Ukraine Conflict - "An empire founded by war has to maintain itself by war"

[xzar_monty]

This guy didn't sound particularly impressive when talking about war in the winter in Ukraine (him being an Australian may be a factor), but this is an interesting thread:

 

[Lexx]

Yeah, so about that winter .... we are having up to 22°C today and in 2 days the calender says it's November. Even the warm winters in the last 5 years didn't hold 22°C into late October, or even November.

[xzar_monty]

It's been unusually warm over here, too, but I wouldn't say anything about the winter yet.

The same holds true for the gas question that @Elerondand @BruceVC have spoken about. It may be that Russia's attempt turns out to be an epic failure (to quote Bruce), but we can't say that yet. Let's talk about this in March or April.

[majestic]

Secret footage of the allies' current superweapon:

[Gorgon]

My electric bill is more than last year x3. Heating will be the same.  It's pre paid per quarter though, so if prices tank I'll get money back.  

[Gorgon]

I'm rooting for global warming

[Mamoulian War]

AFU scored a record on 29th of October

 

[xzar_monty]

Russians retreating from the Kherson region. This only "makes sense" if you watch it all the way to the end, which is worth watching IMO. (I hope this doesn't violate any forum policies; in my understanding it doesn't. But if it does, I'll stand corrected and mea culpa and apologies.)

 

EDIT, later: This does not look good. But it is not a surprise, either. These guys are cannon fodder and they know it. They are going to widow many of their wives.

 

Edited October 30, 2022 by xzar_monty

[Mamoulian War]

Anglo-Saxons have published yesterday confirmation of their involvement in weekends Sevastopol incident at Crimea...

 

[Malcador]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/biden-lost-temper-zelenskyy-phone-call-ukraine-aid-rcna54592

Funny imagining how exactly that went down.  Sort of surprised it got reported

Edited October 31, 2022 by Malcador

[kanisatha]

This is an interesting and fascinating read about life in the Russian Army for newly mobilized civs:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/russia-now-has-a-second-frontline-set-up-just-to-kill-its-deserters-intel

[Mamoulian War]

@Darkpriest

https://www.ft.com/content/8c4f9b6f-7770-490e-83e8-3fdd12f7a99f

 

Edited November 1, 2022 by Mamoulian War

[pmp10]

Grain transports leave Odessa in defiance of Russian withdrawal from the deal.
We will see what their reaction is. 

[xzar_monty]

12 minutes ago, pmp10 said:

Grain transports leave Odessa in defiance of Russian withdrawal from the deal.
We will see what their reaction is. 

Indeed, it's going to be interesting to see what it is. I suppose everything is possible.

I am reminded of Medvedev who asserted that anything in Crimea would lead to "instant Armageddon" or something along those lines to the Ukrainians. I am also reminded of Putin who asserted that Sweden and Finland joining NATO would be completely out of the question. But in fact, Russia has done close to nothing. And yes, I know that the word "yet" is relevant.

More than one historian / military strategist / etc. has pointed out that Russia has a history of employing a strategy comparable to pushing a knife into something: as long as it's soft, Russia will push further, but as soon as it comes against something solid and unyielding, Russia will pull back or even retreat. Of course this doesn't always happen, and of course this isn't unique to Russia, nor are meaningless words: I am reminded of that lamentable Obama who insisted that so-and-so would not go unpunished in Syria, but once it happened, Obama courageously did nothing. If ever there was someone unworthy of the Nobel peace prize.

[BruceVC]

 

1 hour ago, Mamoulian War said:

@Darkpriest

https://www.ft.com/content/8c4f9b6f-7770-490e-83e8-3fdd12f7a99f

 

Thats such a good read and excellent news for the EU , here is the same link outside the FT 

https://internationalaffairs.co/the-end-of-europes-energy-crisis-is-in-sight/

Best part of the article 

" It goes without saying that the tumbling cost of gas was neither Putin’s intention nor the consensus expectation when the Russian president weaponised European gas supplies during the summer. At the time, sector specialists expected wholesale prices to shoot higher and industry was worried. The voice of German industry, the BDI, warned of a “massive recession”.

It was economists who came closest to understanding the likely effect of Putin’s energy aggression; people and industries tend to respond to price incentives so they predicted that consumption was likely to fall "

Putin must be seething, his gas blackmail has really failed and created new avenues for the EU to find new markets 

 

 

[xzar_monty]

14 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

Putin must be seething, his gas blackmail has really failed and created new avenues for the EU to find new markets

I still wouldn't call it failed, but let us hope that that is how it ends up.

