This >>51682 ofc means little without knowing the strenght, the actual forces behind them.
I mean sure the Tsentr has a way narrower line than the rest, but how concentrated the forces are? They said they directed like 50K troops there, but how many units were then subordinated to Yug after the town fell?
I went through the deepstate and militaryland maps and made a list of Russian units they placed onto the map. The picture is not much clearer.
Wikipee has an order of battle, but it's quite dated and this division of forces is a new thing, it was shaped the past week basically.
Couple of fun finds:
>The 80th separate intelligence battalion "Sparta" named Fried Cock
The storm zed units are all named 'shoigists "storm-z"', and then one of them is "strom-v". Whoa.
And ofc it's quite chaotic, because in case of regiment and battalion level units can't know where they belong to, perhaps the map shows a brigade, and then some battalions belong to that, but they didn't bothered (or they don't know) to mention it's part of that brigade.
There are cases when it can be guessed that some units belong together. For example on the militaryland map (picrel) around that HQ at Rostov (8th Combined Arms Army HQ):
- 163th Armored Regiment
- 102nd Motorized Regiment
- 103rd Motorized Regiment
- 381st Artillery Regiment
These are typical components of an old school Soviet armored division - at least they organized the same based on Soviet model on the Hungary in the 50's. Later ofc there were other variations, like with 3 infantry, 2 armored, and 2 artillery regiments.
Btw average German WWII armored division looks very much the same too.
So I assume there is a division HQ somewhere that hold together these.

I really enjoyed this "Super Panel":
https://invidious.protokolla.fi/watch?v=8nhaYF3a86E
https://youtube.com/watch?v=8nhaYF3a86E [Embed]

Was given some food for thought, while was fun and entertaining. Almost make me wanna register and comment on youtube. Well, almost, not by a mile, but as close as I can get to that point.
Here I would just mention one thing, at about 1:19:20 they start to talk about an offensive against Belgorod, and then it gets rightly mentioned that the weapons come with a leash, that they can't use them in Russia, can't fire into Russia what the West considers Russia anyway, Russia considers all that they hold in Ukraine as Russia, especially Crimea, and Ukraine shoots into Crimea all the time....
It's like Vietnam. US army wasn't allowed to march into the North, and bring the war to them. One can't fight a war and win like this. It's a setup for failure.

>>51689
I don't think that's much of an issue. I think invading Belgorod would cause far more harm than good to Ukraine, it would give Russia the pretext to use Conscripts in the war and it would be the conscripts defending Belgorod so it might not actually effect Russian forces in the Donbass all that much.
I think what they are doing now with their small raids is the best course of action as it's enough that Russia has to place units there to stop it but not enough that Russia can justify an escalation.

>>51690
They cover this topic more than I wrote.
But if you think about it: AFU is destined to fail. If not the attrition grinding them down, time will, because US - even if Biden stays - will lose interest at one point. It will fail how South Vietnam failed. I could draw parallel with Korea, but Korea failed too, tho not as bad as Vietnam they had to retreat back, no unified Korea, and no peace ever since then, but the fat little rocketman.
With Belgorod they would gain would have gained - they have no strength for anything now, and won't be ever again, last summer was the peak a bargaining chip and a massive woodland to hold up Russians. The conscript part of the army reacts slow, and they are even less motivated than the current ones fighting in Ukraine.
Belgorod is would have been not a good move, but the rest is was, like their "counteroffensive" worse.

>>51691
If the Ukraine manages to prolong the war long enough there is a chance that Russia will agree to relatively favourable terms for Ukraine, Ukraine will lose Donbass but will keep the rest and may be able to join NATO and the EU. The counter offensive would have contributed towards that end and might have given even more favourable terms, it would not have ended the war, Russia would take everything back they lost even if that took years but it contributes to the effort that Russia has to expend.
I believe that if the effort needed becomes too great, Russia will eventually settle for peace once it deems it has achieved enough to sell as a victory and to achieve at least some of it's goals(such as taking the Donbass).

But taking Belgorod would never have given Ukraine a bargaining chip, Russia could never sell any peace brought from that as a victory no matter how hard it tried. Not only that but Ukraine taking Russia land(actual Russian land) would have a huge effect on the population of Russia, after all, as it is the war is still an external one.

It would have huge geopolitical ramifications for Russia as well as internal ones and Russia may feel that the only way to save face would be to take Kiev and achieve total vicotory.

>>51692
>prolong the war
I don't see how that is detrimental for Russia.
>But taking Belgorod would never have given Ukraine a bargaining chip...
I do agree taking Belgorod, or attacking that wouldn't have been a good move. I do think it would have been the least bad. But Belgorod is a sidetrack tho, and their (well, Wyatt's) idea in the first place.
My point is, can't beat an opponent if the war cannot be taken to him, and beat him on his land. With attrition the invasion can be stopped, but nothing will stop the opponent invading again at a later point. And attrition doesn't work if it attrites me more - and this is the case with Ukraine. They're losing material and personnel (especially experienced personnel) more quickly than they could replenish it. And now they lose land. And every loss they lose morale, they lose will to fight.

Also turns out we have a winner here: >>51559 HistoryLegends is indeed Canuck.
Turkbernd deserves an Krautchan Iron Account, and a medal.

First destroyed Abrams, at and by the Tsentr.
It seems they sent an Abrams in previously yesterday or the day before. It rolled in fired shots until depleted ammo, then rolled out. Perhaps they did the same today, but got caught.
Was surprising that no infantry, or visible air cover supported it.
It kinda reminds me of the situation of the Hungarian army at Iasi in WWII, when they got one (1) Tiger and with that they stopped a Soviet tank regiment allowing withdrawal of troops. In the end however they themselves had to abandon after blowing it up, for they run out of ammo and fuel.

>>51698
Hmmm. Fucked up wikipee link:
C3%81rp%C3%A1d_Line">https://en.wikipedia.org/wikiC3%81rp%C3%A1d_Line

>>51703
Yeah. Oh well. Just search Árpád Line / Árpád-vonal.

Topic related I guess, self-immolation airman guy. >>>/news/22165 has a thread about him.
In short a serviceman of the USAF decided to set himself on fire in front of the Israeli Embassy in Washington DC, as a protest against Israeli actions. I'm not sure if only in this ongoing conflict, or in general the treatment of Palestinians. He died in the hospital.
He seems to be a regular IT guy with family. I don't get why he would do such a thing. I'm also curious who gets moved and motivated by him - like in the sense who is the target audience.

I think the litmus test on how the Russian campaign is going and how the Ukrainians are actually holding up will be the battle at Krasnahorivka, SE from Avdiivka, west from the city of Donetsk.
The front here stands still for long, basically form 2014 it seems, and the place is fortified strong. It's larger than all these villages the fights are going over. The line is solid, the routing, withdrawing brigades are relatively far to the north, so no immediate danger for the flanks to be exposed.
Now the Russian army moved onto the town, brought the fights into the southernmost streets. There was at least in incursion, which the Ukrainians beaten back.
How long will it take for the Russians to take the place - if they will be able at all. If they roll through in 2 weeks... that would be impressive.

At the situation at Robotyne. It sounds like another "meatgrinder" where units can be thrown into by both sides, and probably both sides thinks that they trap the other there. Like at Bakhmut. I don't really expect much territorial gains for now there, but I think the situation favors Russia. Every unit stuffed into that cauldron by Ukraine, one less unit to worry about elsewhere.

So the brand new circus is going on for a few days now. Macron said:
>there is no consensus to officially back any ground troops. That said, nothing should be excluded. We will do everything that we can to make sure that Russia does not prevail.
Which reminds me of an idea not mine which I mention occasionally in these threads, that at one point NATO will move into Ukraine and create a security zone.
Now this statement of his, rather suggest to move in to fight Russians along Ukraine instead of creating a barrier, but occupying creating a security zone as much land would be denying Russia to:
1. annex whole Ukraine;
2. create a "neutral" Ukraine (like Belarus);
3. create disarmed Ukraine.
Since they could preserve a piece of Ukraine that wouldn't be part of Russia, wouldn't be subordinated to Russia but to NATO/EU, and NATO/EU could deploy any number and type of weapon systems. It wouldn't be a victory for Ukraine, but Russia wouldn't prevail.
And the other thing his statement and the following denial of fellow Euro politicians remind me:
>send weapons to ukraine
<noooo we wont send weapons
>send them anyway
>send artillery to ukraine
<ooooo we wont send artillery
>send them anyway
>send tanks to ukraine
<noooo we wont send tanks
>send them anyway
>send long range rockets to ukraine
<noooo we wont send rockets
>send them anyway
>send fighter jets to ukraine
<noooo we wont send fighter jets
>send them anyway
>send troops to ukraine
<noooo we wont send troops
...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/27/french-president-emmanuel-macron-ukraine-french-ground-troops

Edited part of the map of this dude: >>51698 so the strongholds can be seen better. Clément drew the fortifications in blue, and used blue to shade Ukraine held territory. So it's a bit hard to see.
It's the Avdiivka front (Tsentr Group) towards Pokrovsk. There is one chain of trenches from Stara Mykolaivka in the north through Ocheretyne and Komyshivka to Vovchenka in the south where the line can settle. They might just push in the center to about Novoselivka Persha which Russians could take. And they gonna have a bulge there.
I think a lot will depend on Krasnohorivka.

>>51723
It's a stupid term to begin with and one used by people that don't seem to know a whole lot about military tactics or organization.

I like how Matt of WillyOAM pronounces Sergey as Sir Jay. I think excellent channel as far as these war coverage videos go. No sarcasm.

Russia/Soviet Union never attacked "Europe", but "Europe" attacked Russia/Soviet Union twice already.

>>51732
The USSR invaded Finland and also attacked Europe in 1920(the Polish-Soviet war), they invaded Poland again in 1939 but that was a bit different.
The Russian empire historically has invaded Europe on numerous occasions as well.

>>51733
Yes, they invaded Finland, the Baltics, Poland, and Romania. They never attacked "Europe" as a whole.
While Napoleon "unified" Europe and attacked Russia. It was Europe's attack.
And Hitler "unified" Europe and attacked the SU. It was Europe's attack.
Now Macron and the like are talking about how Russia wants to attack Europe, so they have to attack Russia.
In fact this time they (we) have a duo of Franco-Germany which "unifies" Europe and wants to attack Russia.

Probably even the Intervention counts as "Europe" attacking Russia.
And in the Polish-Soviet war was initiated by the Poles in the first place.

I was searching for Ukrainian equipment used in the war. I deviated from the actual mark here and there, skimming various somewhat related articles and looking up stuff from there.
What an interesting find. Does she scream down airplanes from the sky?

The Russian Liberation Army or how it is called, one of the Ukrainian Russian unit is attacking into Belgorod Oblast. Fun.

>>51767
I doubt much will come out of this. I highly suspect this is for spicing up the Russian elections that takes place on March 15-17.

>>51797
Total Democracy Win
No opposition was harmed during this election

Up to this date I've seen (kinda, partially on youtube) two videos when a Bradley faces a tank, while coordinating with either artillery battery and/or a drone team. Both were Bradleys of the 47th Brigade.
Actually the first video was about a month ago, and featured two Bradleys. Well they weren't featured just their tracer munition, it focuses on the T-90.
I assume this is a way to keep Ukrainian tanks out of harm. Concentrated fire of Bradleys could be enough, and if they can add some bombardment while the tank is distracted, they surely don't need the gun of a tank.

>>51799
Inspirational for all the third world's budding democracies.

Potentially good source of tidbits is the Janes' website. Just type "Ukraine" in the search field and order it by Date, like this:
https://www.janes.com/search-results?indexCatalogue=all---production&searchQuery=ukraine&wordsMode=&orderBy=Newest
These articles are short reports but they offer interesting finds. For example the latest:
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/ukraine-conflict-netherlands-pledges-multimillion-euro-f-16-weapons-uav-package-for-kyiv
The following data can be extracted directly:
- Netherlands sends F-16s
- €150 million worth of ammo for the jets
- this purchase will be done directly from the industry - not via Ukraine first
- €200 million for ISR drone purchase - together with partner countries (so it seems this 200 Milka won't be spent by Netherlands alone)
- 18 F-16s go to Romania to used in training
- 24 F-16s go directly to Ukraine
- there is a pilot and maintenance crew training center in Romania for Ukrainian airmen
- there is a so called F-16 coalition: Belgium, Denmark, Luxemburg, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Sweden, UK, US.
I wonder what an exbert could conclude, what derivative information could he mine out of this. Such as one might know the types of ISR drones, and their price and could guesstimate how this 200 Milka will be spent. Eg. Bayraktar TB2 costs about 5 mil, so they can buy 40 pieces of it. Or such expert might now that what "the industry" expression means, what companies and factories, are they in Europe, in the US, who are their owners, who gets this infusion of funds, etc.

Something brewin' in Russia, waiting for updates

>>51806
It's called kvas.

As a note. Crocus City Hall shooting in Moscow. Claimed to be ISIS, Kremlin says 11 arrested, 4 directly involved in the attack, tried to fled to Ukraine.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/3/23/moscow-concert-hall-attack-what-do-we-know-so-far

In criticism of the Putin-regime we will probably see claims that the security forces of Russia are both incompetent to allow and mastermind to orchestrate the attack at the same time. So who knows.

I think that this "they were heading for Ukraine" story is silly. How would they cross the border which is most likely more watched than pornhub, especially after the Ukrainian action against Belgorod.

>>51809
Death toll at the moment: 143.
Apparently 6000 people attended the place.

