Putin is never going to sue for peace
Putin is never going to honestly sue for peace. He may do so if he sees an advantage, for example to rebuild his forces and divide Ukraine's supporters.
I don't think Ukraine will fall for such a ploy. They know the reliability of Russia's guarantees and the consequences of trusting Russia in the past.
Putin is never going to honestly sue for peace
Indeed. It needs some special skills or an insider coup.
why havent they finished off the bridge into crimea? they showed they have the capability to damage it, why not keep hitting it and disrupting supplies? Wouldn't it make life a lot harder for RU if it was down / damaged again?
nor do I think western support will falter significantly if the war isn't concluded in 2023
I think it won't collapse quickly but it will get progressively harder to sustain and, politics being what it is, unscrupulous opposition parties will use it to create pain for governments, you have long time Putin-fan Silvio Belusconni making his comeback in Italy and more worryingly, an increasingly pro-Russian lean on the right wing of the GOP, a Trump or Desantis Whitehouse would be catastrophic for Ukraine.
A failed assault accompanied by gleeful Russian videos of burning Bradleys and Leopards would accelerate this slide considerably.
The longer this war goes on the more troops on the front lines will dig in a deepen their defenses, encouraging a grim war of attrition that favors Russia and the harder it becomes to break through and return to the kind of rapid maneuver warfare Ukraine have proven themselves to be highly adept at.
There are a few paths to Ukrainian victory but by far the clearest is a successful Spring offensive this year.
why havent they finished off the bridge into crimea?
I have a sneaky suspicion that rather than allow time to repair it, it may be better to take it out as part of The Big Push. You do want to give the Russians opportunity to run away...
Also, much discussion on here about how hard it is to take out a bridge like that properly a few months ago IIRC.
You do want to give the Russians opportunity to run away…
This.
why havent they finished off the bridge into crimea?
What Matt says about leaving an intact avenue for retreat to encourage Russian troops to run should Ukraine advance into Crimea seems on the money to me.
I also believe that, whilst the bridge's road surface has been patched up, the rail line is still non operational and since Russian military logistics are almost entirely rail-dependent it's still effectively out of action from that standpoint.
The repair to the rail section is apparently currently under way and should be done by July, which means that the Ukrainians have a few months left to plot precisely how they intend to roger it this time around.
I suspect the UA will form up small, well equipped battlegroups. 4 or 6 tanks, same number of Bradley / Humvee plus associated infantry backed with artillery
Then do a number of smaller attacks to try to stretch the numbers of capable RA assets over a long front line. Then when one attack makes and holds a decent pocket, push reserves into those areas, whilst still maintaining sparodic probing manoeuvres elsewhere, so if the RA move numbers up to stop any further advances, they have less elsewhere.
But it wont happen for a month as you need firm ground to enable vehicles to move off roads at sensible speed without the fear of getting stuck. Plus it is impossible to mine every feild, whereas roads and tracks are easy to defend
DT78
Free Memberwhy havent they finished off the bridge into crimea? they showed they have the capability to damage it, why not keep hitting it and disrupting supplies? Wouldn’t it make life a lot harder for RU if it was down / damaged again?
There's a few likely explanations, one is that they showed they can damage it but we don't know how easily they can repeat it (or exceed it, which is really what's needed). So it might just be capability. Equally, it might be the other way and they're now content that they can close it pretty much at will, in which case doing it now might be a wasted opportunity, while doing it at a really critical time could have a massive effect.
I'm pretty sure that it's too hard to blow up the bridge, otherwise they'd be doing it on a regular basis
This official MOD video is a good insight into the training the Ukrainian Challenger 2 crews are getting. Professionally delivered, high quality training, highly motivated (and in some cases battle hardened) students and top class equipment. These guys are going to be a Russian nightmare when they are let off the leash.
I know there aren't many of them, but they'll be punching well above their weight and together with the Leopards, Bradleys and other Western AFVs they will have a massive effect come the UA offensive.
