Ukraine

[turlo]

25 minutes ago, Countryfox said:

“Make no mistake, being Russia, the intention is to target innocent civilian populations”

 

I think as well as that they are targeting power stations and other utilities to ensure the Ukrainians suffer as much as possible over the winter. 
 

With regard to the now obvious assault on Kherson   it is a little worrying that a) they are moving civilians to the east/right side of the city/river  b) Mad Vlad in chairing a meeting to discuss ‘neutralising’ the threat  c) the hurried meeting in the US with Wallace and  d) he has put a brutal butcher in overall charge of his forces ..  by moving all civilians the Russia can claim that only soldiers or civilian ‘collaborators’ will be left on the left side ..  so some sort of massive destruction is justifiable ..  
 

The situation is ratcheting up ..  

I was thinking they will leave enough forces behind (conscripts from ethic regions, mobilised ex convicts etc who they don't care about ) in fortified positions to force the Ukrainians to resort to heavy shelling of the built up areas of Kherson to take it back. This could then be used as propaganda in Donbas, back in Russia and potential allies to make the Ukrainians look bad for the destruction of Kherson to justify further mobilisation, escalation & support

[Ginger_Filbert]

22 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Whoops 😂

[Countryfox]

1 hour ago, turlo said:

I was thinking they will leave enough forces behind (conscripts from ethic regions, mobilised ex convicts etc who they don't care about ) in fortified positions to force the Ukrainians to resort to heavy shelling of the built up areas of Kherson to take it back. This could then be used as propaganda in Donbas, back in Russia and potential allies to make the Ukrainians look bad for the destruction of Kherson to justify further mobilisation, escalation & support

I’m not so sure ..  but we’ll find out soon enough ..

[fox_favourite]

8 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

All a little concerning.  Even a complete Russian collapse at this stage could be a disaster.

Makes you think they’ve had intelligence to the fact something big is about to happen…and not in a good way.

 

and with now the Russians saying to evacuate the city, things just seem to be ramping up in a very bad way. 
 

From the outset, I get the feeling Putin has wanted a wider conflict, a conflict more than Ukraine and at every turn he’s increase the stakes so the likely hood is that it will. Maybe that’s just the propaganda we’ve been fed at times. Also mentioning the nukes every time, it’s like he needs an excuse. Let’s make Russia great again by destroying everything. Yeah that works. People say we shouldn’t back Putin into a corner. He’s created that himself. He’s created this and he’s back himself into a corner with his actions. Maybe the west could have done more, but when you have someone like that, what can you do? We’ve not taken the bait so far, so he’s again forcing it.

He can’t be that delusional that he doesn’t realise that one nuke spells the end for everyone…even the Russian federation?

 

Edited 19 October 2022 by fox_favourite

[MPH]

13 hours ago, Line-X said:

These Iranian made Shahed drones make a signature buzz due to the two-stroke engines that power them. Just like the ominous buzz bombs/doodlebugs V1s that terrorised London in 1944, the sound must be very ominous. Also like the latter, they are simply a rather unsophisticated form of cruise missile albeit harnessing GPS technology or internal navigation for guidance. The Russians have ordered several thousand of these which can be programmed to fly automatically towards a set of GPS co-ordinates, and carry a formidable 30kg warhead. The comparative ease of use and relatively low cost of about $20,000 apiece, compared with more than $4mn for a cruise missile, mean they can be used in swarms which can make it challenging for limited air defences to stop them. Make no mistake, being Russia, the intention is to target innocent civilian populations and instil fear across the country. One of the many things that they underestimated was the stoical nature and esprit de-corps of the Ukrainian people. As in previous conflicts, Russia has zero qualms when it comes to intentionally killing civilians in an attempt to break the will of resistance.   

 

The increased reliance upon Iran for armaments suggests a depleted state of Russia's own stock of precision weapons. Unlike the Syrian conflict, Tehran has no direct stake in the Ukraine conflict and offered no clear support for Russia’s September 23rd annexation of four Ukrainian provinces. But a heavily sanctioned state will welcome the payments and renewed cooperation with Moscow may grant Iran access to other defence technologies - which is ominous. 

 

The news blackout means something is underway. The likely push is the frontline between Mylove and Snihurivka. I wouldn't rule out a surprise offensive from Zaporizhzhia south to Melitopol. A lightning offensive in Kherson one could inflict heavy casualties on RF and force them to retreat and abandon equipment again. At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if they could pull off both at the same time, while the Kerch Bridge has been crippled and the RF logistics are in complete disarray.

 

Who knows? We certainly will soon. 

 

9 hours ago, Countryfox said:

“Make no mistake, being Russia, the intention is to target innocent civilian populations”

 

I think as well as that they are targeting power stations and other utilities to ensure the Ukrainians suffer as much as possible over the winter. 
 

With regard to the now obvious assault on Kherson   it is a little worrying that a) they are moving civilians to the east/right side of the city/river  b) Mad Vlad in chairing a meeting to discuss ‘neutralising’ the threat  c) the hurried meeting in the US with Wallace and  d) he has put a brutal butcher in overall charge of his forces ..  by moving all civilians the Russia can claim that only soldiers or civilian ‘collaborators’ will be left on the left side ..  so some sort of massive destruction is justifiable ..  
 