Apparently during Russian election time, people - mostly babushkas - were called on phone and conned into setting the voting booths and ballots and whatnot on fire with various liquids, molotov cocktails.
The Crocus attackers used similar method to burn the building.
Was election a foreshadow of the event?

>>51810
Luka claimed they were actually heading for Belarus but wouldn't be able to enter.

>>51820
Their escape plan is quite mysterious. Well, their escape plan too. I doubt we'll ever know anything sure. Suspicions and accusations all what we are having.

Apparently Defense Politics Asia has an archive channel where he uploads war footage. Smart. I hear from tubers they get flagged if too much war footage is in their videos, gore and such. So having a channel that doesn't matter if it gets flagged sounds like a good idea.
This channel seems to be 1 month old.
https://invidious.protokolla.fi/channel/UC3OfKXwIgj2m9Wzj-VEZI8A
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3OfKXwIgj2m9Wzj-VEZI8A
Example:
https://invidious.protokolla.fi/watch?v=uP43kj4K_W4
https://youtube.com/watch?v=uP43kj4K_W4 [Embed]

Invidious is getting fugged by youtube again, can't retrieve videos. So today I'm missing my daily dose of sitreps. Well almost. DPA at last has his channel on Odysee too.

Article about Nepalese, Sri Lankan, and Indian dudes fighting in the Russian army (Ukrainian volunteers also mentioned).
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/4/1/why-are-south-asians-going-to-fight-in-ukraine
It seems sometimes they don't treated the the most honorably, like they don't get the wage they promised, or sent to the front instead of doing supporting jobs in the hinterland, or getting only couple days of training, etc. Individual cases are mentioned not wholesale treatment.

NATO held a jamboree in Brussels for its 75 bday, almost as old as venerable Sleepy Joe.
It was created in 1949. By the US from the countries who:
- were formerly allied to her in WWII, indebted to her and equipped by her: Canada, France, UK;
- were occupied by her, indebted to her: Iceland;
- were "liberated" by her, then occupied by her, indebted to her, and equipped by her: Belgium, Denmark, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway
- were defeated by her, occupied by her, indebted to her, equipped by her: Italy
- were Portugal - this angle would need a bit of research, but they did some favors towards the Allies in WWII, then the country did some "democratization", I assume a capital injection from the US helped out.
Anyway back to the jamboree. Main participants were the foreign minsters of the now 32 member states and the main topic was ofc Ukraine, but they talked about Africa, Middle East and the Indo-Pacific region too.
Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg opened with a:
>NATO is bigger, stronger, and more united than ever
He also babbled about the usual stuff, more support to Ukraine and make Ukraine NATO member. From what I gathered the discussion of the foreign ministers were also empty phrases and gestures, and were basically there to each confirm they'll start some cooperation. Our foreign minister stated later in Hungarian media that they are crossing the two red lines set in 2022:
1. NATO isn't part of Ukraine's war
2. have to do everything to avoid direct confrontation with Russia
He also said that they made a decision that a planning and the creation of a proposition of the next plan needs to be started. So they are basically at step -1.
Beyond this he claimed that they "want to raise NATO's coordination role in training and weapon shipments". They'd create a logistical base in Poland, and the NATO personally would arrange the shipments to that base. From the base it wouldn't be NATO's job to move stuff into Ukraine. They'd train Ukrainian solders in NATO countries (they already do this, wtf). Thirdly they want decide how to do that 5 year plan with that $100 billion that is in the pipes.
Dmytro Kuleba, the Ukrainian foreign minister was there too. He also said the usual: send help. He also said it would be nice if they really do it, and in larger volume.
Perhaps this year most countries will met their 2% of budget military spending.

Surprisingly the official NATO website (https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news.htm) measures information quite thinly.
This one is cute:
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_224206.htm?selectedLocale=en
>Group of Experts
They are apparently "independent" and were eleven, did their research since October, contracted by Stoltenberg. But who are these and where can we read the report? On same page they link this:
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_223916.htm
But no substantial information.
They have a library tho: https://www.natolibguides.info/natolibrary
This article is fun too:
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_224390.htm?selectedLocale=en
>thank you for holding us on leash with firm hands

Btw Stoltenberg will be gone this year, so new General Secretary has to be elected.

Why Are NATO Tanks Equipped With The Wrong Tracks?
Why Is NATO Using Rubber Padded Tracks For Heavy Offroad Terrain?
https://yewtu.be/watch?v=rnvu5cgBZ2o
https://youtube.com/watch?v=rnvu5cgBZ2o [Embed]
He doesn't know, he wants to know the answer. I'm posting because it is interesting to note that they use the rubber padded tracks for asphalt.

Reading an article in Hungarian media right now.
Apparently Iran launched drones/rockets towards Israel.
Nothing sure in this particular article, don't know if drones, rockets, ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, whatever they have. They say "they could launch as much as 4-500 pieces", but don't know how many they launched. They say the flight will took hours.
Tho the article ends that Iran said they launched over 300 rockets, and they link another article of theirs.
https://index.hu/kulfold/2024/04/13/iran-hezbollah-izrael-drontamadas-gaza-haboru-idf/
Eh, a video of weeb union was uploaded 9 hours ago reporting the event, so this happened about midnight in Iran.

I might follow up this. I know previously a "provocation" happened on behalf of Israel, and Iran had to make a response, but at the moment can't recall the event. I'll look it up.

Ah yeah.
Israel bombed the Iranian embassy in Damascus, Syria on April 2nd, killing General Mohammed Reza Zahedi the commander of the Quds Force and others.

After seeing what happened to Gaza, every shitskin on the planet will write a will and testament before touching a white woman

>>51890
What?

So the target was Nevatim Airbase south of the West Bank.
Over 300 missiles (cruise and ballistic) and drones were launched simultaneously.
"99%" of these were intercepted by Israel and her "allies" (from elsewhere: US and UK).
7 projectiles reached the airbase and hit.
US said doesn't want a war with Iran.

Now Israel says they'll retaliate. The retaliation.
They also say they don't know yet when and how, but maybe years later. Meanwhile they'll still bomb targets in Syria.

It should be a known fact by now that Ukraine asks Patriot batteries from the world - from anyone who has. And some countries do consider this option, EU Parliament even voted that the "EU" (EU members who has 'em) should give what they can. Does this Iranian attack make these countries reconsider? They obtained their systems for a reason, and while I'm sure most of them has in no real danger to get attacked, these weapons are part of their arsenal and their main job is to deter potential enemies from attacks.

>>51892
Apparently it was more for show than anything else. It was very well telegraphed.

The pro-Ukrainians have been really riled up by the US-British-French involvement in shooting down these drones, they say that if they do that in Israel they should do it in Ukraine too.

>>51896
>It was very well telegraphed.
Yeah, Iran told US what exactly they are doing way beforehand.
>pro-Ukrainians
From this one can know at least they aren't really banderites or nazis. If they were they wouldn't have such illusions obviously in US logic: Israel is full of Jews, Ukraine is full of only hohols.
But plenty of differences beyond that for the US to rationalize why don't they help out Ukraine in such ways.
>pro-Ukrainians have been really riled up
Sometimes I write couple of words here what I expect to happen after the war. I mentioned all the maimed and the availability of trained footsoldiers for criminal organizations. Another will be looking for scapegoats, Ukrainians, especially the fundamentalist types will want to blame someone, and they'll find plenty to blame. They'll blame Hungary ofc that follows, but they'll blame the west that they let down or even betrayed Ukraine. Some will go through huge disillusionment.
I bet Western propaganda machine will work on it a lot, but it'll be effective mostly for the Western pro-Ukrainians, so they can feel better about themselves, direct the blame towards others like political opponents in their respective countries.
Myths will also be created along the line of this betrayal, which aren't myths in the sense that they are untrue, or entirely untrue. They will be well funded. It's just they'll be told to each other how myths are told. And perhaps they'll gain fictitious details. It's like how masses of German soldiers felt after WWII that the hinterland, the civil society betrayed them. "We could have beaten them but these pansies couldn't hold themselves." And this can be channeled further like NSDAP found more defined groups to blame, commies and especially Jews.
Coming years will be very interesting. Not comfortable, but at least interesting.

Soooo. Israel retaliated the retaliation of retaliation of retaliation of retaliation...
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/4/19/israeli-missiles-hit-site-in-iran-explosions-heard-in-isfahan-report
I bet this is just them finding a way to finally bomb Iran's drone factories as they wanted back in 2023 October: >>51146 >>51147 >>51148

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/4/24/russia-arrests-deputy-defence-minister-suspected-of-corruption
Lel, did he not share enough with those above him in the feudal hierarchy, his seniors?
>Timur
Based name tho.

Was musing about when Ukraine lost the war and if "The War" was avoidable. Realpolitik says it never is tho.

I think Ukraine lost the war in 2014 when it got decided that it's gonna be war.
With Maidan happening I think Moscow decided Ukraine was lost, and they had to salvage anything they could, so they took Crimea, the one region with key importance, and instigated the separatist movement to have further way in to Ukraine when later becomes necessary, or when the time is right.
Why I say Ukraine lost it already? Because no matter the outcome, Ukraine will lose with a war being fought on her soil. They'll lose population/manpower and for there is no chance to stand alone, they lose their assets, land and production facilities to the West in return for the help "help".
So in early 2014 it was sure that war is unavoidable. Frankly it started already. We might just did not see it some surely did, but if they claimed they "always knew with utmost surety" that would be just backwards forethought, there are always differing opinions, and with enough amount of opinions some bound to be right in the end, no they cannot actually know until things happen and make them right. But prior to that?
With the collapse of the Soviet Union US thought now everything is up for grabs, so they started to chain up their new vassals, gradually moving to east. For example Hungary joined NATO in 1999 the year when NATO bombed Serbia to pressure the release of the parastate Kosovo. And Hungary joined EU in 2004, that year saw the so called Orange Revolution of Ukraine, which helped the pro-West/pro-EU Yushchenko into power in 2005, which meant a drift away from Russia.
I think it goes without saying that while there surely were local groups - and people in general - in Ukraine, who favoured the West, US, EU over Russian relations, neither the Orange Revolution, nor Maidan could have happened without Western meddling, without them artificially creating and inflating local movements. And they probably went beyond astroturfing, using professional agents to do stuff as well.
I think Ukraine's only chance was not being a rope in a tug-of-war, which could have happened if Western Europe and Russia could have reconcile, and started to cooperate. Ukraine could have been a bridge in the process that connects, instead a rope pulled - and now torn to pieces.
So essentially Ukraine had no chance. Countries that entered NATO started to enjoy the protection of the nuclear arsenal of the West and the MAD that comes with it. But Ukraine had none of that, but the US's pull, and Russia's jealous stare.
But what if Russia had been quicker and prevented at least the Maidan, and perhaps the Orange too? Maybe Ukraine would be in peace now, but perhaps a different civil war had been broken out, just in the west with secessionist Lwow and such.

Came across a substack on Substack with content that's highly relevant to this topic and from an obscure viewpoint. Obscure outside of Russia at least.
https://slavlandchronicles.substack.com/
Basically the author is from that "pro-war imperialist" group >>50588 which criticizes the Putin regime and the Russian defense ministry with the army for not acting decisively enough, for being incompetent, and who sympathized much with Wagner PMC.
I only took a blink into a couple of posts, but here's some titles:
>SPECIAL POST!!! -"Why the SMO?": FSB Spook Insider Reveals Why Putin's Army Failed to Take Kiev!
>Iran May Have Just Saved Putin's Butt By Starting a New Desert War!
>Actually, Russia Will Have to Mobilize A LOT More Men - Assuming they want to win that is.
>Just More of the Same - I don't like Liberalism ... or Islam ... or Putin for that matter.
>Putin: Russia Remains Committed to Multi-Kulti Antifa Values in Wake of Deadly Muslim Terror Killings!

>>51946
Cool recording of close-air-support. Shows how little time they have to get the target aim and shoot while they fly over. I would watch that video without the slowdowns.

>>51947
Not how they fired directly back in the days, instead of coming a couple km close to the front and then ballistically lobbing their rockets in.
Or just fire (much more powerful) glide bombs from dozens of km away.

When musing about this war - do you ever think this from the endgoal back?

>>51948
Well AFU air defense forced them to launch rockets bit further away, and converting regular bombs to glide ones that can travel longer ranges (and do some course correction) was also done for the same reason. Now they do "classic" CAS again, at Chasiv Yar I know they do. But at the moment it seems Ukrainian air defense is sparse so there are times and places they can act freely. I assume RuAF selects and times various strikes, not just on the frontline but against targets in the hinterland, to create these holes, these empty air spaces for the combat fliers.
>do you ever think this from the endgoal back?
What do you mean? Like starting at the goal and trace it backwards?

>>51949
>at Chasiv Yar I know they do
Any SU-25 footage from there?

>What do you mean? Like starting at the goal and trace it backwards?
Yes.
Because it's easy to say "yeah, looking back it was probably decided, that there would be war in 2014".

But now think the other way around: If 2014 it was decided there would be war - why plan that shit another 8 years? And then with 8 years planning come up with a huge failure? There was nothing better than hoping that the brigades for some weird reason would not be defending Kiev? (even in 2022 they had weeks of warning in advance)

So please do tell: what was decided in 2014? What wargoal? What kind of war would it be?
And then think backwards from that goal if all your theories still make sense.

>>51950
>footage
I saw some on WillyOAM's channel, in some of the relatively recent videos, ofc.
It's not on board footage, but from the ground. I think from both sides, but from Ukraine for sure.