The tanks are slowly arriving- but the numbers are pitiful 🤷♂️
I’m pretty sure that it’s too hard to blow up the bridge, otherwise they’d be doing it on a regular basis
I guess so, and also as mentioned above, its the rail part of the bridge thats more strategically important and leave the road semi-operational for people who want to flee back to russia.
They can always take a pot-shot at it again if they rebuild the rail link, it doesnt take much to knacker a rail track as opposed to taking the whole bridge out.
The tanks are slowly arriving- but the numbers are pitiful
I *think*
- they were designed about quality over quantity on the battlefield. They can shoot further, in all conditions, 'see' at night, move faster, further and much much better armour and survivability.
- if you add up the numbers, they do come to a good few. If deployed well, with the multiple other supplied vehicles and infantry support, it's going to ruin more than a few Russians day.
- there's not a huge distance between front line and south coast or Russian border. I think there's going to be a lot of moving around at speed, making use of the longer range artillery and rockets (etc), while trying to move so quickly the Russians start running and cannot sit down until they have sand/mud flats underfoot.
Yeah, they are western approach- few, high quality, survivable, very expensive, hard to use well, and have to be used well to be worth using.
The main problem with that is when you just don't have enough to actually get them in the right place. When they are in the right place, they can do the impossible pretty much. It's not necessarily better or worse but ukraine does have a really good track record of fighting where they want to, so it should suit them. They'd be close to useless for defending the entire front against a clever enemy, because you'd just avoid them. And that's a real shortcoming, but it shouldn't really apply here
It's kind of the T34 vs panther nerdfest, except with the high quality tank done right and supported right.
I wonder what the psychological effect of the Western tanks will be on the Russian tank crews and force?
The Russian tank crews don't live in a vacuum and they've seen the damage western weapons have inflicted so far. It's going to be bloody uncomfortable being in a Russian T series tank and knowing that even if you score a bit on a Challenger/ Leopard it likey won't immobilise it and its likely to illicit a devastating response from the other tank.
Add in the longer range, accuracy and far better night abilities of the Western tanks and it'll be terrifying to be sat in an old T72 or whatever.
I wonder what the psychological effect of the Western tanks will be on the Russian tank crews and force?
They're clearly not wanting to experience the depleted uranium rounds...
I know from what I've read on here and other sites that the western MBT's are far superior in every way. Better armaments, better speed, longer range etc etc. But god forbid one was hit by a round fired from a Russian T72, what would the likely damage be? By all reports the Challengers and Leopards have great protection, but what would be the effects on the guys inside. I assume not killed, but badly injured? Too disabled to continue fighting, or would the tank and occupants just shrug it off and continue?
The Bradley IFV with 25mm chain gun destroyed T55s in Iraq with a tungsten round. Russian crews will know this and the thought of a western MBT with 120mm gun will be a little concerning 🙂
Too disabled to continue fighting, or would the tank and occupants just shrug it off and continue?
It'd probably keep going. A Challenger 2 was hit by 14 RPGs and an anti-tank guided missile; the optics were damaged so the driver got stuck in a ditch but they were able to sit tight and wait for recovery. Nobody was hurt and the tank was repaired within a few hours
A Russian RPG 29 has penetrated the front of a Challenger 2, causing injuries, but that was 15 years ago and improvements will have been made. Equally the RPG 29 has been superceded by the by the RPG 30 and 32 but none have a range of more than a few hundred metres
There are something like 2000 Leopards in Europe. How many are Ukraine getting, less than 100? Germany is sending 18, its pitiful.
There are something like 2000 Leopards in Europe. How many are Ukraine getting, less than 100? Germany is sending 18, its pitiful.
It does seem like a low number to my eyes, but I'm no expert and I imagine the tank operators needs proper training, and also have the logistics to back them up in terms of ammo, fuel, repairs/servicing, medics, and other supporting millitary personel... it's not just a case of sending 2000 tanks to the front lines.
It needs to be a well thought out, backed up by logistics/supply chain , operation, otherwise you'd just be sending tanks in to get blown up.
