Russian Invasion of Ukraine

[TK]

Word on these streets is that @Jumbohas sent a pair of his meanie pants to @MartinC so y’all better watch out cause he may have overnighted them.

 

 

[TradeTheBeal!]

2 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

I suspect Vietnam will always be the one that most people will call out. 

The Soviets had a real tough time of it in Afghanistan back in the day.

[PleaseBlitz]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/11/politics/uk-storm-shadow-cruise-missiles-ukraine/index.html
 

Britain has delivered long-range ‘Storm Shadow’ cruise missiles to Ukraine ahead of expected counteroffensive, sources say

[TradeTheBeal!]

5 minutes ago, TradeTheBeal! said:

The Soviets had a real tough time of it in Afghanistan back in the day.

Oh yeah.

 

 

[The Evil Genius]

8 minutes ago, TradeTheBeal! said:

The Soviets had a real tough time of it in Afghanistan back in the day.

 

As did the Brits with the Boer republics of South Africa in the 2nd Boer war. Going in to these conflicts as the heavy favorite and coming away with the conclusion that the casualties and costs weren't worth it seems to be common. As well as losing nearly all support of the wars at home...

Edited May 11, 2023 by The Evil Genius

[MartinC]

44 minutes ago, TK said:

Word on these streets is that @Jumbohas sent a pair of his meanie pants to @MartinC so y’all better watch out cause he may have overnighted them.

 

 

 

😂

[Gurgeh]

50 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/11/politics/uk-storm-shadow-cruise-missiles-ukraine/index.html
 

Britain has delivered long-range ‘Storm Shadow’ cruise missiles to Ukraine ahead of expected counteroffensive, sources say

 

Yeah that's been rumored for a while now. It's the limited range export version, so it'll reach about twice the range of their HIMARS. Just knowing Ukraine has them  will make the Russians pull critical targets further back from the front lines.

 

However it's also air-launched, which makes things a little risky for the Ukrainian air force to use close to the front lines:

 

""Our biggest enemy is Russian Su-35 fighter jets," says another MiG-29 pilot with the call sign Juice. "We know positions of [Russian] air defence, we know their ranges. It's quite predictable, so we can calculate how long we can stay [inside their zone]. But in the case of fighter jets, they are mobile. They have a good air picture and they know when we're flying to the front lines.

 

Russian air patrols can detect a jet's take-off deep inside the territory of Ukraine. Their R-37M missiles can hit an aerial target at a distance of 150-200km (93-124 miles)

 

..."Our jets don't have a system to warn about [Russian rocket] launches," says a pilot of an Su-25 attack jet with the call sign Pumba. "It's all visual-based. If you see them, then you just try to escape by firing off heat traps and manoeuvring." Russia's air superiority means that Ukraine can afford only a limited deployment of its military aviation close to the front line, which can have a major impact on the success of any future counter-offensive operations. According to Juice, they carry out up to 20 times fewer sorties than the Russian Air Force."

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65461405

 

 

 

 

[LD0506]

[Jumbo]

On 5/11/2023 at 2:33 PM, TK said:

Word on these streets is that @Jumbohas sent a pair of his meanie pants to @MartinC 

 

 

 

It's ok, I'm not using them right now. I'm driving a '98 Honda CRV through southern Montana and into Idaho with an old acquaintance.

 

We're doing a little renovation on some white supremacists hangouts. I'm wearing my meanie camo.

[Renegade7]

On 5/11/2023 at 5:09 PM, tshile said:

She literally said she agrees with me. 
 

so. Maybe read better. 🤷‍♂️ 

 

Idk, man, treating the Iraq War as limited to just the offensive against Sadaam's military is seriously limiting the scope of why so many consider it an epic blunder.

 

It was expensive AF...Iraq is now basically a proxy state of Iran...the vast majority of the war was actually us learning how to adjust to gurrilla urban warfare and our failure to win over the populace, to the point of pictures getting out bodies hanging upside-down from a bridge in Fallujah...and the second we "left" ISIS made it almost all the way to Bagdahd... 

 

Did I mention it was expensive AF and we've lost almost all credibility and influence in that region of the world because of it?  Hardly a near flawless victory just because we slaughter most of their military like stepping on an ant...that was just the start of the war and ramifications of going in there...

