isolation are exacerbated by the fact that given the kind of leader he is and the kind of country he's leading, he has every real reason to be apprehensive to the point of being paranoid (about other people, about food, etc.). Over two years of almost total isolation in an apprehensive state of mind won't do anyone any good.

Putin's overlong reign is also unlikely to have done him any good. There are many political reasons why term limits are a good thing, as are limits on power. But there are also psychological reasons. Putin has had very few limits and an overlong tenure, which is a bad combination in all sorts of ways.

However, from this it doesn't necessarily follow that he has become seriously unhinged. This would have to be determined by more direct means, and that is obviously not going to be very probable. This is almost certainly the reason why the US, for instance, has refrained from making official statements about his state of mind (in a medical sense). Also, statements such as that wouldn't do any good, even if they were based on proper medical consultation.

[bugarup]

3 hours ago, 213374U said:

That's irrelevant. Implementation of the Minsk accords would have ended the war and returned overall control of the state border and disputed territories to the government of Ukraine, putting it in a much stronger position to actually defend against Russia than letting the conflict fester.

That's not irrelevant, just inconvenient for your "Russia is not aggressor here" stance. Also, while you're at Minsk docs, do they include booting out Moscow puppet "governments" along with their little green men out of of "disputed territories"? 

3 hours ago, 213374U said:

You mean the members that have no skin in the game and for which it's entirely a question of geopolitical interests? So France and Germany would not react to a direct threat to their territorial integrity but the US would in the same circumstances because... reasons. Heh, OK. I mean, you already can see how reluctant the US is to spark an actual war with Russia because being on the other side of the pond doesn't protect you from ICBMs -- those are the stakes. Maybe it would be good to start abandoning any delusions that NATO nowadays is little more than a cudgel used to bludgeon non-nuclear states that don't wanna toe the line as laid out by Washington.

Maybe it would be good to stop flipping arguments like pancakes so that they always land in a way that supports your opinion? Because I vaguely remember someone regularly whatabouting  the US getting involved in affairs that are not exactly geopolitical. Also, EU's territorial integrity is not the same as France and Germany's territorial integrity. 

3 hours ago, 213374U said:

Where did I say that there is no war? That Russia isn't responsible? Stop tilting at windmills.

Where did I say that you said there is no war? Stop extrapolating. Better yet, stop getting all huffy when I do the same to you.

3 hours ago, 213374U said:

What I am disputing is the reductionist and caricaturesque view that Russia never stopped being the Soviet Union, that they always aimed to take over all countries that gained independence after 1991, and that the ultimate reason for this is that "orcs" with "Putler" at the head are stupid and/or insane. Because observed facts over the past two decades simply don't fit that interpretation and looking at international conflicts in terms of "the enemy isn't rational and barely human anyway" makes any sort of negotiated solution much harder. And in this context, the stakes are super high.

Well then how fortunate it is that internet forums do not make important decisions in foreign politics, don't you think? I'm sure that people who do are pragmatic enough and know better than use suchlike rhetoric in negotiations; meanwhile, on our here niche internet forum I am going to insult the poor man's Hitler and his Darkspawn as much as I please. 

Also, it's such a convenient thing to fuse two rather different statements, namely "Russia never stopped being the Soviet Union and always aimed to take over" with "the reason for this is that they are stupid and insane", because then whenever someone tries to point out signs of revanchistic Sovietistan nostalgia rising as soon as tiny dictator plopped its scrawny arse on the metaphorical throne, you can smugly dismiss everything by countering that second part about "stupid/insane", which is considerably easier to do, yes I know I am extrapolating. 

3 hours ago, 213374U said:

So, again, if they simply wanted to take more territory, talks would be pointless, and the timing is poor.

No it isn't, there is this thing called "stalling", also, it's always useful to try and sniff out your enemy's plans, ideas etc. even if you are not planning to seriously negotiate, and I'm not singling out Russia here, both sides are doing that or at least they should. Anyway, scuttlebutt is that Mordor is planning "referendums" in "contested territories" and Kherson in mid-May so lets wait and see how that ends, shall we.