I saw an interesting documentary where a Ukranian tank commander was showing the journalist around his battered old T-64. It had suffered two close artillery strikes, both of which had caused concussion for the crew and damaged the tank.
The era on the front had detonated and was yet to be replaced but the crew had bodged some hand made era for the side panels. There was also a hole in the barrel and they were waiting for nightfall to pull the tank out and get it repaired, it looked like something out of a Mad Max movie.
The most interesting thing was when he pointed out the ballistics / optics computer, which he said "cost a million". Probably multiple times the value of the tank itself.
I've heard that the modern mbt's that are being supplied could be based in the North, warding off any potential attacks from Belarus and freeing up the old Soviet era tanks currently guarding that border.
Old tanks with big guns but with modern optics can still be effective, especially when probably less than one percent of shells fired from tanks are aimed at other tanks.
It wouldn't surprise me if the new tanks don't see much action, but are deployed as a deterrent in the North and as a defensive reserve around Kyiv.
futonrivercrossing
Free Member
There are something like 2000 Leopards in Europe. How many are Ukraine getting, less than 100? Germany is sending 18, its pitiful.
I'm not disagreeing at all, but is there some (justifiable??) concern about a large number of western MBTs falling into Russian hands?
I’m not disagreeing at all, but is there some (justifiable??) concern about a large number of western MBTs falling into Russian hands?
Challenger 2, Leopard, etc are old tech now, although they will have systems that are of interest to Russia. More MBTs will mean that mutual support is better and this might reduce the risk of capture
Russia has bought western military tech, e.g. French sights have been found in Russian tanks captured by Ukraine and while this export market has been closed by recent sanctions the EU is now looking to close sanctions bypassing https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/eu-keeps-doing-business-with-russia-despite-sanctions-2023-03-29/
UK is already building Challenger 3 but MBTs are something that we only have because everyone else has them; the MBTs primary role is to fight other MBTs. Ukraine is only Challenger 2's second war outing, Iraq 2003 was the first and they weren't used in Afghanistan (they didn't have MBTs)
Western MBTs were taken to Afghanistan but primarily used for their sensors (optical, etc) and comms abilities
Iraq 2003 was the first
And that would have been against Russian/Soviet tanks. I think that went quite well from memory.
The C2 was deployed to Kosovo. Although not as kinetic as Iraq it was very quickly noted back then how reliable and maintenance friendly it was. An ex colleague was amazed at how little things went wrong with them. Although relatively new at the time, the trend continued through into Iraq.
As for the C2 that was immobile and received multiple hits in Basra, an ex room mate of mine was in charge of the recovery that day and received the CGC. I "think" it was that incident that resulted in plastic explosive demolitions being reintroduced (costcutting) into the recovery mechanice syllabus as the C2's track was jammed and it had to be cut with a blow torch.
Once it was recovered it was swarmed over by the mechanics and techs and pretty much the only things needing replaced were the optics, which can be swapped out relatively quickly.
I never worked on C2 but it's very highly thought of by the crew's and A mechs.
@cobrakai , your anecdotes are way more interesting than my armchair account 👍
Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo were intended as peace keeping missions, but that doesn't mean that it was peaceful 🙂
And that would have been against Russian/Soviet tanks. I think that went quite well from memory.
A better indication of the vunribility of Russian equipment can be gained from the conflicts in Israel, specifically the Six Day and Yom Kipur wars. Arab forces used then Soviet tanks, Israel were equipped with amongst other things the British Centurion with its 105mm gun.
Two things stand out that can be directly compared to the war in Ukraine. Small numbers of trained and highly motivated troops with more capable equipment can withstand a far greater force. The Centurions were a game changer, the Challenger 2 is a direct descendent of that tank and has the potential to make a big impact. The Leopards are just along for the ride.
Anyone want to open a sweepstake on how long it’ll be before one/both of these have an unfortunate interface with an open window?