The situation is ratcheting up ..  

 

 

i’ll add that we should not be surprised to hear of the ‘ mysterious’ sinking of  Iranian cargo ships ( that will be carrying shipments of these drones) and the mysterious destroying of  Iranian factories and the places that build/ hold these drones. It will be done secretly of course, but They’ll justify it under the banner of it being a response to Russia Raising the stakes.

 

 

And this is where American influence will have a far reaching effect. Don’t be surprised to see rumors around that whilst Israel are somewhat neutral publicly they get handed the “ it’s payback time” card by the states that lists all their support and financial assistance over the years. Israel has vast intelligence on Iran. You can be sure of it. And without American protection Israel would be extremely vulnerable. You can be sure of that too.

Edited 19 October 2022 by MPH

[leicsmac]

8 hours ago, fox_favourite said:

Makes you think they’ve had intelligence to the fact something big is about to happen…and not in a good way.

 

and with now the Russians saying to evacuate the city, things just seem to be ramping up in a very bad way. 
 

From the outset, I get the feeling Putin has wanted a wider conflict, a conflict more than Ukraine and at every turn he’s increase the stakes so the likely hood is that it will. Maybe that’s just the propaganda we’ve been fed at times. Also mentioning the nukes every time, it’s like he needs an excuse. Let’s make Russia great again by destroying everything. Yeah that works. People say we shouldn’t back Putin into a corner. He’s created that himself. He’s created this and he’s back himself into a corner with his actions. Maybe the west could have done more, but when you have someone like that, what can you do? We’ve not taken the bait so far, so he’s again forcing it.

He can’t be that delusional that he doesn’t realise that one nuke spells the end for everyone…even the Russian federation?

 

You answer the first sentence with the second here. Making this conflict wider wouldn't get him what he wants for that exact reason, so why do it?

 

The bigger things get, the bigger the possibility a situation arises that satisfies the "survival of the state is threatened" requirement for nuclear release. Nobody, not even Putin, driven solely by egotistical self-interest (and what good is it if loses everything) thinks that is a good outcome.

 

So no, I don't think he wants a wider conflict.

[Sly]

The minute the rest of Europe or US enters this war, will be a major event. 
 

At the moment, they’re trying to starve Russia into surrender by cutting off supply lines, as they’re concerned about the full on counter offensive with nuclear weapons I’d imagine. That isn’t good for the Ukraine, Russia or the rest of the world. 

A wider conflict is an ill wind, that blows no one any good. 

 

[westernpark]

2 hours ago, Sly said:

The minute the rest of Europe or US enters this war, will be a major event. 
 

At the moment, they’re trying to starve Russia into surrender by cutting off supply lines, as they’re concerned about the full on counter offensive with nuclear weapons I’d imagine. That isn’t good for the Ukraine, Russia or the rest of the world. 

A wider conflict is an ill wind, that blows no one any good. 

 

I don't think this ever enters into a larger conventional war, because Russia won't want that because they don't win. If it escalates, it will escalate to a nuclear war. However, despite Wallace's trip to the states, I don't believe there has been an indication in intelligence that suggests Russia are preparing to use one imminently, rather this would have been planning for such a scenario where a response to a nuclear weapon is required and thus a plan would not have been appropriate to discuss over the phone. In the tabloids they have suggested that he was preparing to show force, by using one of the Black Sea for instance. I don't think Turkey would have been happy regardless of which way the wind was blowing, after they have been in talks to set up a gas hub between the countries.

[Countryfox]

I think Putin's plans for the next few months are becoming clearer ...  he is going to target power and fuel supplies for Ukraine and Europe over winter to put more pressure on the West's resolve and hope that chinks appear in the West's unity.  He has 2,400 Iranean drones (at present ) that will attack infrastructure in Ukraine (as well as surface to surface missiles that Iran is looking to supply) and could also create 'problems' for the nuclear reactors which could cause them to be shut down for safety reasons.   Remember a lot of Ukraines surplus electricity was sent to the West.  He has attacked the Nord stream undersea pipelines and has seen that he can get away with it by simply saying it wasn't us ..   so now maybe he is emboldened to attack the Norwegian pipeline that the West is now heavily reliant on.  He now realises that he will probably have to give up Kherson (after throwing his new conscripts in to no avail) but can mitigate this by creating a new obstacle behind which his troops can regroup ...  that could be done by blowing the dam at the large hydro electric power plant near Kherson, this would be yet another blow to infrastructure but would also flood the Dnipro valley and create a much wider artificial barrier ..  the death of many civilians would be byproduct that would not concern him whatsoever ..  he has already false flagged this so would blame it all on Ukraine.  

 

The good news is that his nuclear sabre rattling has dwindled down as it was getting him nowhere and brought about a very robust response from the West ...   he no doubt has a few more dirty tricks up his sleeve if his 'power' games don't work but there is also a faint glimmer that he might just consolidate and try to keep part of the land he has taken by offering peace talks that he know's would be very attractive to the West. It would also enable him to remain in power.