As for your second point, it could take a while I reply. Surely I won't in full today, but I'll start here with something:
In case you aren't familiar with Realpolitik, here are the tenets:
- in international relations the primary actors are sovereign states
- states do two things: increase security and increase power; they use security to gain power, and use power to increase security (in case you didn't get the memo i wrote about this on this board, its a part what I call the Theory of Power: power is the ability to make decisions, for you and for others, if you can make your own decisions you have power over yourself, if others can decide what you do, they have power over you, if you can decide what others do, you have power over them)
- the international scene is anarchic (no regulative power over the sovereign states)
- states act in their own interests
- impossible to gain complete information, can't be sure about what other states actually doing
- nothing last forever, not peace, treaties, or alliances.
- everything is just business, no place for ideological bias, or morals, or principles
- while war is undesirable, it's natural
- if it comes to war, it is better choose when it starts (act first), then wait until it comes to us
There is one shortcoming of Realpolitik, which is called "security dilemma":
When a state raises her security and power, due to incomplete information other states will recognize it as a threat so they'll try to raise their own security and power, which makes everyone suspicious again and they raise their security and power again. With every step of introducing more weapons to the system (the typical instruments of security and power enforcement) the system becomes less stable, and they get closer to war.

Okay, will continue sometimes.

WillyOAM takes the videos from various milbloggers mostly from Telegram, so ultimately those should be there.

>>51951
>in international relations the primary actors are sovereign states
Why even postulate this? And it's already proven multiple times wrong anyways, from ISIS to the NGOs of George Soros.
And completely disregards puppet states like Japan who clearly don't act in their own interest.

And where do you draw the line? Where is the difference between Chechnya, Transnistria and Ukraine?

For the sake of simplification I can play along, but I don't think it's gonna get you anywhere.

>>51950
Oh, one more thing: I did also write that:
>Frankly it started already. We might just did not see it
Russia already took away a piece of land from a sovereign state (Crimea) - tho justified with a plebiscite -, and more importantly incited a rebellion, which she supported and while she wasn't in war directly, she already waged a proxy war against Ukraine.

>>51953
primary actors
Ralists do recognize other actors, from international institutions to private individuals.
Don't twist what I wrote.

>>51955
*Realists

>>51954
>and more importantly incited a rebellion
Arguably the Maidan was the rebellion. And Crimea and Donbass didn't want to play along the Western Ukrainian plans. But since Western Ukraine had some powerful allies, they got themselves a powerful ally as well?
I am not quite sure what happened and why Crimea, but not Donetsk. I have theories and I am curious about yours (basically everything war-related), that's why I write here.

>>51955
Hm. So ISIS plays for you a secondary role compared to the primary role Sri Lanka is playing, because they aren't a state?

I am not twisting your words, I am taking them at face value and point out the inconsistencies.
Anyway forget that I asked. Not so interested in your opinion anymore.

>>51958
That's not inconsistency. That is in fact part of Realpolitik. They marginalize the role of everything else but the state.
They probably treat ISIS differently than an actor in foreign politics.

2deep4me

RuAF launched attack from Belgorod into Kharkov oblast, yesterday or even on the 9th (I assume during the night of 9 to 10, perhaps at dawn, I haven't really looked it up). For now everyone guessing what is this, a distraction or a start of a full offensive. Ukrainian officials stress it for a while now that Russia is preparing to attack in Kharkov, they did evacuation too. I have the generic impression when they say Russia will attack she generally does, they don't predict bullshit in these cases.
I don't know the latest, I thought it's worth to make a note here about this event.
Couple of villages got occupied yesterday.

>>51972
I heard that they have forces gathered north of Sumy as well, so an attack might be launched in that direction too.

But I don't think they have much in the North, people were saying they might have 50k. I'm not sure that is enough to take Khakiv, thought I don't know what the Ukrainians have in that area but I assume that seeing as it's the second largest city in Ukraine and it's right on the border with Russia that they would have a reasonable number of forces and that they would be reasonably well prepared.

Apparently the Russians are going to create a buffer zone, I don't know that I believe that, it's really not worth the effort.
I think this is a way to draw resources away from other fronts.

>>51973
Apparently they attack here too.
>Sumy
Listened couple of videos, they mention it.
>I'm not sure that is enough to take Khakiv
I'm sure they aren't capable. It is a big city. And fortified 100% with secure depots full of supplies. Unless Ukrainian officers sold it already.
>I think this is a way to draw resources away from other fronts.
I tend to agree.

So Shoigu was replaced by Andrey Belousov in the seat of the Minister of Defence. Might be related to this: >>51906 since that guy was Shoigu's second.
Shoigu was moved to Security Council of Russia, where he is the Secretary now, which might be the third position in that institution (first is Putin as Chairman, second is Medvedev as Deputy Chairman) - the other members are the heads of various other institutions (like the government and ministry of defense and whatnot).

Real Reporter is showing off the captured equipment in Moscow.
https://odysee.com/@RealReporter:e/up-close-look-at-captured-abrams-and:8

Rest in peace sweet president.
https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/498743/Martyrdom-in-the-line-of-duty

From Al Jazeera:
>Iran’s President Ebrahim Raisi and Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian have died in a helicopter crash.
>A total of nine people, including a provincial governor, were on board when the aircraft went down in northern Iran’s East Azerbaijan province. They all are believed to be dead.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/5/20/live-irans-president-raisi-fm-amirabdollahian-killed-in-helicopter-crash

International Criminal Court's prosecutor's statement about Hamas leaders (Sinwar, Al-Masri, Haniyeh) plus Netanyahu and Gallant (the Israeli Minister of Defense):
https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/statement-icc-prosecutor-karim-aa-khan-kc-applications-arrest-warrants-situation-state
Basically there is "reasonable grounds" to raise charges against them for various crimes against humanity and war crimes.
Haven't read all of that, and won't today, maybe tomorrow. But this doesn't mean they are guilty, or will be found guilty, just that a case can be opened against them.
>My Office will not hesitate to submit further applications for warrants of arrest if and when we consider that the threshold of a realistic prospect of conviction has been met. I renew my call for all parties in the current conflict to comply with the law now.
Considering Bibi faces about over 9000 corruption cases at home since forever now, this can be shrugged off.

It's started with the helmets and recently they were caught discussing blowing up the Crimean bridge. Sholtz did his declaration of the German rearmament back in 2022 April, now German minister of defense, Boris Pistorius pushed the idea of conscription forward, and the 3% defense budget. Someone's gonna get his pocket lined.
As the security dilemma of Realpolitik says:
>the more the states raise their security the more likely a war will break out (more security = less security)
https://breakingdefense.com/2024/05/german-defense-minister-restart-conscription-pursue-3-percent-gdp-on-defense/

set the opacity to 88% to make picrel perfect

This really is just the part of the EU parliamentary and Hungarian municipal elections, but part of the Russo-Ukrainian War, so here I post this.
https://insighthungary.444.hu/2024/05/17/internal-documents-prove-russian-hackers-infiltrated-the-foreign-ministry

Essentially.
Russian hackers infiltrated the network ("even a secure network that transmits classified information") of the Hungarian Foreign Ministry some years ago (in an article they mentioned "could have been a decade ago), and they are there since. From an internal document our govt. knows this at least since 2021 autumn. The news hit the media in 2022 first time - and this is why I think it's just the part of the two parallel elections, that the opposition media picked this spring to pull it out from the closet again.

Pretty funny that the article - a Hungarian one, calls Orbán "far-right".
I assume Russian hackers aren't the only one who infiltrated that network. And other networks. But these days Russians are considered the problem.
>Directory service, the mail service, the file server service
Was Windows isn't it. Active Directory, Outlook, and Windows File Server service.
I'm really jelly that Best Korea uses her own Linux distro.
Not that Linux can't be haxxed.

So Macron's sabre rattling is dialed down to the levels of "just instructors".
>"I am pleased to welcome France's initiative to send instructors to Ukraine to train Ukrainian servicemen,"
>"I have already signed the documents that will enable the first French instructors to visit our training centres shortly and familiarize themselves with their infrastructure and personnel,"
>Oleksandr Syrskyi said
I believe Sirsky retracted this when they told him he announced it a bit soon. But next article seems to confirm this, and frankly Macron threw this in back in February.
>Ukraine's Defence Ministry, in a "clarification", said Kyiv had been expressing interest in a project involving receiving foreign instructors since February.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-commander-french-military-instructors-visit-ukrainian-training-centres-2024-05-27/
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/france-could-announce-sending-military-trainers-ukraine-soon-diplomats-say-2024-05-30/

My question is: did Ukraine run out of American instructors that was already in the country since 2014 and before? Are they all dead?
Also at this point Ukraine could teach westerners about modern warfare, so they might be sent to gain XP in that since all France and the West knows is how to fight dudes in sandals and bathrobes.
Plus. Perhaps Ukrainian manpower shortage forces Ukraine to send their own instructors to the front, and they want to replace them with westerners. If they don't shoot at the Russians they don't participate in the war, innit.

>>52023
It does not seem to make much sense, given that it would be much safer to train Ukrainian soldiers to train in Europe or the US like they were in Britain. It would be safer for the Ukrainians themselves but also for the European instructors(I guarantee that the Russians are going to make a point of finding and hitting these European training locations in Ukraine).

But this might be a step towards having French or other NATO troops in Ukraine to fill other roles or to give plausible deniability. After all, it's probably not that easy to tell whether a patriot battery is being operated by NATO forces or if the NATO forces are just there to train the operators.

>>52024
>It does not seem to make much sense, given that it would be much safer to train Ukrainian soldiers to train in Europe[...]
Absolutely. They do the training elsewhere already why would they start doing it in Ukraine now? Except perhaps out of fear that Ukrainian soldiers would just jump fence and leave if they were in Europe somewhere.
I assume they have different reasons. They send them as observers, or as you wrote, to run systems that aren't on the front and little chance to get captured.
There was that Polish general in Chasiv Yar who was killed. What was he doing there anyway?

New Colonel Reisner of the Austrian army is out:
The Russian Momentum is back
https://invidious.protokolla.fi/watch?v=gk7D_TliAuE
https://youtube.com/watch?v=gk7D_TliAuE [Embed]
It's a summary of what washappening since the last time, basically from the start of the Russian winter offensive.
What new was for me is that Russia now produces her own Shahed drones, the Geran-2. I missed out on this tidbit.

>>52027
Finally.

It looks bleaker for the Ukrainians than most his others. It seems like the Russians are really getting their act together now and are also mobilising much of their economy towards the war.

Colonel Reisner also appeared on a video with Military History Visualised recently. Most of what he said was not new but he made a brief mention about the Ukrainian offensives in Kharkiv and Kherson in which he said that the Russians withdrew from Kherson after a deal with the Ukrainians. Interesting...

>>52029
I just remembered that Military History Visualised has another channel called Military History not Visualised. That was where the interview was, not on the first channel.

>>52029
>>52030
>with Military History Visualised
Thanks, I found it.

I agree, he also seems pessimistic about the possibilities for Ukraine.
>Kherson
That is an interesting tidbit. Maybe should try confirming. A casual search had no positive result.

>>52031
I have never heard about this deal anywhere else. But there being such a deal makes sense, given how smooth the Russian withdrawal was.

It could be that this deal was a classified secret that Reisner should not have mentioned or that it time sensitive and it's no longer classified now.

>>52032
>or that it time sensitive
I meant or that it was time sensitive

>>52032
Yeah, I read they just slipped out in three days. There are mocking articles that they can't do it within a week or two and whatnot, and surprised that they done it smooth as you put it.

So the Abrams are kinda sorta better than Soviet/Russian tanks, but...
Without real combined arms structure they are not efficient and vulnerable. And there is the new challenge the drones represents.
Maintenance problems? I wonder how the Leo 2s fair.

Well well well, apparently Ukrainian specops are operating in Syria.
>EXCLUSIVE VIDEO: Ukrainian Special Forces and Syrian Rebels Decimate Russian Mercenaries in Syria
https://www.kyivpost.com/post/33695

>>52036
Also in Africa.
Essentially the [insert USian alphabet agency] gained a bunch of soldiers with this war, whom they can use to counter Russian activities all around the globe, and keep their own hands clean.
Fun fact: in Nigeria US troops and Wagnerians were accommodated on the same airports - in different hangars.

Again, Wyatt of DPA reacts to Colonel Reisner's video, lel.
https://odysee.com/@DefensePoliticsAsia:7/the-russian-momentum-is-back-fake-expert:e

>>52040
This is great line at 16:46.
>NATO is now teaching Russia, how to counter their weapon systems.
Ukraine is a good testing field... but this is a real drawback. It's like microdosing bacteria with antibiotics to make them resistant...

>>52032
I found something. Well nothing that outright say a deal had happened. But a situation where we could hypothesize a deal happening.
Here's this CNN article:
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/03/09/politics/us-prepared-rigorously-potential-russian-nuclear-strike-ukraine/index.html
It's basically an advertisement for that book, The Return of Great Powers. Available on libgen, and I got it too. While the book is longer, but in that particular topic it basically writes the same as the article - I've only skimmed it so I overlooked lotsa details - I search Kherson and rolled through the pages. What I can tell that it polishes the rod of the US govt. and tells us that Putin and Co. are stupid so the US won against an inferior opponent, very impressive.