Joking aside though, evidence of how those who are assumed to be supporting Putin (and being sanctioned because of it) really feel about him and his cabal.
I reckon Vlad must be getting even more paranoid than he already is..
Some great info on the Challenger 2 tanks on this thread, thanks! Did a bit of extra reading and Wiki states that the C2 uses a mix of metric nuts & bolts for the turret, but imperial standards for the main chassis! Is that correct?
Western MBTs were taken to Afghanistan but primarily used for their sensors (optical, etc) and comms abilities
The Danes used the Leopard 2 as a very effective fire support element. Also really good at opening doors and compound walls when needed.
The Leopards are just along for the ride.
We're you wearing your Union Flag pants as you typed that?
inkster Free Member
Old tanks with big guns but with modern optics can still be effective, especially when probably less than one percent of shells fired from tanks are aimed at other tanks.
Nicholas Moran, AKA The Chieftain on YouTube, a tank historian and a US Army cavalry officer, has expressed the opinion that the best upgrade for older tanks is fitting thermal imaging equipment to them. In his opinion a T-62 with a thermal imager would be a more useful tank in Ukraine than a T-72 without one.
Don't want to knock these sorts, but it's not a new concept. The ability to find, fix and destroy your enemy without them being able to reciprocate via tech (which can be low or high) and tactics is the essence of warfare.
We’re you wearing your Union Flag pants as you typed that?
Nah always goes commando?
Pauly
Full Member
Some great info on the Challenger 2 tanks on this thread, thanks! Did a bit of extra reading and Wiki states that the C2 uses a mix of metric nuts & bolts for the turret, but imperial standards for the main chassis! Is that correct?
The C2 was basically an upgrade of C1. The main body of the tank had a lot in common with C1, (apparently 90% commonality) hence the imperial sizes as it was an older design, but the turret was a complete redesign with a mix of old kit (radios etc) and new kit (sights etc) so very possibly there would be a mix between imperial and metric. As I said, never worked on it. Our tool boxes had both metric and imperial tools. 13mm/0.5inch spanners/socket were like golddust.......
The Bradley IFV with 25mm chain gun destroyed T55s in Iraq with a tungsten round.
It's not the chain gun that will have Russian tankers worried, its the TOW missiles most Bradleys carry, they're terrifyingly effective tank killers.
It’s not the chain gun that will have Russian tankers worried, its the TOW missiles most Bradleys carry, they’re terrifyingly effective tank killers.
Especially if it's the wire-less version!
@cobrakai when I was a civi REME fitter back in the early 80s our tool boxes were a mixture of AF and Whitworth. You had to borrow from stores on the rare occasion that new fangled metric was needed.
This guy makes a reasonable speculation for what the T54/55s might be used for, which is to be dug in for a defensive position
The T-34 wasn’t an particularly brilliant tank, even in 1942.
True, but by the time the German army had managed to get well into Russia, their supply-lines were already being stretched to the limits, winter was causing all sorts of issues that the Russians were well used to, and they were turning out large numbers of tanks crewed by the teams that built them, including women. They were also being used in urban warfare as well, which the Germans weren’t used to doing, their tanks tended to be bigger and less manoeuvrable in urban warfare.
Fireflys would terrify the Russians, basically a Sherman with a 17pdr gun fitted, they were small and light enough for forest fighting, but could punch a hole through a Tiger. The barrel was counter-shaded at the end to look like it still had the little short barrel of the standard Sherman.
I think the Israelis were using them, maybe they’ve got a few kicking around they could send the Ukrainians.
It’s not the chain gun that will have Russian tankers worried, its the TOW missiles most Bradleys carry, they’re terrifyingly effective tank killers.
The Bradley only carries two TOW missiles, the 25mm chain gun is designed as a tank killer:
The M2/M3's primary armament is a 25 mm chain gun using either 100 or 300 rounds per minute, accurate to 3,000 m (approximately two miles). It is armed with a TOW missile<sup id="cite_ref-4" class="reference">[a]</sup> launcher capable of carrying two loaded missiles. The missiles, capable of destroying most tanks to a maximum range of 4,000 metres (13,000 ft), can only be fired while the vehicle is stationary. The Bradley carries a coaxial 7.62 mm medium machine gun to the right of the 25 mm chain gun.
