Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Russia/Ukraine conflict

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Even if it did happen, a change in Russian public opinion, or the overthrow of Putin could take years.

I've been focused on the ground because that is where the war is won and lost.

Or negotiations, as that is the fastest path to a resolution.

Success in the war strengthens the Ukrainian bargaining position and should make Russia more willing to end it.


It is important Ukraine can break sieges like this, prevent new sieges and keep taking back territory.

This Izyum area seems most important over the next few days.

IMO any change of Russian public opinion is more likely to happen after the war is settled.
Wouldn't opinions change as soon as the truth - Russian language Western news - gets broadcast into Russia?
 
We are, factually, great apes. Anthropomorphism has limits but sometimes I do wonder.

A guy I used to work with used to make the point that despite all the technological advances we're just one troop of chimpanzees posturing to another on a jungle path.

You can buy whatever tech you want but if the operator is untrained then it’s pretty useless lol.

Which is why the Ukrainians are not getting F-16s and Abrams.
 
Wouldn't opinions change as soon as the truth - Russian language Western news - gets broadcast into Russia?
That might happen, but I don't think we can rely on it.

Censorship is strong, there are heavy penalties for speaking the truth or protesting.

Russia is a state where control of the civilian population is the government's top priority, it is the one thing they do really well, with decades of practice.

Western news will not be broadcast - Russian who travel will know the truth, those with VPNs will know the truth, returning soldiers will spread the truth.

Younger better educated people are more likely to know the truth, but in most cases that causes them to decide to leave the country, if they can.
 
This was discussed in another post, but I would like to remind people that major difference is the mainstream media reported on the doubts on the justification for going to war in Iraq (even in the lead up, and certainly afterwards), and certainly people were not being imprisoned for calling it a war. Just some context in case people try to draw too many parallels.
As they say - history does not repeat, it rhymes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: madodel
I still think we are headed for a negotiated settlement, the Russian position is slowly softening over time,

I would not underestimate what Ukraine can do with Drones, including American switch-blades.

Aside from economic pressures the Russian military in terms of personnel and assets is slowly being depleted.

Ukraine has captured a lot of equipment and did a general mobilisation as few weeks back,.

I expect Ukraine to slowly be able to increase the number of their fighting forces using a combination of locals, Ukrainians returning home, and foreign fighters.

Ukraine doesn't need to win a quick victory, just keep grinding away.

Ukraine will be able to start planting crops in some areas and restart some economic activity as the war becomes more centred in the East/South.

Meantime the weapons are flowing in and that is unlikely to stop anytime soon.

For the US and NATO continuing to support Ukraine makes a lot of sense, it weakens Russia, and makes a threat from Russia to any NATO country more unlikely. In turn this also means China is less likely to pursue a war of aggression anytime soon.
Up to a point Ukraine can continue a defensive-posture war. However the current trends contain a very real concern that the Russians will be able to attrite the Ukraine airforce to the point of being of negligible value. If you have ever studied multi-round conflicts you'll know that the end can come pretty quickly, these things are very non-linear in the final rounds* . If that occurs the dynamic in the land battle changes overnight. (The Russians would then switch to medium altitude bombing with a very high sortie rate, all over Ukraine, which MANPADS would be simply useless against. Ditto they could spot for their own artillery at leisure then, which they cannot do now - no amount of ATGWs or Switchblade-type munitions will solve being pounded by artillery 45km away). However hopeful I would like to be, I simply do not think the reverse might be possible, where the Ukraine could attrite the Russian air force off the battlefield.

I am by no means saying that Ukraine is performing badly. I'm simply taking the ra-ra stuff out and pointing out the problems that the Ukraine knows it has, which is why Ukraine keeps on asking both for aircraft, missiles for the aircraft (a real issue), and medium range SAM systems. The weaponry that Ukraine is receiving at present is necessary, but it is not sufficient. (We must also remember that Western leaders know this - by withholding such weaponry they are in effect pressurising Ukraine to negotiate a settlement now however unpalatable and untenable that might be. Moi, deeply cynical on these things).

* Lanchester's laws - Wikipedia
 
Up to a point Ukraine can continue a defensive-posture war. However the current trends contain a very real concern that the Russians will be able to attrite the Ukraine airforce to the point of being of negligible value. If you have ever studied multi-round conflicts you'll know that the end can come pretty quickly, these things are very non-linear in the final rounds* . If that occurs the dynamic in the land battle changes overnight. (The Russians would then switch to medium altitude bombing with a very high sortie rate, all over Ukraine, which MANPADS would be simply useless against. Ditto they could spot for their own artillery at leisure then, which they cannot do now - no amount of ATGWs or Switchblade-type munitions will solve being pounded by artillery 45km away). However hopeful I would like to be, I simply do not think the reverse might be possible, where the Ukraine could attrite the Russian air force off the battlefield.