Edited May 13, 2023 by Renegade7

[China]

Ukraine claims gains in Bakhmut after Russia denials

 

Ukraine says it has recaptured ground in Bakhmut, a rare advance after months of grinding Russian gains in the eastern city.

 

Kyiv said its forces advanced 2km (1.2 miles) in a week. Russia said its troops had regrouped in one area.

 

The claims signal a momentum shift in Bakhmut - but more widely, there is no clear evidence of an Ukrainian counter-offensive.

 

However, two explosions were reported on Friday in Russian-occupied Luhansk.

 

Images posted on social media, verified by the BBC, show a big plume of black smoke rising from the city, which lies about 90km (55.9 miles) behind the front line in eastern Ukraine.

 

The cause has not been confirmed - but the blasts come a day after the UK said it had supplied Ukraine with long range Storm Shadow cruise missiles.

 

Luhansk is beyond the reach of the Himars rockets Ukraine has previously relied on for deep strikes against Russian targets.

 

But Russian-appointed officials in the region said they thought Ukrainian-made missiles were responsible, hitting administrative buildings of two defunct enterprises.

 

Earlier Russia's defence ministry said Russian troops in one Bakhmut area had changed their position for strategic reasons.

 

It said units of the southern group of Russian forces had taken up a better defensive position in the Maloilinivka area, something which took into consideration "the favourable conditions of the Berkhivka reservoir".

 

However the head of Russia's Wagner mercenary group Yevgeny Prigozhin said what the Ministry of Defence was talking about "is unfortunately called 'fleeing' and not a 'regrouping'".

 

Click on the link for the full article

[MartinC]

1 hour ago, Jumbo said:

 

It's ok, I'm not using them right now. I'm driving a '98 Honda CRV through southern Montana and into Idaho with an old acquaintance.

 

We're doing a little renovation on some white supremacists hangouts. I'm wearing my meanie camo.

 98 Honda CRV. I see you cashed in the 401k. 🙂

[DCSaints_fan]

On 5/11/2023 at 1:46 PM, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

This has got to be a historic blunder…. As far as wars go I can’t think of one as big of a blunder… some might say Iraq but that is pretty shallow. Iraq didn’t expose the ineptitude of our military or roll back decades of progress in trade relations.

We don't know what the peace settlement is going to look like quite yet.  I would agree that it is already strategic failure, in that they did not achieve the collapse of the Ukrainian government as they expected.  However there is the possibility that Ukraine would not be able to expel Russia completely from the occupied territories and may settle for a ceasefire which Putin could spin as win.

 

Germany invading Russia in 1941 and Napoleon doing the same thing in 1812 might top this.

 

Russia invading Finland in 1940 was also a total fiasco, although they eventually got Finland to concede territory, it was such a disaster it led to "purges" in the Red Army. 

 

 

 

[MartinC]

1 hour ago, DCSaints_fan said:

We don't know what the peace settlement is going to look like quite yet.  I would agree that it is already strategic failure, in that they did not achieve the collapse of the Ukrainian government as they expected.  However there is the possibility that Ukraine would not be able to expel Russia completely from the occupied territories and may settle for a ceasefire which Putin could spin as win.

 

Germany invading Russia in 1941 and Napoleon doing the same thing in 1812 might top this.

 

Russia invading Finland in 1940 was also a total fiasco, although they eventually got Finland to concede territory, it was such a disaster it led to "purges" in the Red Army. 

 

 

The ‘Great Purge’ happened prior to the invasion of Finland. Between 1936 and 1938. Tens of thousands of senior military leaders down to Divisional level were purged (which often meant killed but sometimes sent to labour camps or into exile). 

 

Stalin authorized these purges, which went beyond the military, to solidify his grip on power as he feared a return of Trotsky. Estimates are that over 700,000 died in these purges.

 

The Russian invasion of Finland happened late 1939 and has many parallels with their invasion of Ukraine - general incompetence caused in no small part from total lack of experience and competence in Russian military leadership at all levels. Officers were appointed more for their political reliability than military competence and political commissars attached to units had too much influence on orders compared to the ‘normal’ chain of command.
 

They eventually won and imposed terms in an armistice based on sheer weight of numbers but at huge cost in lives.

