Russia v Ukraine

[Gnasher]

3 hours ago, SasaS said:

What would you say needs to happen in order for these objectives to be achieved?

I'd rather leave that to the people who have lived and worked in the old USSR or have a deep understanding of the subject tbh. People like the British general in the above link, plus people like Henry Kissinger, Peter Hitchins, Mark Ames, etc 

 

Or should we listen to a fella on a football message board who who once did a few weekends in the territorial army and is guarding a few bobs worth of shares in an arms firm?

 

 

Ask this fella, he obviously knows more than us,

 

 

 

Sorry but Hitchens is right, he's a mad right wing crank but he's spot on.. we are going to end up fucked.

 

 

 

 

[TheHowieLama]

Nasher's source now reporting Ukraine has taken back 4 previously occupied villages.

 

This isn't over yet lads.

[SasaS]

1 hour ago, Gnasher said:

I'd rather leave that to the people who have lived and worked in the old USSR or have a deep understanding of the subject tbh. People like the British general in the above link, plus people like Henry Kissinger, Peter Hitchins, Mark Ames, etc 

 

Or should we listen to a fella on a football message board who who once did a few weekends in the territorial army and is guarding a few bobs worth of shares in an arms firm?

 

 

Ask this fella, he obviously knows more than us,

 

 

 

Sorry but Hitchens is right, he's a mad right wing crank but he's spot on.. we are going to end up fucked.

 

 

 

 

The problem is, they don't offer anything of any substance either.

 

 

 

 

[TheHowieLama]

When in doubt, call in the Deep State.

[Colonel Bumcunt]

2 hours ago, Gnasher said:

I'd rather leave that to the people who have lived and worked in the old USSR or have a deep understanding of the subject tbh. People like the British general in the above link, plus people like Henry Kissinger, Peter Hitchins, Mark Ames, etc 

 

Or should we listen to a fella on a football message board who who once did a few weekends in the territorial army and is guarding a few bobs worth of shares in an arms firm?

 

 

Ask this fella, he obviously knows more than us,

 

 

 

Sorry but Hitchens is right, he's a mad right wing crank but he's spot on.. we are going to end up fucked.

 

 

 

 

Is the truth. 

This war is nonsense, nobody is actually helping Ukraine is any meaningful way and Russia are just stood on their throats but their patience for a 'civil' resolution is running out.  When they eventually press down hard enough we won't lift a finger. 

 

[Gnasher]

8 hours ago, SasaS said:

The problem is, they don't offer anything of any substance either.

 

 

 

 

I'd start by offering Putin nothing (or next to nothing)  bar the lifting of 'economic' sanctions if he withdraws, then the nitty gritty will be with the negotiators.

 

Russia will still hold Crimea and sadly they may end up with a small slice of the Donbass. Golden bridge and all that.

[SasaS]

56 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

I'd start by offering Putin nothing (or next to nothing)  bar the lifting of 'economic' sanctions if he withdraws, then the nitty gritty will be with the negotiators.

 

Russia will still hold Crimea and sadly they may end up with a small slice of the Donbass. Golden bridge and all that.

Why would they accept that if the sanctions are not hurting them and they already hold most of the south and more than half of Donbas and still have a tactical initiative in most areas? So they have killed up to a 100,000 Ukrainians, separatist Ukrainians and their own people, displaced 10 million people, caused colossal material damage and turned their country from an unpleasant unpredictable pariah of the West into an actual, realistic threat that has everyone who already isn't there running under NATO's protective umbrella?

 

This is a negotiating position you accept when you are facing even more humiliating defeat or you are waging a war you cannot sustain economically any longer, as a damage limitation move. 

[Gnasher]

33 minutes ago, SasaS said:

Why would they accept that if the sanctions are not hurting them and they already hold most of the south and more than half of Donbas and still have a tactical initiative in most areas?