A flock of AC130J Ghostrider gunships would be handy at night:
Armament: Precision Strike Package with 30mm and 105mm cannons and Standoff Precision Guided Munitions (i.e. GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb, GBU-69 Small Glide Munition, AGM-114 Hellfire missile and AGM-176 Griffin missile)
A flock of AC130J Ghostrider gunships would be handy at night:
Chances of that...
Shadow callsigns are hard to come by and reserved for use by a select group of troops.
A flock of AC130J Ghostrider gunships would be
handy at night:extremely vulnerable to modern air defences.
FTFY.
The internet fantasies about sending squadrons of A10s or AC130s are just fantasies. They would not survive long against Russian air defences.
Word, but there aren't many people that can publicly comment on the effectiveness of the countermeasures on most NATO aircraft, it's quite rightly secret, so conjecture is on both sides.
The Taliban however snagged a Spectre in Afghanistan, hence the night only operations since then.
Like I said, they only get used by a very specific group of units/TF's and controllers.
The internet fapping over this conflict never loses its rhythm.
Dug in tanks are are just sitting ducks for GPS artillery and drone attacks 🤷♂️
Aye, I can't remember our doctrine for establishing fixed positions, I'm sure I can get some out of date stuff from my uncle (He was CR1 Commander GW1 and Squadron Commander GW2, left as deputy chief of staff Royal Armoured Corps. He might know a little something about armoured doctrine.)
What I do know is it requires heavy engineer support (my old man was an Armoured Engineer) effective use of cam and thermal screens, but as you say drones have flipped this on its head and are a real game changer.
The old man was talking the other night about back in the 90's they experimented with massive drive in dugouts with overhead cover for tanks, but the work required needed a massive security presence for the engineers or they were established in positions that the enemy would advance to. They stuck to hasty dugouts utilising Trojans or the good old woods and forests.
Mobility is what keeps tanks alive, that and superior optics and range.
In the history of absurd, this is up there as really, properly absurd.
Some light relief
https://twitter.com/FCDOGovUK/status/1641852678106906630?t=pJaHlv1Yj-DBo0rxYSuxMw&s=19
Very good 👏👏👏
They should really let the Canadians join AUKUS too...
CAKUS?
Ha!, nice cafe, shame if anything happened to it
A proper Von Stauffenbergski moment.
He's all over twitter at thee moment... and some tables, doors, chairs....
To avoid confusion in other reports, Vladlen Tatarsky aka Maksim Fomin.
The owner of the bombed cafe and Wagner PMC leader Yevgeny Prigozhin "oddly stated on April 2 that he would not “blame the Kyiv regime” for the deaths of Fomin and Russian ultranationalist figure Daria Dugina, suggesting that Ukrainian agents were not in fact responsible." https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-april-2-2023
This fits the Ukrainian Government statement by Mykhailo Podolyak who "blamed the blast on a Russian "internal political fight", tweeting: "Spiders are eating each other in a jar."" BBC^^
Excellent article on the Cuban missile crisis.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/cuba/missile-crisis-secret-history-soviet-union-russia-ukraine-lessons
Terrified by those developments, Khrushchev understood at last that his reckless gamble had failed and ordered a retreat. Kennedy, too, opted for a compromise. In the end, neither leader proved willing to test the other’s redlines, probably because they did not know where exactly those redlines lay. Khrushchev’s hubris and resentment led him to the worst misadventure of his political career. But his—and Kennedy’s—caution led to a negotiated solution.