I am by no means saying that Ukraine is performing badly. I'm simply taking the ra-ra stuff out and pointing out the problems that the Ukraine knows it has, which is why Ukraine keeps on asking both for aircraft, missiles for the aircraft (a real issue), and medium range SAM systems. The weaponry that Ukraine is receiving at present is necessary, but it is not sufficient. (We must also remember that Western leaders know this - by withholding such weaponry they are in effect pressurising Ukraine to negotiate a settlement now however unpalatable and untenable that might be. Moi, deeply cynical on these things).

* Lanchester's laws - Wikipedia
Continuing a war is never zero risk for either party.

Ukraine has a lot of artillery including some captured artillery and these are weapons that can be suppled.

For the forces East/West of Kyiv Ukraine is working to cut supply lines, then the pound the Russians with artillery/tanks using drones to spot the best targets. If nothing else, they deplete Russian resources that can't easily be replenished.

In the East/South Russia has the upper hand and should be able to use it's air force.

The Brits have supplied a new kind of anti-aircraft missile which fires up to 5km.

Get close to the Russians, force them up to higher altitude, there is some risk their dumb bombs might hit their own troops.
Or hide in bunkers during attacks.

Ukraine has also developed their own drone weapons and their own fairly effective anti-tank weapon, as well as an anti-ship missile.
They might not be able to get all they need, but they are doing a good job with what they have,

It is up to Ukraine to weight the risks and decide what deal they will take, I don't see them needing a deal before sanctions really bite on Russia,
But a lot more can be done on sanctions, and it should be done.

I also think there are multiple reasons for withholding the planes, and having both sides inclined to negotiate is one.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: UncaNed
Up to a point Ukraine can continue a defensive-posture war. However the current trends contain a very real concern that the Russians will be able to attrite the Ukraine airforce to the point of being of negligible value. If you have ever studied multi-round conflicts you'll know that the end can come pretty quickly, these things are very non-linear in the final rounds* . If that occurs the dynamic in the land battle changes overnight. (The Russians would then switch to medium altitude bombing with a very high sortie rate, all over Ukraine, which MANPADS would be simply useless against. Ditto they could spot for their own artillery at leisure then, which they cannot do now - no amount of ATGWs or Switchblade-type munitions will solve being pounded by artillery 45km away). However hopeful I would like to be, I simply do not think the reverse might be possible, where the Ukraine could attrite the Russian air force off the battlefield.

I am by no means saying that Ukraine is performing badly. I'm simply taking the ra-ra stuff out and pointing out the problems that the Ukraine knows it has, which is why Ukraine keeps on asking both for aircraft, missiles for the aircraft (a real issue), and medium range SAM systems. The weaponry that Ukraine is receiving at present is necessary, but it is not sufficient. (We must also remember that Western leaders know this - by withholding such weaponry they are in effect pressurising Ukraine to negotiate a settlement now however unpalatable and untenable that might be. Moi, deeply cynical on these things).

* Lanchester's laws - Wikipedia

Drones are already being used to spot for artillery in this war. Both sides are making use of them, though the Ukrainians are advertising it more. I think drones make a better artillery spotting platform than conventional aircraft.

The Ukrainian Air Force is still in the fight, but it's a tiny force for the job its trying to do. They started the war with only 80 Mig-29s. Two have been lost, but almost certainly quite a few are out of service for maintenance. Some may have been lost due to accidents.

I think the truth is the Russian air force is incapable of the job they are being asked to do. This is from early March, but it is, I think, and excellent analysis of what might be going on with the Russian air force
Is the Russian Air Force Actually Incapable of Complex Air Operations?

We have already seen clearly that the Russian army has failed because they never invested in the training necessary to make their forces work together. The Russians have been fronting about the military for many years. The few fights they have taken on have been small affairs with limited objectives against weak adversaries. Operations like Syria were done in small force numbers with elite troops.

The Russian air force is no different. Their aircrew training is poor and they are incapable for doing better.

"While the early VKS failure to establish air superiority could be explained by lack of early warning, coordination capacity and sufficient planning time, the continued pattern of activity suggests a more significant conclusion: that the VKS lacks the institutional capacity to plan, brief and fly complex air operations at scale. There is significant circumstantial evidence to support this, admittedly tentative, explanation."

The VKS is not holding back because of the Ukrainian air force, they are holding back because they are can't do any better.

Russia has not had to fight a large conventional army with determination to fight back since 1945. The last time they took on any force with any military capability and the willingness to fight back was in Afghanistan and that didn't turn out well. Ukraine is much better equipped and organized than Afghanistan with, if anything, more unified determination to fight back.