Another encouraging thing is that once Russia has used this potential energy weapon that it has / had at its disposal, it will never have it again. Other countries will act, too, and not in ways that will please Russia.

[Chilloutman]

Gas and oil prices were keeping Russia floating this summer, I think they have like 30% of GDP from those. It will be interesting what will happen next year if prices really fall and EU stop buying them from Russia

[Zoraptor]

Could well be nothing?

There is not a major increase in supply, though that will potentially come. There is only a major increase in supply to Europe. Europe is getting its 'new' supply mostly by... inducing the breaking of existing contracts with other countries. Indeed, one of the more amusing things is watching Europeans pat themselves on the back and pontificate on their moral superiority over the rules based order and cutting down on reliance on Russia by, well, stealing what they need off others- morally, if not legally. Then of course having the mega hypocrisy of criticising those they've deprived of gas- and this is the kicker, since there's no major increase in supply, only supply to Europe- for going to Russia; and wondering why those countries really don't like them and see them as massive frauds. Euro Response Roulette: Russian bots? Russian disinformation? Hating our freeeeedom? Weeds who want to ruin our Perfect Garden (thanks Borrel, hilarious you said that in the institution Mogherini runs; you're not fit to tie her shoes when it comes to diplomacy). Not really, in this case it's the old "it's legal and necessary as we're doing it, you need to accept that your people just aren't as deserving of energy as Euros".

Energy price deflation happens all the time. It's just a fancy way of saying... prices will drop. I doubt anyone including Russia expects the prices to stay as high constantly as new supply (and new infrastructure carrying it) will be developed/ built. That works both ways though.

As for retaliation to stuff happening in Crimea, the change of focus to hitting energy infrastructure happened directly after the Kerch Bridge attack. Might not exactly be armageddon- at least now, when it's relatively warm- but then hyperbole isn't exactly unknown in military matters.  "Mission Accomplished", Operation 'Enduring' Freedom, etc etc.

Edited November 1, 2022 by Zoraptor

[xzar_monty]

23 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

As for retaliation to stuff happening in Crimea, the change of focus to hitting energy infrastructure happened directly after the Kerch Bridge attack.

There's no question about this one, I agree. However, there were earlier strikes of significance: for example, the one on the Saky airbase was August 9, followed by nothing.

[Zoraptor]

Two factors at work there one suspects. Firstly, a lot of the earlier attacks were designated as being 'accidents', sometimes even when they very obviously weren't. If you deny the attack happened/ say it's an accident then you don't need to retaliate. Secondly, and probably most importantly by far, an airbase and even the port isn't critical infrastructure and is, for want of a better term, a 'legitimate'* military target. The Kerch Bridge is absolutely critical infrastructure, and was near immediately attributed to Ukraine by the Russians -->--> resulting in them switching to targeting Ukraine's critical infrastructure.

I'm always a bit skeptical about translations/ interpretations too, it's surprising (or not?) how often translations are a bit... well, the wording, context and phrasing is chosen to make a more 'attractive' story. Kind of like how 'go to hell' can be literally interpreted as wishing someone not only dead, but for them to suffer eternal torment; but generally it's an expression of (often fairly mild) annoyance. Taking Armageddon (or Judgement Day, as some translated it) literally is great if you want to sell papers/ clicks and are telling people the Russians are imminently going to start throwing nukes about though. You'd hardly expect a Russian politician to say that Crimea was fair game after all, any more than you'd expect a Ukrainian to say anything of theirs is fair game.

*or understandable, or non escalatory, or reciprocal or whatever. Specifically not being used as legitimate in the war crimes sense. Obviously they are legitimate in that sense, but then so is everything dual use including the bridge and electrical/ power infrastructure and this is a motive/ response explanation.

[Mamoulian War]

The "funny" thing is, that the retaliation was planned well before Kerch Bridge incident. As soon as October 1/2, when Surovikin was appointed as the commander, as a show to appease the military bloggers and their ultranationalist followers/sponsors... Kerch Bridge was just a scapegoat. And it is as much possible, that it was not Ukraine, as it is possible that it was Ukraine, who did it

Edited November 1, 2022 by Mamoulian War

[Zoraptor]

lol no. It was 100% Ukraine that did it and many of the sources for that are sources you'd otherwise take as gospel- like UPravda and UNIAN. Then of course there was Kuleba admitting to it in a prank call; and that's without getting into the litany of anonymously sourced western articles. If it was intended as a 'justification' by Russia they'd have picked something of a lot less strategic importance.