Their prudence holds lessons for today, when so many commentators in Russia and in the West are calling for a resolute victory of one side or the other in Ukraine. Some Americans and Europeans assume that the use of nuclear weapons in the current crisis is completely out of the question and thus that the West can safely push the Kremlin into the corner by obtaining a comprehensive victory for Ukraine. But plenty of people in Russia, especially around Putin and among his propagandists, defiantly say that there would be “no world without Russia,” meaning that Moscow should prefer a nuclear Armageddon to defeat.
If such voices had prevailed in 1962, we’d all be dead now.
Loosing in Ukraine won't somehow eliminate Russia will it 🤷♂️
The West has already self deterred itself because of Putins nuclear posturing. Our approach seems to be a gradualist one. A few tanks here, a few tanks there, some Bradley’s etc. no jets, no fly zones or long range missiles.
Yep. And there's a real issue there in that the truth doesn't really matter. There's no existential threat to Russia from the west, not militarily. The threats are economic, technological, societal and demographic and they've all been made much worse by the war, not better- there's nothing at all that they can do militarily to fix any of those issues. But the only military threat to "Russia" is when they're in someone else's country. The west is absolutely delighted to just sit back and grow and develop and shag russia into irrelevance.
The only people who doubt that, unfortunately, are Russians. Some russians who are crazy, some russians who are paranoid, some that are reliving past crises, some that realise that they've already lost the economic and demographic wars badly enough that they just can't get back into the game without spectacular changes and so are looking for distractions or excuses, some that are desperate and lots- oh god really lots- that have just been misinformed for decades.
None of that's necessarily incompatible with the reality but it makes it far harder to cut through to it. The actual threat to Russia is when everyone's old and poor and their only way out is to open up to foreign powers and end up owned by China and Amazon. And barring massive worldwide changes, that's pretty much inevitable within a generation or two.
Loosing in Ukraine won’t somehow eliminate Russia will it
No of course not but it's a rhetoric that is well received in some quarters in Russia. Putin's special operation was framed as Russia defending itself against Western (NATO) expansionism. Of course the outcome has been NATO expanionism. Finland joins tomorrow.
Putin’s special operation was framed as Russia defending itself against Western (NATO) expansionism. Of course the outcome has been NATO expanionism. Finland joins tomorrow.
Yes, it explains why President Putin looked like the junior partner when he and President Xi met last month, especially if you remember back to the Beijing Winter Olympics in early February 2022 and their joint declaration:
They opposed AUKUS; New Zealand has now expressed interest in a non-nuclear membership capacity
They opposed NATO expansion; see Finland ^^ and Sweden if they can sort out their Kurdish issue with Turkey
They opposed the US building conventional precision-strike weapons in high volume; see new contracts for Boeing-Saab GLSDB and production of various guided MLRS rockets will double because of the invasion of Ukraine (HIMARS, German MARS, UK M270, etc)
The only thing that has come true is Russia supplying China with oil and gas, the volume will be high but, because of sanctions, the price won't be.
The invasion of Ukraine isn't looking too good for Russia with a lack of "no limits" support from China. Russia has managed to wind western military partnerships and manufacturing up rather than down and China will be keen that Russia doesn't escalate matters more than it already has
Don't mention the war (on Twitter): https://gizmodo.com/twitter-musk-ukraine-crisis-open-source-code-russia-1850293386
Pootin, baby, how is that 3-day special operation going to secure more land for Russia and weaken NATO?
"Nato's border with Russia doubles as Finland joins"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65173043
Pootin, baby, how is that 3-day special operation going to secure more land for Russia and weaken NATO?
“Nato’s border with Russia doubles as Finland joins”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65173043/blockquote >
Feels like history is repeating itself etc with one empire replacing another. (248 years since the American Revolution/War of Independence)
Finland seem confident that Russia threat to militarise the new border with NATO isn’t so scary on the basis they don’t have the military material to do it effectively.
Does this push Putin over the edge to do something stupid, or does this push Putin over a window ledge? Does he feel stronger with the Saudi support…. Or not?
Finland seem confident that Russia threat to militarise the new border with NATO isn’t so scary on the basis they don’t have the military material to do it effectively.