 

It was partly the abject performance of the Red Army in the so called Winter War which encouraged Hitler to invade Russia in 1941. It was in 1941 after the Germans inflicted huge initial defeats on the Red Army that the next round of purges happened.

 

 

 

[Gurgeh]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2023/may/13/russia-ukraine-war-live-russian-retreat-in-bakhmut-highlights-shortage-of-credible-combat-units-say-uk-officials

Guardian foreign correspondent Luke Harding reporting from Kyiv.

There are unconfirmed reports that another plane and helicopter has crashed, in what appears to be a disastrous day for Russian aviation. Moscow Telegram channels reported that an SU-35 warplane had been shot down too, together with a second Mi8 helicopter.

Another military helicopter crashed on Friday in Crimea. It was unclear whether the two aircraft and two helicopters were downed on Saturday because of friendly fire, or if the Ukrainians targeted them with missiles.

[TradeTheBeal!]

Uh oh…Luka drank the tea.

 

 

[Jabbyrwock]

1 hour ago, TradeTheBeal! said:

Uh oh…Luka drank the tea.

 

 

Looks like its gonna be a rough Polonium season in Russia this year.  Shame...they just got over their random third story plummet pandemic.

[PleaseBlitz]

[PleaseBlitz]

Zelensky is so ****ing good at this. 

[CousinsCowgirl84]

On 5/12/2023 at 8:31 PM, Renegade7 said:

 

Idk, man, treating the Iraq War as limited to just the offensive against Sadaam's military is seriously limiting the scope of why so many consider it an epic blunder.

 

It was expensive AF...Iraq is now basically a proxy state of Iran...the vast majority of the war was actually us learning how to adjust to gurrilla urban warfare and our failure to win over the populace, to the point of pictures getting out bodies hanging upside-down from a bridge in Fallujah...and the second we "left" ISIS made it almost all the way to Bagdahd... 

 

Did I mention it was expensive AF and we've lost almost all credibility and influence in that region of the world because of it?  Hardly a near flawless victory just because we slaughter most of their military like stepping on an ant...that was just the start of the war and ramifications of going in there...

Either way, despite what it cost in the end it basically cost us no more than any other poor decision we made, certainly there are no long term ill effects. And I don’t see how you can make the argument that the Middle East would be in a significantly better place strategically for the US had we not invaded Iraq. 
 

So was Iraq a complete success? No. Was it a strategic blunder? Not really. Despite whatever lies wer told to sell the war, whatever tarnish was done to our reputation, when it was time for the west to fall in line, the west fell in line. 

Edited May 14, 2023 by CousinsCowgirl84

[Gurgeh]

2 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

Either way, despite what it cost in the end it basically cost us no more than any other poor decision we made, certainly there are no long term ill effects. And I don’t see how you can make the argument that the Middle East would be in a significantly better place strategically for the US had we not invaded Iraq. 
 

So was Iraq a complete success? No. Was it a strategic blunder? Not really. Despite whatever lies wer told to sell the war, whatever tarnish was done to our reputation, when it was time for the west to fall in line, the west fell in line. 

 

I think you could call the peace that came afterwards a missed opportunity. We didn't make things worse, but we could have made things better. In terms of regional influence, the people who really did benefit from the invasion of Iraq was Iran, as their most powerful and hostile neighbor ended up under their influence. It wasn't hard to foresee that being the outcome, but the depressing thing about that war is our leaders didn't seem to have thought about what would happen afterwards, other than good PR footage of a victory parade.

 

Ukraine will be a different peace, probably more of a ceasefire. Putin likes to leave conflicts unresolved, it leeches resources away from countries he views as hostile, and he knows countries with ongoing border issues aren't allowed into NATO. When the fighting ends, we're going to have to arm Ukraine to the teeth, because Putin will rebuild his army as fast as he can and try again, no matter what agreements he signs. He's laid out his world view: Ukraine never existed, it's always been a part of Russia, NATO needs to be pushed back to the 1980s membership with eastern Europe acknowledging Russia as their protector, and Russia and China (and we all know who would hold the power in that partnership) opposing the US around the world.

 

 

[Larry]

4 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

Either way, despite what it cost in the end it basically cost us no more than any other poor decision we made, certainly there are no long term ill effects. And I don’t see how you can make the argument that the Middle East would be in a significantly better place strategically for the US had we not invaded Iraq. 