3 hours ago, 213374U said:

That is also why Russia isn't yet doing all they can to flatten any city within striking distance -- because going full out actually reduces their leverage.

No argument here?

3 hours ago, 213374U said:

But no reasons or facts are going to matter if your preferred fall-back to argument is that Russians are simply cartoon villains twirling their mustaches at every opportunity. That's not only eyeroll-inducing boring, it's also fairly dangerous if it becomes the accepted view at the decision-making level because the only path it leaves open is escalation.

Flattering as it is for you to say that denizens of assorted internet hangouts such as reddit or this very forum have the power to infect decision-making people with exercises in frivolous name-calling, I'm afraid you are slightly overestimating their influence.  

Edited May 5, 2022 by bugarup

[xzar_monty]

FYI, here's another example of Russia's barking-mad rhetoric: Maria Zakharova (so not just any Russian but a proper spokeswoman from on high) once again warns Sweden and Finland against joining NATO. Her claims are untrue to a hilarious extent, as she proposes that this is all a US / Brussels ploy that these two poor countries are falling for, not decisions made by these two countries themselves. This, incidentally, is one reason why negotiations appear almost entirely futile now: the lies(*) are so outrageous that there is no shared reality.

https://tass.com/world/1440259

 

(*) "We have not attacked Ukraine", etc.

[Mamoulian War]

Also, back to speaking about Russia getting insane...

Question to everyone... If official Russian government media mouthpieces are spreading information like this, how can you consider them not completely out of touch with reality, and how would you negotiate with these people?

 

[Zoraptor]

8 hours ago, xzar_monty said:

What's your take on the reasons for this? In my view, the most logical explanation is that Putin, surrounded by yes-men, was told what he wanted to hear, and this skewed his thinking way out of proportion. Combine this with the effects of widespread corruption on equipment and morale, and you get what we've got this far.

I mean, the original plan indeed was too unrealistic, by several orders of magnitude, so to speak.

My short take would be that they wanted to take a lot of territory quickly- which, broadly speaking, they did- to spook Ukraine into a quick political rather than military capitulation. The problem came when the political capitulation didn't eventuate and their efforts were far too diffuse to be effective militarily. That explains pretty much everything of how they went about it though; trying to take Kiev, airborne assaults, not really trying to compartmentalise things by blowing up bridges and infrastructure and the like. It was all designed to leave a more or less intact Ukraine with a new Russian friendly government/ Russian friendly conditions imposed on it.

And it also has to be said; as much as I thought that trying for Kiev was a stupid idea* from the outset and a political rather than military decision there were a lot of people expecting it to work, not just the Russians- there were multiple assessments that Kiev would fall in days from western military analysts.

*at some point I will probably do something with more detail on what I think they should have done, but it actually wouldn't be significantly different from what I said before everything kicked off.

Edited May 5, 2022 by Zoraptor

[xzar_monty]

35 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

there were multiple assessments that Kiev would fall in days from western military analysts.

This is probably fair. Doesn't the fact that the US offered an escape route to Zelenskyi sort of point to a similar assessment?

Btw, if your analysis on the initial strategy is correct, then that begs the question of where it all turned into a genocidal-seeming bloodbath, and how, and why. Doesn't it?

Edited May 5, 2022 by xzar_monty

[Mamoulian War]

This one might be interesting news...

"Lukashenka in Associated Press interview doubts that "Russian operation is going according to the plan"

https://t.me/pul_1/5410

 

[xzar_monty]

Hmm, if the Russian media is really talking about black magic, then it appears to have gone back to the middle ages, or something. Does it expect people inside Russia to take this stuff seriously? Well, of course the answer must be "Yes".

[BruceVC]

45 minutes ago, Mamoulian War said:

Also, back to speaking about Russia getting insane...

Question to everyone... If official Russian government media mouthpieces are spreading information like this, how can you consider them not completely out of touch with reality, and how would you negotiate with these people?

 

Mamie are you sure the Ukrainians are not using black magic, shouldnt we wait for confirmation before we proceed 

[Malcador]

1 hour ago, Mamoulian War said:

Also, back to speaking about Russia getting insane...

Question to everyone... If official Russian government media mouthpieces are spreading information like this, how can you consider them not completely out of touch with reality, and how would you negotiate with these people?