 

 

[yorkie1999]

20 hours ago, fox_favourite said:

Makes you think they’ve had intelligence to the fact something big is about to happen…and not in a good way.

 

and with now the Russians saying to evacuate the city, things just seem to be ramping up in a very bad way. 
 

From the outset, I get the feeling Putin has wanted a wider conflict, a conflict more than Ukraine and at every turn he’s increase the stakes so the likely hood is that it will. Maybe that’s just the propaganda we’ve been fed at times. Also mentioning the nukes every time, it’s like he needs an excuse. Let’s make Russia great again by destroying everything. Yeah that works. People say we shouldn’t back Putin into a corner. He’s created that himself. He’s created this and he’s back himself into a corner with his actions. Maybe the west could have done more, but when you have someone like that, what can you do? We’ve not taken the bait so far, so he’s again forcing it.

He can’t be that delusional that he doesn’t realise that one nuke spells the end for everyone…even the Russian federation?

 

He won't use a nuke in Ukraine, Putin is all about intimidation by targeting civilians so enough of them eventually give up and get rid of their leaders,  attacking on the battlefield using tactical nukes is pointless and he can't really use the same weapon on a city be it large or small because that would force the US into ww3,  but he's shown he's prepared to use chemical and biological weapons in previous conflicts on populations.

[leicsmac]

5 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

He won't use a nuke in Ukraine, Putin is all about intimidation by targeting civilians so enough of them eventually give up and get rid of their leaders,  attacking on the battlefield using tactical nukes is pointless and he can't really use the same weapon on a city be it large or small because that would force the US into ww3,  but he's shown he's prepared to use chemical and biological weapons in previous conflicts on populations.

Small point of order: when did Russia use biological weapons?

 

There's a reason they're bound by treaties even stricter than for the use of nuclear weapons and everyone sticks by those treaties, even the really bad hombres.

[Countryfox]

7 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

 but he's shown he's prepared to use chemical and biological weapons in previous conflicts on populations.

But most likely not with the whole of the Western world watching.   Very unlikely at this stage imo. 

[Countryfox]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Small point of order: when did Russia use biological weapons?

 

There's a reason they're bound by treaties even stricter than for the use of nuclear weapons and everyone sticks by those treaties, even the really bad hombres.

 

Well done Mac ...  keep em on their toes ..    

 

P.S.  Shall we go back to the politics thread ...  probably about to overheat by now ...  

[leicsmac]

7 minutes ago, Countryfox said:

 

Well done Mac ...  keep em on their toes ..    

 

P.S.  Shall we go back to the politics thread ...  probably about to overheat by now ...  

 

Well, on that topic, as far as I'm concerned the fracking issue should be enough to call a GE on - even if it wasn't a clear break of a manifesto promise.

[Sly]

A few questions …..
 

How long would it take to sort a general election? 

Could Charles reject the next PM? Tossing not over the fence to others? 
 

 

[Sly]

Doh. This is the war thread! 

[Countryfox]

Is someone sending us a message ...   TWO cables in a week ...  

 

 

 

 

[Jon the Hat]

8 minutes ago, Countryfox said:

Is someone sending us a message ...   TWO cables in a week ...  

 

 

 

 

That is worrying.  

[SpacedX]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

Small point of order: when did Russia use biological weapons?

 

I think he probably meant chemical weapons. 

[leicsmac]

13 minutes ago, Line-X said:

I think he probably meant chemical weapons. 

Hmmm.

 

Taking the quote "he's shown he's prepared to use chemical and biological weapons in previous conflicts on populations" in full context there, I'm reasonably sure the inclusion of "biological" was deliberate, but it's also inaccurate.

[SpacedX]

1 minute ago, leicsmac said:

Hmmm.

 

Taking the quote "he's shown he's prepared to use chemical and biological weapons in previous conflicts on populations" in full context there, I'm reasonably sure the inclusion of "biological" was deliberate, but it's also inaccurate.

Ah yes. Sorry, I missed that. 

[yorkie1999]

11 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Hmmm.

 

Taking the quote "he's shown he's prepared to use chemical and biological weapons in previous conflicts on populations" in full context there, I'm reasonably sure the inclusion of "biological" was deliberate, but it's also inaccurate.

I meant used chemical weapons, but would use biological weapons.

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

I meant used chemical weapons, but would use biological weapons.

Thanks for the clarification.

 

In that case, IMO for the reasons above he would use nuclear weapons before biological ones and there's pretty good justification for that.

[yorkie1999]

25 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Thanks for the clarification.

 

In that case, IMO for the reasons above he would use nuclear weapons before biological ones and there's pretty good justification for that.

He can't use biological weapons, Russia doesn't have them because they're  prohibited from development and use.....

[leicsmac]

6 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

He can't use biological weapons, Russia doesn't have them because they're  prohibited from development and use.....

In that case (which I'm sure is true as per treaty terms) then this entire discussion is moot as what he'd do doesn't mean much if he can't do it anyway.