The story in short:
Kharkov offensive was a huge setback for the Russians, and when the Kherson offensive started they started to panic. Their worries was twofold:
1. they were scared losing Kherson;
2. they were scared that their troops will be steamrolled by the Ukrainians;
So this would have been a great debacle for them, and they were seriously considering to use of tactical nuke if both happened. They started to circulate Ukraine dirty bomb story in case they have to cover up a nuclear strike.
But heroic US diplomacy and secret services were vigilant. So they and Sholz went to Modi and Xi Jinping, and bullied them into going to Putin and pressure him not to use the nukes.
World Saved again by timely and resolute US intervention.

Now.
We can speculate that yes losing lots troops, equipment and key city was actually uncomfortable, and the use of nukes are kinda sorta are always on table, so these offensives could have triggered the use of them. So they could make a deal that they make Ukraine halt and give time for an orderly retreat, and Russia don't use nukes.
This doesn't sound very convincing, but rounds out the story above and offers something to negotiate with.

>>52042
I have heard that but I don't know that I believe it. I think the most likely explanation was simply that both sides knew that a fight over Kherson would be bloody and miserable for them both.
The Russians were not going to lose their army but fighting in such conditions would have meant their army would be poorly supplied and that many Russian assets such as aviation and helicopters would have to be redirected to resupply the Russians over the river and also to provide air support for them. It could have ended in a situation where the Russian army was stuck in Kherson city, terribly supplied but on the other side the Ukrainians would have to fight in bloody urban combat against an enemy with their backs to the wall, all the while being hammered by Russian airpower and from Russian artillery on the other side of the river. It would be bad for both of them, and also bad for the city itself and the people living there. Most likely it would have ended with a permanent but poorly supplied Russian bridgehead located in Kherson city and then a permanent force of Ukrainians stationed around the city to keep them in check.

Janes' articles in the last month:
>weapons, equipment, and more weapons to Ukriane
Also now they lock all articles, and need subscription to read 'em in full.
Anyway.
https://www.janes.com/osint-insights/defence-news/ukraine-conflict-germany-pays-for-us-himars-for-kyiv-canada-provides-air-defence-funding
Germany pays. To US. Amerrrica continues to siphon the wealth from Europe into her own pocket.

Now this one, I'd like to read in full:
https://www.janes.com/osint-insights/defence-news/air/special-report-no-time-to-lose-as-lessons-from-ukraine-force-the-pace-in-electronic-warfare
>after decades of disinvestment in electronic warfare (EW), NATO now had to step up a gear and be prepared to counter a grinding Russian EW onslaught. “We're now seeing [in Ukraine] the most dense and dangerous electromagnetic operating environment we've ever seen,” he said. “Russia never stopped doing EW, it never stopped continuing to invest. We need to learn from the Ukrainians who are fighting for their lives and their country.”
>the fact is that the conflict is witnessing a highly dynamic ‘war in the ether' unprecedented in its intensity
Electronic warfare is more important then ever. The real countermeasure against drones, and against anti-drone capabilities are these equipment.

The Finnish map updated some time ago the fortification layer, now showing the Ukrainian trenches too. It's under the Tools option.
https://www.scribblemaps.com/maps/view/The%20War%20in%20Ukraine/091194

“What Washington is proposing is, 'We [the U.S.] take a loan, Europe takes all the risk, you [Europe] pay the interest, and we [the U.S.] use the money for a U.S.-Ukraine fund,'” said one senior European diplomat. “We might be stupid but we’re not that stupid.”
LÖL
https://www.politico.eu/article/us-eu-war-in-ukraine-loan-russian-assets-negotiations-g7-us-election-western-support-joe-biden-olaf-scholz-emmanuel-macron/
Frankly this whole war is the USA beating the stinging nettle with someone else's dick. With Europe's and with Ukraine's.
Interesting tidbit:
>who legally will be liable to pay the loan back if Hungary [...] vetoes the prolongation of EU sanctions against the Kremlin, which legally have to be renewed every six months
Especially this part:
>have to be renewed every six months
The fun thing is that one day perhaps another EU country will veto it.
Another:
>While EU officials are receptive to these concerns, they’re reluctant to agree to something that comes at the expense of their own taxpayers.
This whole war is payed by EU taxpayers. And the money lands in the pockets of the US oil and military industry. This fucking war is a US money grabbing scheme for their economy is going down the shitter.

Oooo, the Ukraine peace summit started yesterday. "Peace summit".
War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength

>>52063
Just so it features here I copy of the Ukrainian peace plan I found on Wikipee: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine%27s_Peace_Formula
1. Nuclear safety, especially that of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant;
2. Food security for Asian and African countries;
3. Energy security and restoration of Ukraine's energy infrastructure;
4. Release of all prisoners and the return of Ukrainian children deported to Russia;
5. Restoration of the Russia–Ukraine border to that prior to the 2014 annexation of Crimea, in line with Article 2 of the Charter of the United Nations;
6. Full withdrawal of Russian military forces from Ukraine and cessation of hostilities;
7. Prosecution of war crimes in the Russian invasion of Ukraine, including the creation of a special tribunal for Russian war crimes;
8. Assessment of ecological damage, including that caused by the destruction of the Kakhovka Dam; prosecution of those responsible; recovery and reconstruction;
9. Guarantees against future Russian aggression;
10. A multilateral peace conference with a legally binding international treaty.

Earlier this week Putin also put forward the conditions when he would start a conversation. Whole speech as here and I think the "proposal" starts at 4015 second. The whole thing is liek 1 hour 20 mins long, but I'd rather listen El Presidente Castro all day. Video has professionally translated captions.
https://invidious.protokolla.fi/watch?v=vgOS9gzK5Ys
https://youtube.com/watch?v=vgOS9gzK5Ys [Embed]
1. Ukraine withdrawal from Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhia - fully from the whole administrative areas;
2. abandon plans to join NATO.
After these conditions met, then they would sit down and talk about peace. So this isn't even a peace proposal, just preliminary conditions.
It seems they stick to the paper the representatives of these oblasts signed when these regions "entered" or "returned" to Russia, so when Russia annexed them.

Obviously this withdrawal won't happen, and the Ukrainian "formula" is a pipe dream. But at least these give something to the media, from news outlets, through narrocasts in social media (such as this post), to youtubers, to generate some content.

>>52064
It is a pipe dream. Honestly Russia's peace deal is not too bad for Ukraine compared to the risks they face right now. Russia only wants two mandates and they will end the war:

1) Ukrainian troops must be completely withdrawn from the Donetsk People's Republic, the Luhansk People's Republic, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions.

2) Ukraine must reject ambitions to join the NATO alliance.

Compare that to more war. More war means more Ukrainians die. More Ukrainian territory usurped by Russia. More Ukrainian infrastructure gets destroyed. More Ukrainians flee and become refugees. More political unrest in Ukraine and the West. More economic destruction in Ukraine and Europe.

It is absolutely appalling and questionably treasonous to your own citizens not to come to terms with this. I, for one, will NEVER be fighting for this and nor will my family! I don't care how bad things get.

>>52065
One problem is, which wasn't mentioned, but they talked about this in Moscow earlier this year: Zelensky's legitimacy. The current standpoint of Putin and Co. is that he is not legitimate since his time as President is done, they should have kept an election already. So whatever current Zelensky signs, it would be an easy excuse later to restart military operations.
On the other hand the other side too can claim later that they actually did not sign away any Ukrainian territory, since Zelensky had to democratic authorization from the people of Ukraine.

>>52066
I think the Russians will have to keep engaging, sadly, until there is a military coup in Ukraine and new leadership willing to negotiate their way out of it. Meanwhile, we in the Western nations have to do our best to throw our corrupt POS politicians out of office before they drag us into a global war (and that itself would cause massive public uproar no doubt about it).

Another attack happened couple days ago in Russia, in the Republic of Dagestan, in the cities of Derbent and Makhachkala. Again gunmen opened fire on (in?, at?) a church, a synagogue, and a police post. 20 died (including 15 policemen), and another 12 injured. At least. Five attacker were killed.

>Tonight in Derbent and Makhachkala, unknown people made attempts to destabilise the public situation,” Melikov said. “Dagestan police officers stood in their way
Uh, I thought the shooters attacked the police station no self-sacrifice was needed on behalf of the police.

Again the blame finds Daesh. I dunno.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/6/23/synagogue-church-attacks-in-russias-dagestan-kill-police-report

Heard something today, about what Stoltenberg said:
>Ukraine will join NATO after she defeated Russia
So basically - as the opinion goes - Ukraine should do something she's not able to, then she'll be allowed to do something which she won't need anymore.
>Thank you, Mr. Norway Man
>t. Ukraine

Since the Kharkov incursion Russians seem to take larger swathes of lands, the size of square kms, at least weekly, but lately every day, elsewhere than the Kharkov front, down at Siversk, Bakhmut, Avdiivka and Donetsk front. So essentially the Kharkov front sucks the resources from elsewhere and this allows Russians to advance.
It is possible that Ukrainian started to trade more land, to preserve life and material. Frankly these patches they withdraw from has nothing on them, ruins at best.
They really have to pick where they allow the enemy to advance, because the road from Pokrovsk to Kramatorsk is vital.

I heard today that a plain 155mm NATO shell costs 8 times more per round than the Russian counterpart (152mm). I tried to find a source, but gave up fast to get a more recent, so here's two older.
From 2023 November:
https://www.defenseone.com/business/2023/11/race-make-artillery-shells-us-eu-see-different-results/392288/
>In October, NATO’s senior military officer, Adm. Rob Bauer, said that the price for one 155mm shell had risen from 2,000 euros ($2,171) at the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion to 8,000 euros ($8,489.60).
>For comparison, the U.S. currently pays $3,000 for its most modern shells, according to an Army spokesperson. That price includes the charge, fuze, and shell body.
From 2024 May:
https://news.sky.com/story/russia-is-producing-artillery-shells-around-three-times-faster-than-ukraines-western-allies-and-for-about-a-quarter-of-the-cost-13143224
>On cost, it said the average production cost per 155 mm shell - the type produced by NATO countries - was about $4,000 (£3,160) per unit, though it varied significantly between countries. This is compared with a reported Russian production cost of around $1,000 (£790) per 152 mm shell that the Russian armed forces use.
The first article is closer to what I heard.

Orbán is visiting Zelensky today in Kiev. The main apropos of the event is the Hungarian presidency of the EU. Is the presidency matters?
>The presidency of the Council of the European Union rotates among the 27 EU member states every six months. The country holding the presidency guides the work of the Council and represents all member states in negotiations with other EU institutions
You be the judge.
But Orbán went to Kiev because the situation of Ukraine is very important for the EU. There were already preparations of this meeting way beforehand I noted on this board when our Foreign Minister went to the neighbour and they agreed on a meeting. So this visit shouldn't be much of a surprise.
Orbán said why not make a cease fire. The peace process is long, just stop fighting for a bit, this will quicken the process. Or something similar other load of nonsense. If Ukrainians stop fighting that doesn't stop Russians fighting. Tell it to Putin too. Then make that "you first" game. So I think what he said was stupid as fuck.
Zelensky said he is glad Hungary attended the "peace summit", and signed whatever was agreed on, that 2-3 points of the proposed 10.
I wonder if they talked anything worthwhile at all. I don't even know what could that be.

Sudden and weird news.
The article linked below tells three things. Orbán (personally him) ordered these three. One is a change in the budget, seems unrelated (kinda its about the spending of the Hungarian embassies, they get more money), the other two is related to the Hungarian Defense Forces. The one from these two that I find curious - especially after Orbán's visit to Ukraine - is about the care of disabled soldiers, about those who is eligible to receive disability support. From now on only those get the money who had 15 years of service behind them, and their "level of health" doesn't reach 30%. So who are +70% disabled. That is one seriously maimed soldier.
And it is important because if a war breaks out, a war like the one ongoing in Ukraine, there will be lots of new soldiers with various amount of injuries, wounds. All with all kinds of missing body parts, from ears, through fingers/toes to whole limbs, and more. But first, even they get to the front, the standing army will be engaged, and will suffer extremely high casualties - most of which also all kinds of injuries.
So what I see is the Hungarian government want to minimize the spending on these soldiers. Even those who are currently serving, most of them rarely has 10+ years of service. I think they have 5 years of contracts (at first perhaps), I'm not sure at all. But I doubt many are in for 15+ years. And even the most veteran ones (who were all over the globe in various places now, Balkans, Afghanistan, Africa) only the super maimed will get any support, those who can only vegetate.
How this decision came to be?
Did Orbán get information about the losses in Ukraine? About the real situation that does not reaches the media?
https://index.hu/gazdasag/2024/07/03/varga-mihaly-orban-viktor-koltsegvetes-atcsoportositas-honvedseg/

>>52149
Also do they really think war is actually coming?

Or are we going into?

>>52146
Anything appears in the media seems utter gibberish. Reading titles liek:
>The whole Western media is loud from Orbán's visit to Kiev
Now these at least tell me, the whole thing is a PR stunt.
I already see the arch:
>Orbán starts the EU presidency by visiting President Zelensky
<Orbán ends the EU presidency by visiting President Trump
...

Opinion piece by Orbán:
https://www.newsweek.com/orban-point-nato-peace-not-endless-war-opinion-1915287
Not that interesting, but at least is in English.
But according to Realpolitik, there is no offensive war, just defensive. This is how the Kremlin can invade another country and claim defense.

Yesterday Orbán had a chat with Erdogan in Washington DC.
Today the NATO summit starts.