 

Because its not sustainable. War costs and it'll hurt both Europe and Russia badly in the medium/long term. Unfortunately our (Britain/Germany/Europe) economic situation seems even more perilous than Russia's, although America's economy seems to be holding up. Start negotiating now, they did with the grain. 

 

 

Quote

 

So they have killed up to a 100,000 Ukrainians, separatist Ukrainians and their own people, displaced 10 million people, caused colossal material damage and turned their country from an unpleasant unpredictable pariah of the West into an actual, realistic threat that has everyone who already isn't there running under NATO's protective umbrella?

 

This is a negotiating position you accept when you are facing even more humiliating defeat or you are waging a war you cannot sustain economically any longer, as a damage limitation move. 

 

It is a damage limitation move, we would be ending it sooner because it suits our interests. The alternative could be a long drawn out war where European public opinion wavers as its economy sinks down the plughole. 

[Section_31]

Some estimates the Russians have lost between 60 and 80k troops, insane.

[SasaS]

4 hours ago, Gnasher said:

Because its not sustainable. War costs and it'll hurt both Europe and Russia badly in the medium/long term. Unfortunately our (Britain/Germany/Europe) economic situation seems even more perilous than Russia's, although America's economy seems to be holding up. Start negotiating now, they did with the grain. 

 

 

 

It is a damage limitation move, we would be ending it sooner because it suits our interests. The alternative could be a long drawn out war where European public opinion wavers as its economy sinks down the plughole. 

I don't know of any historic example where an invading force was negotiated away into what is for all intends and purposes a defeat from the position of strength. Until Russia is being seriously pushed back, or its force starts falling apart, there is no way they would be prepared to negotiate anything Ukrainians would now find acceptable, after all the bloodshed, unless the are themselves facing the prospect of a disastrous defeat. And they are not. 

 

 

 

[SasaS]

Tom has an update with what he knows about the (latest) Kherson offensive.

 

https://medium.com/@x_TomCooper_x/ukraine-war-29-august-2022-ukrainian-attacks-in-kherson-oblast-fceb25696613

[cochyn]

On 28/08/2022 at 09:17, Gnasher said:

 

 

https://www.greenleft.org.au/content/ukraine-amid-putins-war-criticism-zelenskys-anti-labour-laws-grow

 

 

 

Reports on the ground (admittedly, from July) paint a slightly different picture:

 

https://www.sibreal.org/a/v-rossii-nachalis-zaderzhki-zarplaty/31941523.html

 

The evidence here may be anecdotal but it's no less credible than the 'hazy' stats currently being bandied about by Rosstat on the kremlin's watch.  Also tallies with the article you posted which stated employees are being put on 'unpaid furlough' (i.e: laid off) en-masse.

 

A more recent analysis projects 'real' decline in Russian GDP of 10-15% by December (backed up by Russia's own central bank):

 

 

Not wildly exciting to anyone hoping for a radical collapse. But enough to demonstrate that Russia's economy is only going one way once coal and oil embargoes take effect in the coming months. 

 

One illuminating stat is the cost of buying a new Lada in Russia; $12500 pre-invasion, $50000 now due to collapse in industrial output. Extrapolate that across Russia's manufacturing economy and things look dire indeed in the medium term.

 

 

Going back to the sibreal link, collapsing consumer confidence will play havoc with any economy (as we are about to find out to a lesser degree soon). Only one person to blame I guess...

 

 

[Section_31]

I reckon the Russian economy is booming in much the same way the North Korean one is. As in, not really, but you'll end up with an anti aircraft gun up your arse if you report the wrong figures.

[Rico1304]

Tick tick boom!

 

 

[Section_31]

Gorbachev dead. An absolute giant of modern history.

[Baltar]

15 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

Gorbachev dead. An absolute giant of modern history.

Gutted. What a man, what a legacy. 

[Harry's Lad]

35 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

Gorbachev dead. An absolute giant of modern history.

 

18 minutes ago, Baltar said:

Gutted. What a man, what a legacy. 