 

Not sure that is relevant at all for negotiations, though. 

  

35 minutes ago, Mamoulian War said:

This one might be interesting news...

"Lukashenka in Associated Press interview doubts that "Russian operation is going according to the plan"

https://t.me/pul_1/5410

 

https://apnews.com/article/belarus-alexander-lukashenko-ap-interview-9bc1f6524eb65841b924883705684b7f

Doesn't really seem that much of a change, I think.  His comments about the nukes was amusing though.

Edited May 5, 2022 by Malcador

[bugarup]

40 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

FYI, here's another example of Russia's barking-mad rhetoric: Maria Zakharova (so not just any Russian but a proper spokeswoman from on high) once again warns Sweden and Finland against joining NATO. Her claims are untrue to a hilarious extent, as she proposes that this is all a US / Brussels ploy that these two poor countries are falling for, not decisions made by these two countries themselves. This, incidentally, is one reason why negotiations appear almost entirely futile now: the lies(*) are so outrageous that there is no shared reality.

https://tass.com/world/1440259

 

(*) "We have not attacked Ukraine", etc.

Yesterday Zakharova accused Israel sending mercs to fight along Azov (https://www.timesofisrael.com/moscow-israeli-mercenaries-fighting-with-far-right-ukrainian-unit/), some time earlier she said Ukrainians are faux-nation of meanie poopooheads because they're gatekeeping borscht (beetroot soup popular both in Russia and Ukraine), I'm thinking she, along with Medvedev, is the recipient of those diplomatic mail packages of Colombian cocaine.

As for black magic, mysticism is a thing in Mordor's top circles, been a while. Not unlike how with that other previous Reich. 

There is another interesting thing to observe in speeches of russian officials, chief goblin including -- note how they seldom mention EU and its countries when accusing Ukraine's allies of sanctions or "trying to prevent the military operation from ending" (Peskov, today. Like, no ****, Sherlock). It's almost always "NATO this, USA that". I think there was even an offer from Lavrov in the very beginning of war to the US "to solve this matter between ourselves" or something in that line. I'm curious why. Is it because russia thinks ol' Murica is the only one worthy to address as their equal, wishes sempai would notice her or simply inherited enemy list from sovietistan and just went with it unchanged, because updating it would be above KGB agent's initiative and creativity-deprived mind.  Would also explain why russia acts like China still is its friend. 

[Malcador]

4 minutes ago, bugarup said:

There is another interesting thing to observe in speeches of russian officials, chief goblin including -- note how they seldom mention EU and its countries when accusing Ukraine's allies of sanctions or "trying to prevent the military operation from ending" (Peskov, today. Like, no ****, Sherlock). It's almost always "NATO this, USA that". I think there was even an offer from Lavrov in the very beginning of war to the US "to solve this matter between ourselves" or something in that line. I'm curious why. Is it because russia thinks ol' Murica is the only one worthy to address as their equal, wishes sempai would notice her or simply inherited enemy list from sovietistan and just went with it unchanged, because updating it would be above KGB agent's initiative and creativity-deprived mind.  Would also explain why russia acts like China still is its friend. 

What's so surprising about that ? The US is their chief adversary and the real might in NATO.  Is the EU offended they're not being mentioned ?

[Gorth]

59 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

Btw, if your analysis on the initial strategy is correct, then that begs the question of where it all turned into a genocidal-seeming bloodbath, and how, and why. Doesn't it?

Brutality and atrocities are nothing new in warfare. England tried deliberately to maximize civilian casualties in Germany from 1943 and onwards, I think most of us know how civilians fare in the wars in the Balkans after the break up of Yugoslavia, Spain during the civil war in the 30's, Moroccan troops have been particular savage against the population in West Sahara... sometimes (like the first case), it's deliberate government politics, sometimes it's the men on the ground venting their frustration, anger, fear etc. by turning into monsters and take it all out on the weakest groups they can find. Usually POW's and local civilians. It's not unique, it's not the first time and sadly probably also not the last time armed forces acts this way.