Even if Ukraine can't conduct a full scale offensive to push the Russians out, they can continue to bleed Russia dry. My partner was reading an economic analysis that made the point that the measures the Russians are doing to prop up the ruble and the economy is only a short term plaster on a gaping wound. They are trading future stability to patch the damage today. When the reserves run out the crash will be even bigger and there will be nothing left to stop it.

I'm sure the Ukrainians understand this too. The Russians ability to fight war is also degrading. Their supply situation is still terrible and getting worse. Their replacements are even poorer quality and their reserve equipment are little more than dregs from a scrapyard.

A long war favors Ukraine. Russia gets more unstable by the day.

I don't see where further degradation of the Ukrainian air force would lead to a catastrophe to Ukraine. It has not been a major factor from the start. On the other hand there are several paths that could lead to catastrophic failures for Russia.

Mark Hertling posted a few hours ago that his analysis from Feb 24 still stands.
 
Last edited:
That might happen, but I don't think we can rely on it.

Censorship is strong, there are heavy penalties for speaking the truth or protesting.

Russia is a state where control of the civilian population is the government's top priority, it is the one thing they do really well, with decades of practice.

Western news will not be broadcast - Russian who travel will know the truth, those with VPNs will know the truth, returning soldiers will spread the truth.

Younger better educated people are more likely to know the truth, but in most cases that causes them to decide to leave the country, if they can.
The population is largely spoon fed whatever information the government want’s them to know. Also helped by the prevalence of films showing Russians as the bad guys who always get their arses kicked. Then of course the fact alcohol and tobacco taxation is kept purposefully low…..drunk people are more apathetic about life in general and less likely to vote in elections. Those non votes get gifted to the person with most votes in Russia hence Putin getting rid of any serious threats and also how he gets such large numbers of votes for himself. Apathy is the Russian general population’s own worst enemy imo.
 
"Pro-Russia voices dominate China's highly controlled social media environment -- but Ukrainians in the country are pushing back"

 

I’d say this analysis of the current situation around Kyiv is a pretty fair assumption.

I agree. They are trying to consolidate their forces. The best thing the Ukrainians can do is hit the retreating forces as hard as possible. Every loss in the north is one less that will appear in the south.

Though any sane army would withdraw and rebuild damaged units before feeding them back into another front, but the Russians don't appear to have the concept. Ultimately limiting casualties and rebuilding units is a good thing, even if you aren't touchy feely. A fragment of a unit is more likely to take heavier casualties and become less effective than a reinforced or rebuilt unit would. A fragment of a unit is like trying to field less than the normal number of players on a side in a sports match. There are holes and the enemy will exploit them.
 
I have several employees in Russia. Most of what you say is true, but there are some fine details which are not.

SWIFT - while technically some banks still have access to it, in practice what we have seen is that many/most US banks have simply cut off payments to Russian accounts period. We got a few wires out early in the conflict back in late Feb, but those bank accounts are now blocked by our bank (BoA), even though they are not on the sanctioned list.

VPN - these are starting to be restricted. My employees are having to bounce around to stay ahead of the restrictions.

So do the sanctions provide the opportunity for anyone with Russian payables to “extend the terms” indefinitely since most will be blocked from paying for or receiving goods? In this way sanctions have a retroactive element?
 
Ukraine does not have the anti-ship Neptune missiles some of you are saying that they have. The missiles have not been delivered yet, if they had been delivered they would have been used by now. The only thing that Ukraine has so far are the Transporter Erecter Launcher vehicles (TELs ) for the missiles, but not the missiles themselves.

At the moment the Russian Air force cannot do their job very well. But it is on a matter of time (attrition rate) before it is in an effectively unopposed situation where it could do the job.

To an extent (militarily) both sides are losing, and therefore it is a race to make the other side give up first.
 
So do the sanctions provide the opportunity for anyone with Russian payables to “extend the terms” indefinitely since most will be blocked from paying for or receiving goods? In this way sanctions have a retroactive element?

I don't know the answer to that. No one I pay is on the sanction list, it's just hard to get them funds.
 
I don't know the answer to that. No one I pay is on the sanction list, it's just hard to get them funds.
Depends on the terms of the contract and on the legal regime that the contract specifies. When I write such a contract I make sure that there is a clause in there which means i/we are never in the wrong in these circumstances. But that is because I have had to deal with sanctions and so know what can happen. Most suppliers are unable to get most clients to sign such onerous terms, in fact I was surprised when the clients in question eventually agreed.

Ordinarily the client will need to find a way to pay on time or they will be in the wrong. Talking to (a close contact who is very close to this) the US sanctions provisions have clauses in them to allow for orderly winding up of business affairs, whereas the corresponding EU regime is much more draconian. That is due to the different histories and decision making processes of EU vs US.