The only credible efforts so far as disputation goes is trying to avoid it being a suicide/ homicide bomb that was used- and those often aren't very credible at all per the BBC's "maybe it was a remote control boat [with, uh, 65kg payload, lest we forget]?". Which was either monumental stupidity or active misinformation- as an aside, absolutely hilarious that that obviously and ludicrously incorrect claim makes it onto wikipedia because it comes from a 'credible' source, but that's wikipedia for you.

The targeting switch was almost certainly planned right from the outset and before even that. Indeed, they will also have a plan for targeting just about everyone's infrastructure- and targets for nukes for that matter. That's the nature of planning. They don't really need a justification for it and as above even if they did the Kerch Bridge is an awful choice.

Edited November 1, 2022 by Zoraptor

[BruceVC]

8 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

Could well be nothing?

There is not a major increase in supply, though that will potentially come. There is only a major increase in supply to Europe. Europe is getting its 'new' supply mostly by... inducing the breaking of existing contracts with other countries. Indeed, one of the more amusing things is watching Europeans pat themselves on the back and pontificate on their moral superiority over the rules based order and cutting down on reliance on Russia by, well, stealing what they need off others- morally, if not legally. Then of course having the mega hypocrisy of criticising those they've deprived of gas- and this is the kicker, since there's no major increase in supply, only supply to Europe- for going to Russia; and wondering why those countries really don't like them and see them as massive frauds. Euro Response Roulette: Russian bots? Russian disinformation? Hating our freeeeedom? Weeds who want to ruin our Perfect Garden (thanks Borrel, hilarious you said that in the institution Mogherini runs; you're not fit to tie her shoes when it comes to diplomacy). Not really, in this case it's the old "it's legal and necessary as we're doing it, you need to accept that your people just aren't as deserving of energy as Euros".

Energy price deflation happens all the time. It's just a fancy way of saying... prices will drop. I doubt anyone including Russia expects the prices to stay as high constantly as new supply (and new infrastructure carrying it) will be developed/ built. That works both ways though.

As for retaliation to stuff happening in Crimea, the change of focus to hitting energy infrastructure happened directly after the Kerch Bridge attack. Might not exactly be armageddon- at least now, when it's relatively warm- but then hyperbole isn't exactly unknown in military matters.  "Mission Accomplished", Operation 'Enduring' Freedom, etc etc.

Who has been impacted by the EU being responsible for " breaking" current contracts? Which countries and do you have  links 

And why do you sound so mad, we dont hear  from you for  ages and then when the EU has avoided its " Western sanctions are going to mean the EU will freeze to death " Russian prediction you start posting again but you seem really mad ?

You even playing  the "Europeans pat themselves on the back and pontificate on their moral superiority over the rules based order " card

Russia threw the rules based order out the window, now the West is forced to respond. I am glad you angry but your anger and criticism needs to be directed towards the right target, Putins War 

 

[BruceVC]

5 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

lol no. It was 100% Ukraine that did it and many of the sources for that are sources you'd otherwise take as gospel- like UPravda and UNIAN. Then of course there was Kuleba admitting to it in a prank call; and that's without getting into the litany of anonymously sourced western articles. If it was intended as a 'justification' by Russia they'd have picked something of a lot less strategic importance.

The only credible efforts so far as disputation goes is trying to avoid it being a suicide/ homicide bomb that was used- and those often aren't very credible at all per the BBC's "maybe it was a remote control boat [with, uh, 65kg payload, lest we forget]?". Which was either monumental stupidity or active misinformation- as an aside, absolutely hilarious that that obviously and ludicrously incorrect claim makes it onto wikipedia because it comes from a 'credible' source, but that's wikipedia for you.

The targeting switch was almost certainly planned right from the outset and before even that. Indeed, they will also have a plan for targeting just about everyone's infrastructure- and targets for nukes for that matter. That's the nature of planning. They don't really need a justification for it and as above even if they did the Kerch Bridge is an awful choice.

But what do you think about the constant targeting of Ukrainian energy infrastructure that also  directly impacts hundreds of thousands of civilians , arent you outraged?

[Zoraptor]

I'm exactly as outraged as you were when it was Iraqi and Serbian infrastructure on the receiving end, Brucykins.

Though asking for a cite for the natural gas stuff is fair enough.

Quote

 

Pakistan has signed contracts with trading companies which may not necessarily produce the LNG themselves. The contracts often include break clauses, meaning the suppliers can sell the LNG to other markets if they wish at short notice. They must pay a penalty in that case.

However, soaring LNG prices elsewhere mean they can easily pay the penalty and still make substantial profits by selling in the more profitable market.

 

Zero guesses as to what the 'more profitable market' is.