Biden's speech on NATO summit:
https://invidious.protokolla.fi/watch?v=MeP7z1GCsDM
https://youtube.com/watch?v=MeP7z1GCsDM [Embed]
Fierce speech considering. Some slurring here and there, but it's better than the debate.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_227685.htm
>The Allies also pledged to deliver critical capabilities to Ukraine rapidly, with an initial focus
on munitions and air and missile defence systems.
>In January, European NATO Allies agreed to jointly buy up to 1,000 Patriot missiles. In the margins of the Summit, the NATO support and procurement agency (NSPA) has placed an order for Stinger anti-aircraft missiles worth $700 million.
Frankly they can't deploy F-16s in Ukraine (they promised first batch by June), for the missile and drone threat. They would be just destroyed on the airfields. Some even without flying one mission. They stronger air defense.
And not just in the hinterland, their troops are bombed daily on the fronts, FABbed continuously. And their artillery pieces are targeted by Lancets. And other pleasantries. Frankly air defense is way more important for Ukraine than F-16s - granted F-16s are part of air defense/control.
Interesting thing that Matt of WillyOAM said in an interview, and his interviewee, a foreign veteran in Ukraine agreed: lots of Ukrainian soldiers lack in equipment, the defense works are in shambles, they have very little night vision and infra red capabilities on most of the frontline, from the price of one Abrams these problems could be solved, why not start there?!

Back to our favourite African country.
Mali signed a nuclear cooperation with Rosatom. They'll build there a low capacity NPP. Apparently they are already constructing a larger one in Egypt (El Dabaa), plus have other agreements with Burkina Faso and Algeria.
https://invidious.perennialte.ch/watch?v=GwEz1it1b64
https://youtube.com/watch?v=GwEz1it1b64 [Embed]

>>52194
I heard that beyond this, they approved again of the use of Western weapons inside Russia.
This could matter for the F-16s too - just as AA rockets - so they could reach Russian airplanes attacking the front with FABS further away. (And ofc for the use of ATACAMS or HIMARS or just simple artillery against targets within Russia.)

Beyond this Stoltenberg said again Ukraine will join NATO.
And beyond all this they congratulated themselves to set up AA batteries in Poland close to Ukraine, which could target incoming threats still over Ukraine. Will they use it to shield targets within Ukraine? Right now I think no plans for that but the implications are there. Range is about 150km I think. Where is an article about this?

Is this the secret plan?

>>52197
It's quite telling that the majority of the questions that reporters asked him in his NATO press conference were about his health and him still running for the presidency and not actually about NATO. Nobody believes that he is fit to run for president again other than himself.

>>52198
Just wait. They make Trump's return so sure that everyone who does not want Trump will go and vote on Biden and reelect him (or whoever they switch to).

DPA skips reports now. Very disturbing.

DPA says:
>we have 20 frontline changes constantly
I mean even if its a bit exaggerated claim and not all Russian captures, it does seem they advance perpetually.
Constant mention of peace in media.
Will this war be shorter than expected?
New NATO secretary, and probably new US President. They could say they bring change and shut things down.

Here's the Syrsky interview by the Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jul/24/i-know-we-will-win-and-how-ukraines-top-general-on-turning-the-tables-against-russia

When I searched for it DDG gave some results like "key takeaways from the Guardian's Syrsky interview". Perhaps it would be interesting to check what are their takeaways and how they compare to mine.

Conflict in Ukraine's Donbas Region: The Geology Behind the Headlines
https://yewtu.be/watch?v=LvxzEa9Rkpg
https://youtube.com/watch?v=LvxzEa9Rkpg [Embed]
Not a new video, published in 2022 November. He presents some maps and explains the geology of Ukraine and the resources can be found there.
The iron belt, the coal region, the gas and oil fields. He mentions the interest of Shell and the Russians.

>>52225
Some would claim the Ukrainians achieved a favorable material loss ratio in the wider area around Krinky. Even if it's true, Ukraine would have been burning through precious elite manpower to deplete enemy armor and artillery. Do the generals really believe manpower is worth burning through like that? Easier to believe it's one of those "not one step back" orders coming from the highest echelons.

>>52247
Now this is a convenient way to learn geology through prior knowledge of history and geography. Few, if any, viewers would learn the other way around.

>>52249
>Easier to believe it's one of those "not one step back" orders coming from the highest echelons.
Sounds like it.
Maybe they tried to establish an actual bridgehead and do some operations from there I kinda refuse to believe those two rows of houses was the big prize, but Russians acted more quickly and decisively than AFU expected and they got stuck in that strip of land. Then someone upstairs said, "fuck it, you'll hold that".
Maybe there was even some hope that they achieve some results elsewhere which could help push out from Krynky but it never came.

>convenient way to learn geology
I sure find it helpful. My question was: I see the Dnieper flowing right at the divide of the two zones, but what makes it suddenly cross the pink instead of following the divide to the sea? But then I realized the orange zone ends about there and the coal zone comes with it's ridge, I assume that's less erodible.

Israel keeps the Syrian Golan Heights under occupation since 1961, settlers continuously colonized the place until they "annexed" it in 1981 and this is okay according to everyone.
Hezbollah did a rocket attack into the place, targeting a military installation, but (also?) hitting a sports field killing children.
As a declared "revenge" Israel did an actual "precision" strike (so they claim) against an Hezbollah hq in Beirut, killing a top leader. Tit for tat continues with Iran.
https://yewtu.be/watch?v=XaLKS3g0id8
https://youtube.com/watch?v=XaLKS3g0id8 [Embed]

DPA has new news channel. Perhaps I should collect all his channels to one post, its hard to find them on invidious.
https://invidious.privacyredirect.com/channel/UCRr0ok9LBlj66of_ZrbjNVA
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRr0ok9LBlj66of_ZrbjNVA

Two things.
1. This could be fairly uncomfortable, private ties, foreign interests, corruption.
https://xcancel.com/SarahAshtonLV/status/1819698313769423210#m
This person is kinda controversial being a tranny or whatever. Weirdly enough Trump's vice president candidate, JD Vance, had a run in with him:
https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-suspends-transgender-spokesperson-after-fight-republican-1828640
From the article it seems he's very committed to battling Russians, if anything.
As he notes in the video, he tried to resolve the issue through official channels, with his superiors in the chain of command, without success. This is why he made this thing public.
It seems a private group intends to get large amount (over 200 000 kgs) of explosives from the US via Syrsky, circumventing the Ukrainian MoD.
This shit is highly suspicious, just imagine, Bernd, if you'd turn to a general (the commander-in-chief no less) of your country to get weapons for you from another country's military without telling it to the PM/Pres of your country. What the fuck. If I was liek:
>yo buddy, don't tell Orbán, but get some of that Lancets from the Russians
I'm deliberately not giving USA as an example, but someone we aren't in a military alliance with
Anyway... there are some documents in that thread on twitter.

2. Business insider video about US spending on Ukrainian war.
https://invidious.privacyredirect.com/watch?v=WhhovQ7HW4k
https://youtube.com/watch?v=WhhovQ7HW4k [Embed]
At 0:44 the narrator says:
>in a war some have called a stalemate
He said this on 2024 August 4 Anno Domini, when the Russians slowly but surely move forward - and towards victory - for months now. They take larger and larger bites with constant pace, or even accelerating pace. This situation is not something that can be described as stalemate.
I wonder when the narration will shift and acknowledge that Ukraine is losing.

Military term worth noting related to the above:
Diversion Reconnaissance Group (DRG):
>refers to a specialized unit tasked with reconnaissance operations that may involve deceptive maneuvers to mislead enemy forces.
So basically Ukraine doing a double operation, sending these DRG units deep into enemy territory, while there is a slower paced "normal" force to actually occupy and hold areas, while actually clashing with counterattacking Russian units - perhaps even do surprise attacks, ambushes, if the arriving Russian troops are too hasty to move forward (and estimates AFU positions wrong.
I think situation isn't changed too much since yesterday.

This doesn't seem to make much sense. The Ukrainians are simply wasting men and resources.

I heard rumours that the war was going to end in a ceasefire this year. So I wonder if maybe the Ukrainians are launching this attack in the hope that it will give them at something to use at the negotiating table. Because long term this attack is stupid, like actually stupid. If this isn't in support of a ceasefire then all it will do is tie up Ukrainian forces, waste Ukrainian men and resources which they are lacking as it is and give Russia justification to use conscripts and to escalate the war in general. There are also worrying movements coming from Belarus who is of course a Russian ally and so theoretically could be brought into this war.

This operation seems like a desperate gamble to me.

>>52309
>I heard rumours that the war was going to end in a ceasefire this year. So I wonder if maybe the Ukrainians are launching this attack in the hope that it will give them at something to use at the negotiating table.
I see/hear/read rumors and speculations about that. That "peace plan" of Zelensky's they hyped this year also part of this rumor mill. But Russia has no reason to sit down yet. If they feel they can take more land they'll just go on.
For now the Kursk incursion did not slow down the rest of the fronts, Russians have a capacity separated just for the "SMO", and they use other resources to defend Russia "proper".
On the other hand Ukraine's army is getting weaker by the day. When the cohesion drops low enough, Russia will be able to do anything. And they are betting on this in Moscow I think.
I do think they won't do quick captures like at the very beginning of the war. They will be suspicious of everything. Hidden minefields, booby traps, guerillas in hiding. They don't want neither of these behind their units. Perhaps a point comes when they drop most precautions, perhaps not.
For the Western powers it would be advantageous to have a peace that is temporary, to have a situation they could reignite (especially indirectly through provocations), but the Kremlin don't want to replay this war ever again. They want all the places in their strategic interest to hold, and want Ukraine neutered. They want a buffer zone between them and NATO. They want a buffer zone they have influence on, like Belarus.
They have unfinished business in the Caucasus, and potential confrontation zone in the Baltics, a new one with Finland, and on the longer run in Asia. While China is friendly now, the two countries are rival too, and their cooperation will only last until the US is a danger for both.

I think the Kursk offensive is a live military exercise. How would a NATO invasion against Russia would look like?

Putin is addressing his staff about the Kursk invasion.
https://yewtu.be/watch?v=u1qHC_471C8
https://youtube.com/watch?v=u1qHC_471C8 [Embed]
He says that the #1 priority of the Def Ministry is to force out the Ukrainians. But he does not mention the army, only the FSB (Federal Security Service) and the National Guard (Rosgvardiya) - used against the sabotage and recon groups, and some vague combat objectives of the National Guard. Later in the speech he does say that the RuAF doing well in its effort to "liberate" Donetsk and Luhansk, so that is about only the offensive operations of the SMO.
Wyatt of DPA says form open sources it can be gathered that Russians use airplanes, helicopters, and drones heavily, but on the ground it seems it's mostly special forces that engages the AFU on the ground in Kursk. It does seem that regular units of the Russian army aren't there to halt the advances.
So I assume the fight - for now - is the job of the oblast itself, the local units of the National Guard. The federal government complements them with air force, FSB, and other special forces. I wonder why.

Yesterday Zelensky said the goal is to establish a buffer zone in Kursk to prevent Russia opening another front in Ukraine.
Perhaps this idea I put forward here: >>52318 is right and they essentially testing how Russia reacts when attacked. And it is also an exercise, a learning opportunity for Russia to polish their defense plans and actions.
https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2024/08/19/zelenskyy-envisions-buffer-zone-as-ukraine-pushes-into-kursk-region/

>>52365
In the East the Russians are entering areas now where the buildings are still intact and there are still leafy trees in the towns. This shows that very little fighting has taken place in those areas as compared with what we usually see where it looks worse than Stalingrad. I heard that the Ukrainians are pulling out, but I don't know how far they are pulling out too.

Regarding the US election, it's hard to say. Germany announced they were reducing spending on Ukraine for next year, they are the second largest donor and we have not really heard much about any new plans or wonder weapons to defeat Russia. The F16s have arrived but people have begun to realise that they really were never going to achieve all that much.
I think that there is a possibility that US support will wain anyway but I also think that if Trump gets in it will certainly wain. But regardless of the party in charge, if US support for Ukraine starts declining or it stops all together than I think the rest of NATO will follow suit(if it does not stop by itself anyway) and I think Ukraine will have to negotiate.

Ukraine really doesn't seem to be the biggest concern in most countries now. Britain has a huge debt, Britain's healthcare is in a bad state as are other public services, they have internal unrest and they have cost of living issues. They can't afford to help all that much. France has similar problems(and it doesn't even have a functioning government) and Germany is not doing too great either.

The only upside for Ukraine is that as time goes on defence manufacturing ramps up more and more which might help if nations choose to send it to Ukraine and if they can send more to Ukraine that way than Ukraine has been getting through NATO stock piles but I still doubt that. I certainly don't think Ukraine is going to get many more Patriot batteries or tanks.

>>52368
>the buildings are still intact and there are still leafy trees
Ah yeah, I noticed that. They don't really drop FABs for sure and seems not much artillery and drone strikes are basically precision ones. Which means little to no resistance.
This is the "big arrow" offensive, they just have to take it slow, so no potential guerillas/special forces slip in, and no booby traps, mines remain in the way.

Hmm. Germany goes where the wind blows. Will they ever say no to US demands?
Monies should already prepared for a while, and they don't let the whole picture slip. Starting this year was the drama about the €50 billion - "oh my god will Orbán block it circus" - and it seemed it popped out from nowhere, while it was in the pipes since the start of the war basically. They rely on people not be able to track what's going on for a longer run. So god knows what's the situation now.
On EU level they were talking about using the frozen Russian assets. They are debating this for a while now.
>doesn't even have a functioning government
They don't really need it.
>defence manufacturing ramps up more and more
Indeed, the wheels started to spin. I guess they produce 155mm now.