Yes he was. RIP.

[polymerpunkah]

The accidental emancipator, to some degree.

 

But looking at the types of leaders they're capable of producing--now and in the past--it went about as well as anyone could have hoped.

 

RIP

 

[Arniepie]

53 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

Gorbachev dead. An absolute giant of modern history.

I remember when Reagan went, all the obituaries were about how he ended the cold War.

Personally I would have thought Gorbachev deserved that accolade

 

[Gnasher]

13 hours ago, Section_31 said:

I reckon the Russian economy is booming in much the same way the North Korean one is. As in, not really, but you'll end up with an anti aircraft gun up your arse if you report the wrong figures.

I don't think the International Monetary Fund would spin a an optimistic yarn to favour the Russians tbh. I think these economic reports have a fair degree of accuracy. 

 

 

https://english.alarabiya.net/News/2022/07/26/Russian-economy-doing-well-despite-sanctions-IMF

 

Meanwhile;

 

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/aug/31/uk-food-price-inflation-hits-highest-level-since-global-financial-crash

 

 

 

[Gnasher]

 

 

 

[Gnasher]

 

 

 

 

[Gnasher]

16 hours ago, cochyn said:

 

Reports on the ground (admittedly, from July) paint a slightly different picture:

 

https://www.sibreal.org/a/v-rossii-nachalis-zaderzhki-zarplaty/31941523.html

 

The evidence here may be anecdotal but it's no less credible than the 'hazy' stats currently being bandied about by Rosstat on the kremlin's watch.  Also tallies with the article you posted which stated employees are being put on 'unpaid furlough' (i.e: laid off) en-masse.

 

A more recent analysis projects 'real' decline in Russian GDP of 10-15% by December (backed up by Russia's own central bank):

 

 

Not wildly exciting to anyone hoping for a radical collapse. But enough to demonstrate that Russia's economy is only going one way once coal and oil embargoes take effect in the coming months. 

 

One illuminating stat is the cost of buying a new Lada in Russia; $12500 pre-invasion, $50000 now due to collapse in industrial output. Extrapolate that across Russia's manufacturing economy and things look dire indeed in the medium term.

 

 

Going back to the sibreal link, collapsing consumer confidence will play havoc with any economy (as we are about to find out to a lesser degree soon). Only one person to blame I guess...

 

 

The war is obviously going to hit their economy but the effect on Europe's is proving disastrous. Germany are going back to using coal, the world's dirtiest fossil fuel. We have a hosepipe ban and Pakistan are experiencing floods through climate change.

 

But we're sticking it to Putin, so swings and roundabouts,

 

 

It ain't getting better anytime soon. This ex British general has a point, we desperately need to explore other avenues.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Gnasher]

 

It's how he'd want to be remembered.

 

[Section_31]

1 hour ago, Gnasher said:

The war is obviously going to hit their economy but the effect on Europe's is proving disastrous. Germany are going back to using coal, the world's dirtiest fossil fuel. We have a hosepipe ban and Pakistan are experiencing floods through climate change.

 

But we're sticking it to Putin, so swings and roundabouts,

 

 

It ain't getting better anytime soon. This ex British general has a point, we desperately need to explore other avenues.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You make it sound like the West did this through choice. Russia invaded and people fought back. 

 

The Russians have lost something like 60-80k troops and god knows how much equipment. It's alright General Fuckpants saying the Russians can't lose, but that depends how you define a loss.

 

They wanted to occupy Ukraine but they've got about as much change of doing so as I have of getting a blowjob off Tuppence Middleton. 

 

Also, and their biggest loss - is beyond their nuclear threats, nobody's scared of them any more. The baltic states would have been shitting one when they invaded Ukraine, now they're probably not remotely arsed. 

 

It's a smoke and mirrors power, a geoplitical wizard of oz, hiding behind a Soviet era reputation but is in actual fact a 2nd world military.