Funny. I seem to remember that pre-invasion, the two biggest militaries in the Middle East were Iran and Iraq. But they were next door to each other, and hated each other. And therefore checked each other somewhat. 
 

I even recall, during Desert Storm, Norm Schwarzkopf literally saying something that implied that the US was limiting our military, because we wanted Iraq to come out of the Desert Storm, still able to defend itself. 
 

As opposed to post-invasion, where Iran is in charge of both countries. 

[Renegade7]

6 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

Either way, despite what it cost in the end it basically cost us no more than any other poor decision we made, certainly there are no long term ill effects. And I don’t see how you can make the argument that the Middle East would be in a significantly better place strategically for the US had we not invaded Iraq. 
 

 

Whack, I gave plenty, you just aren't quantifying them or don't care. Just because it doesn't matter to you doesn't mean it doesn't matter.

 

If we didn't go into Iraq, our soliders who died wouldn't be dead, Sadaam would not allow his country to slowly become a pawn of Iran, and Obama wouldn't of had to go on a credibility repairing tour because of how many countries didn't buy the mobile chemical weapons factory nonsense.  We had an incredible amount of goodwill behind us right after 9/11 and completely blew it over this war.

 

 

6 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

So was Iraq a complete success? No. Was it a strategic blunder? Not really. Despite whatever lies wer told to sell the war, whatever tarnish was done to our reputation, when it was time for the west to fall in line, the west fell in line. 

 

France and Germany didn't go...in fact France didn't show up in Iraq until ISIS did, far more consensue among the West to stop that then whatever BS Colin Powell was told to peddle to the UN.  Dude might of actually had a political career if Bush didn't sacrafice his and our whole country's credibility like that.

 

What's done is done, I can't go back in time and change my position I had at the point we started anymore then anyone else can.  But it is absolutely insane how much money we spent trying to nation-build another country instead of our own...the only nation one can nation-build by themselves without the help of the international community is one's own...

 

I really don't want to spend too much more time blasting a war that's been over and we are still feeling the ramifications of, its a distraction here.  So to bring it back home, whiping out Iraq's military as quickly as we did only to not find any chemical weapons and Iraq end up of a proxy-state of Iran instead of a Pro-Western Democracy is like if Russia made it all the way to Kiev successful, installed a puppet government, then that puppet government decide to join NATO and the EU anyway...countries go to war for a reason because of the huge ramifications from them, its never just to see who has the best military, this ain't no video game...

Edited May 14, 2023 by Renegade7

[CousinsCowgirl84]

44 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

 

France and Germany didn't go...in fact France didn't show up in Iraq until ISIS did, far more consensue among the West to stop that then whatever BS Colin Powell was told to peddle to the UN.  Dude might of actually had a political career if Bush didn't sacrafice his and our whole country's credibility like that.

 

I’m talking post Iraq regarding the “fall in line comment”. All of the consequences you listed were painful, but strategically short term. Now we can’t know yet how long this will negatively affect Russia… but I think it is going to take more than one leading visiting countries. 

 

Iran being checked by Iraq is a bit optimistic I think.  

Edited May 14, 2023 by CousinsCowgirl84

[Renegade7]

48 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

I’m talking post Iraq regarding the “fall in line comment”. All of the consequences you listed were painful, but strategically short term. Now we can’t know yet how long this will negatively affect Russia… but I think it is going to take more than one leading visiting countries. 

 

I get what your saying in that NATO and the West all got on the same page eventually over Ukraine nearly 20 years after we first invaded Iraq...I just find it disingenous to throw around the "fall in line" language when they never did over Iraq...

 

 

48 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

Iran being checked by Iraq is a bit optimistic I think.  

 

"Check" is a strong word I'm not sure I've seen anyone specificly use yet (if I missed it, my bad)...more like act like a impartial buffer in that part of the world (getting along with no one was better then them taking sides) where even if it was authoritarian, it was much more diverse from Sunni and Shia perspective then other countries in the region and the iron first of Sadaam help get that from getting out of control.  We insisted on putting a west-style democracy in a part of the world where they are still extremely violent towards opposing denominations of Islam...the arguement can be made they weren't ready yet no matter our "best intentions".

 

Iraq had already been to war with Iran enough that Iran was willing to leave they ass alone as long as Sadaam was there.  Not anymore.