Nothing will happen. Russia is not interested in Finland unless Finland starts arming themselves with missiles pointing to/at Russia. Finland has nothing the world desire apart from being a strategy staging post for NATO. Ukraine on the other hand is rich with resources.
However, this cannot be said of NATO because their strategy of encirclement has always been the top priority (slowly, slowly catchy monkey). NATO needs an excuse to expand and the war in Ukraine is a good way to expand. i.e. when there is risk, there is opportunity (for America/NATO of course).
Finns are just spooked into joining by NATO.
Does this push Putin over the edge to do something stupid, or does this push Putin over a window ledge? Does he feel stronger with the Saudi support…. Or not?
With the production of oil cut by 1.5 million barrels a day, I am afraid it will be a slow grind and eventually it will hurt. When the inflation (yes, caused by shortage of energy mostly) hit the roof, people go hungry then we shall see how many govts will be able to dig deep into their reserve.
Finns are just spooked into joining by
NATORussia.
FTFY
Russia is not interested in Finland unless Finland starts arming themselves with missiles pointing to/at Russia.
So why have they invaded them twice?
FTFY
LOL! NATO spooks them more.
So why have they invaded them twice?
Long history due to being former colony I guess. You know Russian Empire and that sort of things?
But now it's the turn of American empire.
p/s: Crikey, £8 to £9 for a portion of street food! Well, if inflation continues, which I see will, soon most restaurants will not survive. We will all be slaves to the system/govt.
Be interesting to see how putin sells Finish accession to NATO to his domestic audience
Its a huge policy failure for him, one of the reasons for his war that was meant to last 3 days, was to lessen the influence of NATO in the region
hes managed to achieve exactly the opposite of that, he still has a tight grip on power in Russia, but the oligarchs are not happy at what hes done to the economy
https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1640036537436889088
Long history due to being former colony I guess
When Russia invaded Finland in 1939 the performance of the numerically superior Red Army was so poor (sound familiar?) that Adolph Hitler decided to invade Russia
It would be karma if Russia experienced the ignominy of China regaining the territory that it lost to Russia in the late 1850s (the history is longer than that) and left Taiwan on the back burner.
Vladivostock was formerly Chinese (Hai Shen Wai) and the dispute wasn't properly sorted out until 2005. Chinese media still calls for the inequality to be rectified
China has been colonizing Eastern Russia for quite some time, there has been a lot of migration from China and they have set up a lot of businesses there as well IIRC. They are occupying by stealth.
Interestingly, when Lenningrad was under siege from the Germans, the Fins didn't press home the advantage to the North of the city, even though they were at war with Russia at the time.
This inaction by the Fins saved the city from falling to the Nazi's and demonstrates the Fins ambiguous relationship with them.
Apparently, as a thank ypu for not attacking, Stalin left Finland alone after that (If you can believe Stalin ever had a heart...).
Finns are just spooked into joining by NATO.
And yet both them and the Swedes avoided being spooked for years.
It was only after the second invasion of Ukraine and attempt to seize the entire country that for some odd reason the popular mood in those two countries came down strongly on the lets join Nato viewpoint.
Yup, The non-NATO scandis had no intention of joining NATO until this latest russian threat (the threat being russia are activley invading and trying to conquer countries on thier boarders).
Strange, that.
Interestingly, when Lenningrad was under siege from the Germans, the Fins didn’t press home the advantage to the North of the city, even though they were at war with Russia at the time
I'd guess that was to do with the Finnish position. They didn't want to be associated with Nazi Germany; it was more a case of the enemy of my enemy is my friend in regaining Finnish territory rather than advancing into Russia
Be interesting to see how putin sells Finish accession to NATO to his domestic audience
Nothing he can do about it now but just to tell the audience NATO has expanded to their door step. The reality has come true.