New info to me, also CNN acknowledging problems...
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/09/08/europe/ukraine-military-morale-desertion-intl-cmd/index.html

Article writes about huge losses, tho a bit vague on this (whole units eroding).
Also mentioning the hardships on the frontline, with some data. In general units try to rotate troops sitting on the front every 3-4 days. However this could be as much as 20 days. And this is 24/7, it's not like "hey my 8 hours shift is done, I hang my hat". They can sit there, getting bombarded, or attacked by ground troops, replying with fire as they can. The article also says, they often cannot reply with artillery, can't help out the troops from behind.
The real banger is the subordination problems. The "newly" mobilized troops who aren't there on their own volition, they got enough of the fight very quick. Many leave, desert, or try to use connections to get somewhere else, just far from the front.
In the first 4 months of 2024 "prosecutors launched criminal proceedings against almost 19,000 soldiers who either abandoned their posts or deserted"! And things only got worse in the next 4 months passed since. This could mean as much as 40000 soldiers denying to face the enemy!
The author also mentions other problems such as lack of communications, lack of vital information sharing, skepticism towards the Kursk offensive.
For a CNN article this is quite shocking. What the regular readers could think?

>>52393
The punishment for that kind of thing in most armies used to be death. We have really gotten soft now...

>>52394
Indeed. When presented with the choice of facing sure death vs. possible death, most people will pick which gives them a (fighting) chance.
But it's not like they will execute 19 (40) 000 people.

https://www.politico.eu/article/russia-ukraine-nuclear-plants-energy-war-joe-biden-united-states-nato/
>The risk of Ukraine losing the war this winter
This, coming from Politico, is like a bomb. What their readers think? They were telling all this time that Ukraine is winning. That Russia is shit! SHIT! This is literally a 540 degree turn.

Well, Mr. Jamie Dettmer of Politico, it's time for you to suck some Scholz dick. Imagine the options of Western centers of power if they setting up Scholz as the peacemaker. Really scraping the bottom of that barrel.
https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-kyiv-un-security-council-washington-nato/

Anyway.
This article above is one more voice they started to let peep the tune that things aren't going as media (like Politico) told to us. But it also seems to be one that starts to contemplate what they'll present to the readers as victory.
>When the dust settles, will the West’s media coverage get a passing grade, or will we find, at times, we allowed our sympathy for the Ukrainian cause to overlook matters we shouldn’t?
Mr. Jamie Dettmer, you have no sympathy for Ukraine. You write whatever you are paid to write and that is to make the readers feel sympathy for Ukraine just enough to not question whatever bs the legislations and governments pass through related to this war.

Tho this article also starts out with telling us, they are right about everything they wrote check out this paragraph:
>The information trap we’re caught in isn’t one that overplays the true menace of [...] Putin — his thuggish, antediluvian nastiness; the bestial nature of his army’s atrocious behavior; his unlawful and detestable deportations (many of them children) from occupied parts of Ukraine to Russia — all echoing some of the worst episodes of a dark and hideous European past. Nor does it downplay the threat to democracies posed by his axis of autocrats and their antagonism toward classic liberal values.
Nooo, not the children! Think of them.
Literal Holocaust Holodomor. dark and hideous European past
Also Orbán.The "axis of autocrats".

Anyway #2, quotes.
>skepticism needed when considering whether this war is winnable — as in, can Russian forces be ejected from the 20 percent of Ukraine they’ve seized? Are we properly questioning some of the key assumptions underpinning the West’s strategy? Assumptions like Ukraine being the first stage of a broader Russian master plan to launch a land attack on NATO; that the fates of Ukraine and Europe are absolutely synonymous; or that Western sanctions will inevitably wreck Russia’s economy.
Here's the replies this article implies to each question:
>Is this war winnable?
No.
>As in, can Russian forces be ejected from the 20 percent of Ukraine they’ve seized?
No.
>Are we properly questioning some of the key assumptions underpinning the West’s strategy?
No.
>Is Ukraine the first stage of a broader Russian master plan to launch a land attack on NATO?
No.
>Is the fates of Ukraine and Europe are absolutely synonymous?
No.
Will Western sanctions inevitably wreck Russia’s economy?
No.

So much to tell and note about this article. Beyond all the above it also wants readers to support lifting restrictions over weapon systems:
>Questions like is this war winnable in the maximal sense? And if it is, can it be won with the current Western approach of foot-dragging when it comes to supplies or maintaining restrictions on Ukraine’s use of long-range missiles? And if the West isn’t prepared to do much more, what then? Prolonged war?
Translation:
>if you don't support lifting restrictions that will prolong the war
Isn't giving more straws to Ukraine to grab on prolongs the war but not helping Ukraine actually "win" this?
The author criticizes the "game changing weapons", but can't prevent himself suggesting another one. Good job.

Russia update the ToS of nuclear weapons. Translation done by Michael Rossi, not machine translator, so might be more accurate than others.
https://invidious.jing.rocks/watch?v=mKrCQyZDy4U
https://youtube.com/watch?v=mKrCQyZDy4U [Embed]
Essentially:
- nuclear deterrence includes Belarus;
- extended definition of weapons and use of weapons that can trigger nuclear response, such as massive air attack - think of the modus of Iranian strike against Israel - with aircraft, drones, hypersonic missiles, etc, or the use other conventional weapons if they create critical threat to the sovereignty of Rus/Belrus;
- nuclear weapons can be used against non-nuclear state which is supported by nuclear states (considered joint attack);

I dunno. Sounds like this new regulation is tailored to a specific ongoing conflict..., although considering new weapons (chiefly drones and hypersonic rockets) and their new type of usage warrants an updated policy.

Vuhledar is gone. Symbolic. Russians surely payed the price. Tough haggle, Ukrainians.
DeepState map hasn't acknowledge'd yet, DPA, reported based on geolocations.

DeepState confirmed.
Well they held it for a long time and held it well.
Situation changed. The balance of power tipped towards the Russians, they have the firepower, initiative, and their strategy and tactics evolved.
Back then when the assault of Vuhledar failed, there was only one real fighting force conducting offensive operation: the Wagner at Bakhmut. Now the Russian army is capable conducting even more serious operation what they did there, and not just at one place. They have an offensive at Pishchane (near the Oskil), Siversk, Chasiv Yar-Bakhmut, New York-Toretsk, Pokrovsk, Kurakhov, and Vodiane-Vuhledar. They are doing something at Kursk now too, at least checking the AFU there. Very different in magnitude.

>>52444
>>52445
Things are not going well for the Ukrainians. But you are right, in the past Russian offensives were focused on singular points fo the front, now they are not. But back then the Russians were outnumbered whereas now they are the ones that have the numbers. Though numbers on both sides are really hard to even guess at by this stage in the war.

It will be interesting to see what happens in the next few days, to see how much farther the Russians can push in that direction.

>>52446
>But back then the Russians were outnumbered whereas now they are the ones that have the numbers.
True. Situation changed a lot.
>Though numbers on both sides are really hard to even guess at by this stage in the war.
Maybe it would be more correct to say that Russian military is more powerful which consists of a number of factors, one of it is manpower. And perhaps not simply numerical, but number of men who are capable of doing assault operations.
It's told sometimes that not all soldiers are doing frontline duty, and even in the units holding the line not all sub-units are used, or can be used in such way. When I browsed the militaryland map and checked some of the brigades that were set up for the 2023 spring/summer offensive, only 1 or 2 mechanized brigades had an assault battalion. And I remember clearly when Ukrainian soldiers from a mechanized brigade complained that they are used for assault duty which they have nor training neither equipment. Now imagine the situation with "simple" rifle brigades, and even lower: territorial defense brigade.

>>52448
They really haven't achieved much so far. It seems they are being cautious.

I think the Gaza operation does actually have the potential to be beneficial to Israel. If they manage to take and hold Gaza then that puts an end to the Palestinian question. There won't be any more serious Palestinian resistance.

But I agree that this Lebanon operation doesn't seem to have much potential benefit. Even if they take southern Lebanon, then what? Hezbollah will just move north and launch rockets from there instead.

>>52450
>puts an end to the Palestinian question
They can't "annex" Gaza, they don't want a large Palestinian minority in Israel. At least with that they are outside of it. And there could be in international backlash, tho this don't matter much to them. Muh holocaust.
Plus the West Bank is still there. Problem is the Jews want all the banks, hehehe.
Unless they literally kill all the Palestinians, the only way forward is such a level of cooperation, with such level of Palestinian benefits that no "radical" organization can get a real support among the Palestinian population.
I don't think that's happening either. So at some point things will be at square one.

>>52453
They would manage Gaza like they do the west bank. The Israelis have the west bank under control even though it's a larger area. Yes there is some resistance their but nothing on the scale of Hamas.

>>52454
West Bank has PNA/Fatah.
Hamas is good for Israel at least for certain interest groups there and the US, because they can generate conflict out of them when necessary, and they can use it as an excuse not to create independent Palestine.
Now the name Hamas will be too inconvenient so they'll drop it and setup some different organization which Iran can support on.

Russian fighter shot down own S-70 drone over Ukraine. This type of drone is still in development and used as a pilotless weapon platform, an expansion of firepower per pilot basis. One pilot in a Su-57 can control a few of these.
Now the AFU (therefore the USA) has the wreckage, free to study this new system. What Bernd thinks, how much this matters? The West has experience with these types of airframes, and trick is in the control tech, the programs that enables these drones.
https://www.twz.com/air/why-did-russia-just-shoot-down-its-own-fighter-sized-s-70-hunter-drone-over-ukraine

>>52458
It's interesting. I have long wondered why the SU-57 hasn't seen any use in this war, my theory for this was that it's stealth capabilities were not good enough and so it would be shot down if it was but the fact that this happened over Ukrainian held territory would imply that the SU-57 is actually undetectable by the Ukrainians. But why would they fly the Su-57 alongside a test vehicle over Ukrainian territory? It's such an odd thing to do.

I don't think the west will learn anything from the drone, we already have such drone programmes. But maybe this will help the west develop means to detect the S-70.

>>52459
>the fact that this happened over Ukrainian held territory would imply that the SU-57 is actually undetectable by the Ukrainians.
Either tech is lacking, or the air defense has more holes than Swiss cheese.
>why would they fly the Su-57 alongside a test vehicle over Ukrainian territory?
In theory a "drone strike force" consists of one Su-57 and 2-3 S-70. The pilot in the Su-57 controls the drones. They add more firepower to one pilot, more rockets and bombs, but also they help the Su-57 remain stealthy: stealth aircrafts typically hold their armament inside the fuselage to lower radar cross section. But if they want to fire them they have to open up - which breaks their silhouette and they open up to radars too. If the weaponry is another airplane, they they don't have to reveal themselves, and/or can do it when it's absolutely necessary. The S-70 is more sacrificable than the Su-57 with pilot.
The real question is why the Su-57 shot the S-70 down??? Surely not by mistake, especially if they flew together as a wing.

>But maybe this will help the west develop means to detect the S-70.
You might be right.

>>52460
>or the air defense has more holes than Swiss cheese.
The Ukrainians are fairly mobile with their AA plaforms so the Russian's would find it hard to guarantee that there were no patriot batteries in the area, I don't think the Russians would risk it.

>They add more firepower to one pilot, more rockets and bombs, but also they help the Su-57 remain stealthy
I get the reason for the drone but not why the Russians would have used it where they were. What were they doing that was so important that it was worth sending a valuable experimental assets like that for?

>The real question is why the Su-57 shot the S-70 down??? Surely not by mistake, especially if they flew together as a wing.
My theory would be that the drone either lost connection to the SU-57 or it lost the ability to fly properly. So it was uncontrollable and the SU-57 had to destroy it. That might also explain why it was there in the first place, maybe the drone been uncontrollable for a while and had away from safe Russian airspace into Ukrainian airspace.

>>52461
>What were they doing that was so important that it was worth sending a valuable experimental assets like that for?
Maybe they aren't really experimental by now but combat ready and do missions for a while now.
>lost connection to the SU-57 or it lost the ability to fly properly. So it was uncontrollable and the SU-57 had to destroy it.
Now this really activates the almonds. Anti-drone EW capabilities can do more than disrupt frequencies, communications with various means: it is possible to take control over drones. Granted it is probably easier to do it with a DJI Mavic, than the S-70, but who knows. NATO is watching, they gather intelligence, draw conclusion, develop their own stuff, and they test weapon systems in Ukraine, partially by Ukrainians, partially by foreign "volunteers", they could test stuff covertly and directly themselves, as long as public does not know about. Russia has to turn a blind eye for different things anyway (like directing strikes on the Black Sea fleet from aboard of NATO AWACS and whatnot).
tl;dr NATO might have an EW system that can take the control over S-70s. They caught one and the Russian pilot had to destroy it.

>>52462
I had not really thought about EW but yes, that could be it. EW is one of those things that's obviously quite common and very important but at the same time highly classified and hard to actually see or know what is even going on or what it even is so I don't think about it as much as I probably should.

Now we know that success for Ukraine would be if Ukraine could have a place at the negotiating table.
And now we know that Ukraine's NATO membership is a pipe dream and they hover it as a carrot.

>>52475

Even if they won't get in NATO de jure, they will still enter into mutual defense agreements with the most important NATO countries (if not all of them plus some non-NATO ones). This process has already started.