 

Edit: It was my impression during the first 2 days of the war, that Russia actually tried to minise casualties, which made sense if their goal was to incorporate Ukraine into the federation. Only when the military campaign turned out to be a cluster**** and the conscripts took a severe beating did the brutality against the population get turned up to 11

 

Edit2: It seems to always be a consequence in war. Even having a professional army doesn't prevent casual and callous killing of civilians, eventually. It happened in Afghanistan and it happened in Iraq. It's a side effect of what war does to people fighting it. Better trained armies seems to resist the temptation better, but none are immune

[bugarup]

1 minute ago, Malcador said:

What's so surprising about that ? The US is their chief adversary and the real might in NATO.  Is the EU offended they're not being mentioned ?

The EU sanctions them and sends war stuff to Ukraine. 

[BruceVC]

7 minutes ago, Gorth said:

Brutality and atrocities are nothing new in warfare. England tried deliberately to maximize civilian casualties in Germany from 1943 and onwards, I think most of us know how civilians fare in the wars in the Balkans after the break up of Yugoslavia, Spain during the civil war in the 30's, Moroccan troops have been particular savage against the population in West Sahara... sometimes (like the first case), it's deliberate government politics, sometimes it's the men on the ground venting their frustration, anger, fear etc. by turning into monsters and take it all out on the weakest groups they can find. Usually POW's and local civilians. It's not unique, it's not the first time and sadly probably also not the last time armed forces acts this way.

None of that means we should ignore the Geneva Convention and not charge Russia with numerous examples of war crimes. Do you agree Russia should be charged? 

[Gorth]

4 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

None of that means we should ignore the Geneva Convention and not charge Russia with numerous examples of war crimes. Do you agree Russia should be charged? 

What would be the point? Other countries don't give up their troops for prosecution. I doubt Russia will.

 

Sure, you can put on some kind of show to make yourself feel all warm and fuzzy, but in the world of realpoltik, it's a waste of resources. Only losers gets prosecuted and the sentences also carried out

[Malcador]

13 minutes ago, bugarup said:

The EU sanctions them and sends war stuff to Ukraine. 

Also they've set this as a struggle against NATO.  EU isn't a military organization as well, so if the same members are doing the same thing in two different shirts, might as well harp on NATO.

 

[BruceVC]

17 minutes ago, Gorth said:

What would be the point? Other countries don't give up their troops for prosecution. I doubt Russia will.

 

Sure, you can put on some kind of show to make yourself feel all warm and fuzzy, but in the world of realpoltik, it's a waste of resources. Only losers gets prosecuted and the sentences also carried out

Its more symbolic and people do give up their troops accused of war crimes, it happens in Africa. Remember Charles Taylor and also war criminals in countries like Croatia and Serbia were sent to the Hague to be prosecuted 

But part of me wants to agree with you, it would make things much easier when the West is involved in conflicts in places like the  ME and Afghanistan to throw the Geneva Convention out the window in some cases 

But it will set a very bad  global precedent for other wars so its probably not a good idea 

[kanisatha]

5 hours ago, Mamoulian War said:

Answer to both of you, there are rumours about Israel willing to offer Ukraine their Iron Dome, especially now after Lavrov went full anti-semitic. I have absolutely no clue how that might be plausible, so I am just posting it here as one of the theoretical options here.

Yes definitely one of the better options. And Isreal has now lifted its earlier block on Baltic states and other NATO states transferring Israeli military hardware to Ukraine, which is what prompted the latest crazy out of Lavrov that Israel was helping neo-nazis in Ukraine. I'm still holding out hope that the US will transfer Patriot to Ukraine. It's been the Administration's pattern thus far to initially wring their hands and whine about something but then eventually cave to pressure and change their mind.

[kanisatha]

Latest on Finland, Sweden, and NATO (including that it could all be finalized within two weeks):

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/finland-sweden-could-deepen-military-cooperation-if-situation-worsens-2022-04-29/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/annakaplan/2022/04/28/nato-could-provide-arrangements-for-sweden-and-finland-during-membership-process-secretary-general-says/?sh=30620df77e11

https://www.newsweek.com/sweden-finland-nato-membership-two-weeks-russia-ukraine-invasion-1703349