Its a huge policy failure for him, one of the reasons for his war that was meant to last 3 days, was to lessen the influence of NATO in the region
While Russia has been busy trying to manage and to improve their economy standing, NATO (Murica specifically) has been sneakily building influence and building their arsenal (Murica especially, I mean look at their budget).
hes managed to achieve exactly the opposite of that, he still has a tight grip on power in Russia, but the oligarchs are not happy at what hes done to the economy
That part of the world works differently from the western worldview. Dictator or not they just have different system.
When Russia invaded Finland in 1939 the performance of the numerically superior Red Army was so poor (sound familiar?) that Adolph Hitler decided to invade Russia
They are Not as Advanced by the way but everyone "learns". Even Hitler failed to invade Russia completely and NATO is thinking they can do better for now.
It would be karma if Russia experienced the ignominy of China regaining the territory that it lost to Russia in the late 1850s (the history is longer than that) and left Taiwan on the back burner.
Not sure who will receive the karma but I suspect NATO too will get some especially Murica. China on the other hand, although I don't like their system, will be difficult to break because historically they have the greatest influence in that region whether the West like it or not. Culturally and ideologically, the region is of Chinese influence.
Vladivostock was formerly Chinese (Hai Shen Wai) and the dispute wasn’t properly sorted out until 2005. Chinese media still calls for the inequality to be rectified
They know that but that is not their objective at the moment. Their objective is get get NATO out of Asia. Yes, out of Asia and eventually it will happen. NATO/Murica, got the "fright" when then the President of Indonesia Suharto dared to oppose Murica/West. In retaliation Muria/West sow the seed of influence to get the opposition to bring his govt down. But the Indonesian people only realised many years later. Furthermore, as usually, NATO then started encircling Indonesia after Suharto (Chinese alliance for many centuries) to keep an eye on them. But things will change if the Muria/West don't keep them sweet, which eventually means slow brewing of tension.
China has been colonizing Eastern Russia for quite some time, there has been a lot of migration from China and they have set up a lot of businesses there as well IIRC. They are occupying by stealth.
No different from past colonial "masters". Same strategy. That's how Western power conquered the world previously.
Interestingly, when Lenningrad was under siege from the Germans, the Fins didn’t press home the advantage to the North of the city, even though they were at war with Russia at the time.
That's because the Finns knew that if they did that they would never sleep well, because there was simply no benefits at all in being greedy. They also knew they would not have enough manpower to maintain the place.
This inaction by the Fins saved the city from falling to the Nazi’s and demonstrates the Fins ambiguous relationship with them.
My guess is that they just wanted a "peaceful" neighbour rather than headache.
Apparently, as a thank ypu for not attacking, Stalin left Finland alone after that (If you can believe Stalin ever had a heart…).
There you go for establishing "good" neighbourhood.
And yet both them and the Swedes avoided being spooked for years.
It was only after the second invasion of Ukraine and attempt to seize the entire country that for some odd reason the popular mood in those two countries came down strongly on the lets join Nato viewpoint.
Their younger generations are just easily influenced. For years they have been "told" or drum in by the West that the evil empire would gobble them up one day if they remained out of NATO. Well, it works. Keep drumming and eventually everyone will dance to the same beat. Murica has been using scare tactics for yeaarrs!! And they are very good at this.
Yup, The non-NATO scandis had no intention of joining NATO until this latest russian threat (the threat being russia are activley invading and trying to conquer countries on thier boarders).
Strange, that.
For years Scandinavian countries were told that same story and eventually they succumbed to the NATO persuasion (more like Murica). NATO knew that in order to get the rest on board the simplest thing and the easiest thing to do is to poke the hornet's nest and then use that as "evidence" to show the world that the evil empire is expanding. Since Russia has never been portray as "civilised" the story fits very well and spooking the Scandinavian countries is much easier than thought.
At the end of the day, Murica is empire building and they know they can because they have already controlled the currency but this is not very stable. Hence, the next step is to control the world but their competitors are not playing ball. That's the problem.
Here is your occasional reminder that NATO has not invaded Russia and is not looking to.
————————-
What would it take to have a “HIDE” post option next to the REPLY & REPORT ones?