>>52476
>mutual defense agreements
This could be a broad term, and could include stuff liek:
>thereby we vow that if Ukraine is attacked by Russia again, we'll sanction Russia (again) and send our concern to Ukraine (again)
But in a strict sense which would cause these most important NATO countries to go to war against Russia: no. They won't risk it.
The chief problem is however - as far as we can tell - that noone knows how Ukraine will look like after the war, or even in half a year distance that could be after the war btw, I linked an article here >>52417 that notes Ukraine could lose during this winter.

Here's two unpopular opinions.

1. Strong Ukraine is bad for the EU
The EU was created by France and Germany (with the participation of the Netherlands and Italy) and serves first and foremost their interests, their economical progress. When the Eastern EU countries entered into this institution they had to fulfill some requirements. Beyond the commonly cited ones (like law and order and democratic expectations) they also had to downgrade their economies, cut back on production, because Western companies and farmers and such don't want competition. They want new markets and workforce working for them.
They also want to preserve their weight in the decision making. They bitch about new power blocks even so weak as the V4. Eastern EU countries can gang together and cause all kinds of troubles, like earlier this year when the farmers of these countries came together to stop Ukrainian grain (which Western governments wanted so much). They cry about Poland/Northern Hungary/Hungary vetoing random crap.
Would they really want a respectable sized country with relatively large population and potentially strong economy enter to their club and fuck the power of balance up even more? Not to mention the hundreds of thousands of Nazis who would be pissed by Brussels' immigration policies too.

2. Strong Russia is good for the US
In a multipolar world the leading powers are all enemies of each other, and they only create temporary alignments (not alliances, but align together to oppose others), depending on the balance of power.
As of now three leading powers exist: USA, China, Russia. Power ranking follows this order too. Right now China and Russia are working together to balance out the US. But China and Russia are also rivals of each other. In the future it can happen that the US will need someone to balance out China. And this will be Russia.
Frankly from now on all the great powers need the others.
Ofc there is another possibility to kick one leading power down and downgrade it to a local power achieving a bipolar world, but for now this doesn't seem working, and Russia is getting stronger China alone still can't balance out US, so they won't let this happen either.

>>52478
1- That's true, also the EU is ageing and they are going to face economic challenges in the future. I don't think they have the resources to fix Ukraine, lift it to EU standards and then give them the same support that they give every other EU nation. And yes, as you say they are not going to want another Hungary or Poland in the EU.
Having said that, the EU is still going to want to make use of their labour and they are still going to want to keep them aligned with the west, so I think they will make some kind of other arrangement. Like giving them some kind of partial EU member status.

2- Sort of, that's partly how they dealt with the USSR, they swayed the weaker power(China) to support them against the the stronger power(the USSR). But the problem is that the Russians are a direct threat to Europe in a way that China was not, so by working with Russia they put themselves at odds with Europe and they also are trying to leave Europe to focus on China but if Russia gets too strong they will have to come back to Europe anyway. Although China is in a complicated situation, Russia's war in Ukraine really does not help her and nor does the escalating situation in the middle east, on top of that, US and EU trade wars against China are going to force China to rethink how it engages with the world and who it engages with. They might come out of that either doubling down on Russia as a source of energy imports and an ally against the west or turning against Russia as a rival to Chinese ambitions in Africa,Iran and North Korea and as a threat to global trade and energy security, if Russia supports Iran in attacking Saudi oil facilities and cutting off Saudi oil, China will not be happy. But that also relates to the Saudis who are also at a crossroads and are also going to have to rethink their place in the world as the US increasingly loses interest in them and the region.

>>52479
>EU is still going to want to make use of their labour
And a weak Ukraine is enough for that.

>Russians are a direct threat to Europe
Which is perfect if the US wants the European countries beneath of the protective umbrella of NATO. Can't scare Europe with a weak Russia, they would even think cooperating with her could be a good idea. Can't allow that.
>China is in a complicated situation, Russia's war in Ukraine really does not help her
It does. She sells great many non-lethal non-weapons (which still can be used in the war) to both sides. And while Russia created local facilities to produce the much needed stuff she can't buy from Europe anymore, they also turned to China to buy 'em. Machines, tech, cars. Russia became quickly a great market for Chinese cars.
>Saudi and Iran
While this is a tangent, but why not. Iran is now a member of BRICS and perhaps Iran will be too. Trade could help to build a mutual understanding. Well it did little for India and China... but perhaps.

>>52480
>Which is perfect if the US wants the European countries beneath of the protective umbrella of NATO. Can't scare Europe with a weak Russia, they would even think cooperating with her could be a good idea. Can't allow that.
Europe would be less willing to work with the US if the US is also working with their enemy. Europe is also at a crossroads right now(I keep saying that but it's just the way the world is right now). The US is looking increasingly isolationist and hostile towards the outside world, even towards Europe, and there may be a US trade war with Europe. On top of that the Europeans themselves are looking like they might have a trade war with China and the Europeans have already ruined relations with Russia over the Ukraine war. So they have to rethink where they get energy and raw materials from and who they sell their finished products too.

>It does. She sells great many non-lethal non-weapons (which still can be used in the war) to both sides. And while Russia created local facilities to produce the much needed stuff she can't buy from Europe anymore, they also turned to China to buy 'em. Machines, tech, cars. Russia became quickly a great market for Chinese cars.
Chinese exports to Ukraine have tanked due to this war, they were 9.29 Billion in 2021 but only 3.3 Billion in 2022 and 2.78 Billion in 2023.

https://tradingeconomics.com/china/exports/ukraine

But Chinese exports to Russia have grown from 67.2 Billion in 2021 to 111 Billion in 2023.

https://tradingeconomics.com/china/exports/russia

But Russia isn't a big enough market to be able to replace Europe or the US in the event of a trade war or sanctions, so China really doesn't want to be forced to pick a side in this war.

>While this is a tangent, but why not. Iran is now a member of BRICS and perhaps Iran will be too. Trade could help to build a mutual understanding. Well it did little for India and China... but perhaps.
Maybe, Iran produces a lot of agricultural products and Saudi Arabia is a desert so they probably could do with that, it would benefit the Saudis to be on good relations with Russia to access her grain exports as well. But they have to get over their differences first.

>>52481
> But they have to get over their differences first.
I mean the Saudis have to get over their differences with Iran not Russia.

>>52478

>As of now three leading powers exist: USA, China, Russia

Aren't you forgetting someone? Europe united into a (con)federation would have more military power than Russia and China and would rival economies of USA and China. I mean, they are not a "leading power" right now, but out of the three you mentioned only USA can be truly described like that.

So, a united and independent Europe has the potential to be more of a rival, a threat to USA dominance than Russia or China. Only if the latter two would combine their potentials in a firm political and military alliance akin to NATO, only then would they be able to rival USA or Europe (think like - "if USA attacks China Russia will launch all their nuked towards USA, or if Europe would attack Russia, China would send all their ground and air forces to the European front to fight alongside Russia"), which is of course highly improbable.

Therefore it is in American interests to keep Europe from further integrating into a single country (ergo "Brexit"), and to keep China and Russia from entering a true alliance. USA will try to keep Europe dependent both on American resources (instead of, say, Norwegian gas and oil) and on American military might via NATO. To this end they'll maintain Russia as a threat to Europe and the raison d'etre for NATO - a source of threatening newspaper headlines, but not much of a real threat. They will also try to deepen the rift between the "old EU" and "new EU" (ergo Visegrad 4), perhaps helping Poland to become a rival of Germany and the power center of [s]Eastern[/s] sorry, Central Europe. Meanwhile in Asia (and Africa) all their might will be poised against China. May be we will finally see something of an asian NATO - NEATO, if you will.

>>52481
Europe has very little say and is manipulated into what US wants.
>The US is looking increasingly isolationist and hostile towards the outside world, even towards Europe
Yeah, US seems to drain Europe's wealth, to keep the motor running at home, lessen the impact of recession, and restart the economy.
>Europeans themselves are looking like they might have a trade war with China and the Europeans have already ruined relations with Russia over the Ukraine war. So they have to rethink where they get energy and raw materials from and who they sell their finished products too.
Seems so.
>Chinese exports to Ukraine have tanked due to this war, they were 9.29 Billion in 2021 but only 3.3 Billion
But they sell stuff to US and EU whom then sends that to Ukraine.
>Russia isn't a big enough market to be able to replace Europe or the US
Europe will continue buy Chinese stuff, they can't compete with production (Europe pays like three times more for energy than the rest of the world) no matter how much tariffs they put on certain goods (and they won't put on everything).
>they have to get over their differences first.
We can only wait and see.

>Aren't you forgetting someone? Europe
Hello, Slovborg!
Europe is an international organization. It is not a sate. Furthermore it lacks resources, it is not independent, first and foremost in energy, but in everything else. Europe is the consumer of the world's products. China also has energy problems, but can't sell shit to China, they sell to everyone they buy very little, only luxury goods basically
>not a "leading power" right now, but out of the three you mentioned only USA can be truly described like that.
Multipolar world doesn't mean "multiple powers of equal strength". The toplist doesn't go extinct.
After the fall of the SU, and the demise of the bipolar world, the US become hegemon. Now it is not anymore. This doesn't mean China and/or Russia caught up, it just means that now they are strong enough to form their own poles within the global order. Not just US can meddle around the globe, but them too.
But yeah, "global power" is perhaps the more accurate term.
>united and independent Europe
There is no united and independent Europe.
>has the potential to be more of a rival, a threat to USA
And this is why the US prevents Europe to become a global power. And it will make sure European countries needs her. As of now almost all of Europe is a client state of the US, btw, yes Hungary too and is used to prevent the unification of Europe.
>Therefore it is in American interests to keep Europe from further integrating into a single country
Indeed. Europe is a non-factor. I'm not forgetting someone, because Europe is nowhere.
>rest of the paragraph
I mostly agree.

Zelensky's "Victory Plan"
https://www.politico.eu/article/volodymyr-zelenskyy-presents-his-victory-plan-to-ukraine-parliament-war-vladimir-putin/
1. Invitation to NATO - not membership just invitation.
2. Moar weapons without restrictions of use.
3. Non-nuclear strategic deterrence (the fuck is this)
>exact weapons were not revealed by Zelenskyy
4. Ukraine offers her strategic resources (such as lithium, gas, titanium, energy, I assume grain as well)
5. Ukraine's place in Europe after the war.

I have comments for #1 and #3.
#1 Way, way before I noted this could have been avoided if they took Ukraine into NATO. Ukraine had two "westward turn", in 2004 and 2014. Nothing happened. The 2014 one brought the civil war, which was still an internal conflict for Ukraine, and that issue with Crimea - which could have been ended by saying goodby to the peninsula. NATO membership needs no external conflict. And apparently NATO can act very quick if it wants. Wants such countries as Sweden and Finland. But not Ukraine.
#3 As an ex Soviet country, Ukraine inherited large number of nuclear weapons. That was nuclear deterrence. That could have helped them. But Westerners made them to give up in return for security guarantees. Paper defence. Moral of the story: never give up your weapons.

Fun:
Daniel Ortega, el Prezidente of Nicaragua said Zelensky and Netanyahu are the sons of the devil and are literally Hitler.
https://www.laprensani.com/2024/10/14/politica/3390632-ortega-califica-a-netanyahu-de-hijo-del-demonio
From Politico we learn that Netanyahu is actually Jewish. Who would have thought. About Zelensky we know this already.
Weird tho. Being Jewish doesn't prevent Jews calling each other Hitler and Nazi.
https://www.politico.eu/article/benjamin-netanyahu-volodymyr-zelenskyy-sons-adolf-hitler-devil-nicaragua-president-says-daniel-ortega-vladimir-putin-ukraine-russia-israel/
>Calling Your Political Rival a Nazi Is a Time-hallowed Tradition in Israel
>This specific term is a something left and right in Israel have always used against each other.
https://www.haaretz.com/2014-01-19/ty-article/.premium/calling-rivals-nazis-an-israeli-tradition/0000017f-e7b4-d62c-a1ff-ffff8ecf0000
Paywalled ofc, but still.

Hungary took over the presidency of the EU in July, will held it till January. Finally the bureaucrats in Brussels allowed Orbán to present his programme of the presidency on October 9, at the European Parliament Plenary.
I got the whole thing, speeches and "debate" from youtube, 3 and a half fucking hours. It complicates things that everyone talks in their own national language, so it has a shitty voice translation over it. I did not dare to listen yet.
Frau von der Leyen directed some lukewarm quips against Orbán and some others two, Orbán did a 15 mins reply there, I listen that one. They all touched several topics, one of them is Ukraine, and this is why I post about it here.
Orbán said in his reply (it's more or less a translation, not word to word tho, but close enough for our purpose, my notes in italics):
Now even in the Anglo-Saxon media (mainstream media) they report that Ukraine now loses the war, and this is accepted by all now. "We" - I got he meant as Ukraine, US, but first and foremost the EU with Hungary - "are losing the war". He said European MEPs still hasn't acknowledged it, but it would be the time to do. If we want to win, first we have to acknowledge the fact that we are losing. Because "we are losing on the Ukrainian front". And those in the EU Parliament pretends that this is not true. The truth is that - partially can be thanked for von der Leyen - the EU went into this war recklessly, with misguided and miscalculated strategy. If we want to win, this losing strategy has to be changed. The strategy was badly planned and badly executed. If we follow this, we'll lose. If we want the Ukrainians not to lose, we have to change the strategy. Every war needs diplomatical steps, communication, direct and indirect contacts, or we'll just go deeper into the war. Hundreds of thousands are dying in this war, thousands of each day. So this war won't have a solution with this strategy. So better to stand for peace. Argue for a ceasefire, and create a different strategy or we will all lose.
That's about it. Not many specifics. I think he just made notes and put together this reply while the others were talking.
The very end is interesting. In this form it means to freeze the conflict as it stands now, halt the fights, and... prepare a new fight???
Because it doesn't sound cutting the losses and make peace, just postpone the fight for a better time.
I think Russia would really want this to avoid. It is not good for Russia to have an unsolved situation, and they surely don't want NATO to equip and prepare Ukraine better. They surely don't want to wait until the Western arms production is in full swing.

https://www.politico.eu/article/ursula-von-der-leyen-attacks-viktor-orban-support-russia-speech-eu-european-parliament-hungary-ukraine-war/

>>52503
I think it will end in a ceasefire. The concern the west has with this war is that if Russia were to invade another country and then annex territory from that country it would throw out the rule book and international law would be meaningless, it would mean any nation would be free to take land from any other nation. While yes, other countries have taken land from one another post WW2 it has never been recognised or legitimate. If Ukraine acknowledged the surrender of land in a treaty that would legitimise it.
So I think the west would prefer an end to the war that saw Ukraine de-facto hand over land but to not officially acknowledge it as lost. Though there will probably be stipulations on that ceasefire, like a promise that Ukraine does not join NATO and a limit to the amount of arms that the west can send them. But the conditions of that ceasefire will of course depend on how the war ends and how badly the Ukrainians lose.

>>52504
It would be a huge difference between a ceasefire now and a ceasefire in one or two years.
In previous posts I mentioned that I think Russia want to close this down once and for all. Take everything that is strategically important for them (such as Odessa from Odessa the whole Russian Black Sea shipping can be endangered, Crimea is not secure without securing Odessa) and neuter Ukraine, keep her out of NATO, perhaps DMZ, whatever. This doesn't mean Ukraine has to officially surrender, sign annexation papers and whatnot. Can be done without.
I still think (and how I mentioned before) that at one point - when Ukraine defences collapse and the Ukrainian army start to break apart, units deserting en masse and such - NATO (or parts of NATO, as representatives of EU, first and foremost Poland) will move into Ukraine, citing a humanitarian crisis, and create a "safety zone" in western Ukraine, to manage Ukrainians fleeing into the EU. Russia doesn't want Western Ukraine anyway where a huge chunk of the population is openly hostile, and would just be a pain in the ass. So this NATO intervention would avoid a confrontation with Russia.
It would be like a Korea, where technically they are still at war with each other. And things would be settled according to Moscow.
But this still needs a lot of time. A ceasfire right now would create a situation where reigniting the conflict would be possible for the Westerners.

>>52512
I've seen some of his videos but I don't have the time or energy to watch daily updates on the war anymore, instead I follow him on Telegram.

Interestingly enough, he lives in the same city as I do. Well he lives in a suburb of Adelaide called Port Adelaide and I live in a town that is close to Adelaide but not part of it.
I hope he does okay. Luckily for him we have the most expensive hospital in the world here, so you would think if anybody can help him we can.
Actually I doubled checked and apparently it's no longer the most expensive hospital in the world. But it was when we built it at least.

>>52513
I watch/listen these while I'm eating. Or doing something that doesn't need that much of a concentration.

Right now I listen to the recent Zaluzhny speech and interview/press conference. He's now the ambassador to the UK. How they made this decision, I'm not sure that is his strength, but I don't know him. The interpretation is painful, perhaps they aren't military men.

>>52513
His last video before the surgery was aired.
>follow him on Telegram
If there is any update regarding his health pls post here. Thanks.

>>52515
Okay. He posted a picture of himself in a gown saying "seeya in a bit lads" this morning. I'll keep an eye on the situation.

>>52519
Thanks, Bernd.

A status update was posted and a video as well, it looks like he is going alright.

"Gday legends, Lily here 👋🏻
Matt's surgery went as well as possible, currently he's very sore, fatigued and in intensive care. The doctors have him fairly drugged up. Although he said to ask 'does Deepstate show Chasiv Yar or Klishkiivka yet?'
Matt wanted to give you guys a great interview because he's unsure when he'll make a return.
From a personal note thankyou for supporting Matt/Willy and in turn us. Matt has had a hard year losing his grandfather to cancer and his mother currently undergoing cancer treatment. His own well-being as always he made a low priority behind others and his work, but I know how much he loves what he does. Even when there's yelling from his office or endlessly expressing his endless frustration with what's reported vs the reality and the incredible human cost.
The emotional toll all this has on Matt is massive."

Thankyou everyone
Link:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=_A56zbbMEzE [Embed]

>>52521
>Thankyou everyone
>Link:

I meant

"Thankyou everyone"
"Link:"

as it's still part of the telegram post.

>>52521
Thanks. He said the surgery has a low chance to go south, but I thought he was downplaying the risk. I'm glad he's alive.
>'does Deepstate show Chasiv Yar or Klishkiivka yet?'
Kek.

>>52522
It's all right, I figured.

>>52524
I know you would have. I have OCD and it makes you obsessively worry about stupid things even thought they are stupid. I knew people would know it was part of the Telegram post but I still had to clarify anyway.

Now this is interesting, about the Hungarian adventure in Chad.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=KjmWjo6OfsU [Embed]
I posted about this, as a recap (as the video also says):
- Hungary invest in education, agriculture, healthcare, and IT in Chad
- sends 200 troops to Chad
The video examines the implications and motivations with Paul Melly of Chatham House (a think tank in London).
He says it's different than Russia's Wagner presence in Sahelian countries, and not really for paving the road for Russia.
Firstly to raise international presence, prestige for the country. Then to gain international experience for the army, instead of the scrapped mission Takuba in Mali/Niger. Then help to curb migration (stopping illegal migration at the source) with security and development.
It is good for Chad, beyond the investment, this can be used to show France, that Chad has other options - I assume options that isn't Russia -, a range of partners.
Fun: the Hungarian troops will depend on French logistical (and probably other) support.

What I wanna add is that the Hungarian troops can be stand ins, replacement for French troops, and behind the scene it might be a French initiative too. Since less and less Sahelian states want the French, they could say, okay then we send someone else. Good choice could be some of the Central-Eastern Euro countries, who bears no taint of colonialism, and perhaps Hungary could be the best around since she has and understanding with Moscow, which can come in handy due to the Russian presence in the neighbouring countries (Niger, Libya, and the CAR for sure).
And. Historically the North African shores always had strong ties with Europe, and the divide between the two continents is not the Mediterranean, but the Sahara, the southern border of Europe is there. If they want the resources of the North African countries it would be also a good idea if the migration wasn't stopped there, but further south, beyond those borders.


I also find the aesthetics of that South African news anchor pleasant. Unusual accent too.

>>52526
Also apparently Nigeria is buying Italian jet fighters.

This one is very perceptive. Stallman about the Ukraine war:
>To Endure, Peace Needs to Weaken Putin But Not Ruin Him
https://stallman.org/articles/lasting-peace-weaken-putin-not-ruin.html
Short enough to quote the whole thing:

Calling for regime change in Russia can make for a worse outcome for Ukraine.
Biden has called for removing Putin from power in Russia. Even though officials then insisted that removing Putin is not US policy, the president's statement still conveys that demand.
I believe that demand is strategically unwise, as it will encourage Putin to keep fighting.
Putin is likely to continue fighting as long as he believes he can defeat Ukraine through war and get his demands. However, handing him his war aims without a fight is no solution, as that victory would encourage him to seek gains through war again. We must try to get him to stop the killing — but not by by offering him a shortcut to victory.
If Putin says he is willing to end the war without victory, what will Ukraine need in a peace agreement? Whatever will make Putin keep the deal he made.
Putin won't keep a deal just because he made a deal; it would have to be clear to him that breaking the deal would do him harm. Thus, if we want Putin to make peace and stick to it, we must create a situation that will dissuade him from restarting the war. The easiest way is to make sure the war leaves him weaker than before — enough so, that he sees little chance of winning a renewed war and feels no appetite for another defeat. Perhaps losing Crimea and the two puppet "republics" he set up inside Ukraine would be sufficient to convince him of this.
This is the point missed by some commentators such as Anatol Lieven who recommend giving Putin much of the Ukrainian territory that he has taken so far. Given such a success, he would think of rebuilding his army and starting another war to conquer more.
On the other hand, if he he can't get that, why would he agree to any deal? It would have to offer him something he wants, even though not everything. His principal desire is to remain in power in Russia. He will never make a deal that includes giving up that. Thus, I conclude that demanding "regime change" in Russia is a misguided approach, bad strategy. We must aim for the middle zone, enough defeat to discourage Putin but not so much he will never agree.
Putin is not now ready to accept a peace deal that Ukraine ought to consider. It would not satisfy him, as long as he hopes to seize Ukraine by continuing the war. But if things get worse for him, there may come a day when remaining in power only in Russia, plus the lifting of some sanctions, becomes the best outcome he can hope for. We must keep the door open for that.

Very true. However.
This was written in 2022 March. Since then lotsa water passed down the Dnepr. At the moment gaining back Crimea and any Russian gains is a pipe dream, and it seems there is no way to force Russia out. What now?

Another update from Matt.

"G'day legends,
Lily typing and interpreting, Willy talking.
Guys I'm just transferring now from intensive care into a ward, I felt pretty reasonable this morning and even stood up but some swelling in my brain and the new drugs are really having an effect, I'm really spaced out and struggling to take in all of what's happening.
Surgeon is happy with the operation, but the results will take 2-3 weeks.
Lots have offered to come visit, thankyou but I'm really not up to it.
But thankyou so much for making my recent video go number 1 of 10.
Love you guys."

"Thank you for everything boys.
It's going to be a long and tough road ahead but I can't thankyou all enough, I really hope we can all grab a beer when this is over."

>>52529
>interpreting
He must be KO.
>Lots have offered to come visit, thankyou but I'm really not up to it.
Only one day passed, let the man rest. Wtf.

>>52529

Who's Matt though?

t. out of the loop

>>52534
Of WillyOAM: >>52512

>>52512

Thanks.

He is back!
https://youtube.com/watch?v=T-PrvNFSw5E [Embed]

I listened to the press conference they did after the session of this European Political Community Summit I was mentioned here >>52554
I post this here instead of the politics thread because Orbán and Edi Rama (the Albanian PM) said very little substantial about anything (Rama sounds like a funny guy tho, cudos), so am gonna just note what Orbán said about the war on the Ukraine, when he answered questions about it.
He said:
1. When he talks about war and peace camp, he talks about the west, not Vladimir Putin (question was: in what camp he would place Putin), and not about Russia.
2. When asked how does he imagine the peace in Ukraine (what will be the fate of Ukraine), he replied he does not talk about the peace itself, but about the road to peace, that a cease fire has to be established, and with that communication has to be started between the warring parties.
3. He pointed out that the peace on Ukraine won't be just the question of the fate of Ukraine, but it will establish a new security structure for Europe.
That's about it.

I'm fast forwarding through the Zelensky replies (it is weird he wasn't allowed(?) to do an opening statement, or at least he had no such prior to the journalist questions). Sadly he talks only in Ukrainian. He gesticulates a lot, seems like a passionate speech, and looks a bit pissed at the very end, at the closing words.
Maybe youtube has captions for at least one video.

I hate DPA's new Front Line Changes format where he counts the captured area. Those users who requested it are braindead autists. Area in itself is meaningless. It matters what's on the area, population and industrial, economical facilities.

G'Day Cunts!

>>52576
Have a fantastic weekend.

The two news I wanna note:
1. Scholz talking to Putin
2. Biden approved the use of long range rockets into Russia by Ukraine
Both a couple days old now.

Can't find an article on DW about #1. I can't find a search function on their site, curiously.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/germanys-scholz-russias-putin-hold-phone-call-friday-bloomberg-reports-2024-11-15/
The Scholz situation is interesting since his government in a crisis now. They are losing popularity, and due to the broken relations with the coalition partners they are also governing form minority.
This move, that he actually picked up the phone and called Putin, could originate from couple of motives (from salvaging popularity to the new winds of the future from Washington), but it has a prior buildup, see this >>52423 , recently he also declared that Ukraine won't enter NATO, until the issue with Russia is resolved.
One more thing, Germany won't ship Taurus missiles to Ukraine. For now.
https://www.dw.com/en/war-in-ukraine-why-germany-isnt-sending-taurus-cruise-missiles-to-help-ukraine/a-70813246
>He argues that Germany runs the risk of being drawn into the war between Russia and Ukraine if the Taurus cruise missiles are used.
This statement is suspiciously similar to what Orbán keeps telling to us: "not to be drawn into the war".

Here's a video report about Biden's decision and the ATACMS. I also upload it, jsut in case, one and a half minutes long.
https://www.dw.com/en/atacms-how-ukraine-could-use-long-range-missiles-on-russia/video-70813574

>>52589
I think it's silly. It's not enough to change the course of the war or to achieve much at all really but it could have sever ramifications.
I don't think Russia will attack a NATO country but I do think they are likely to send a few high tech anti-ship missiles to the Houthis or other kinds of advanced equipment to other hostile countries that have not received advanced equipment before, like Syria, North Korea, Iran, Venezuela and maybe the Sahel states.

>>52590
I do agree with what you wrote, and what Matt usually says (no video from yesterday btw, hope he's doing as well as circumstances allow), that the Russian escalation happens on other parts of the globe, the three H-man get more support, or more pressure in Korea, or with Iran, or in Africa or South America.
The situation is similar to the Cold War, with many proxy wars and battle for influence between the leading powers but no hot conflict.