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.
Unfortunately it's looking more and more like a negotiated settlement with Russia taking a portion of Ukraine's farmlands. There will be skirmishes for years to come. Neither side wins and Ukraine will be lucky if Russian pays anything but a token amount for damages.

Now that oil prices are coming down many Americans have lost interest and the US media isn't getting enough clicks to cover the story.
 
  • Funny
Reactions: bkp_duke
Based on?...

Where to start. For me the list is almost endless. Ukraine has the heart, right to protect its borders, support from international law, etc. but it doesn't matter when the international community refuses to defend Ukraine with its own military. Aside from a few more modern foreign supplied armaments almost everything is stacked against Ukraine. Ukraine and Russian have complex history. There's a sizeable Russian population in Ukraine, a mismatch in GDP/population/natural resources/nuclear weapons/military/leadership.... And dictators are almost impossible to remove.

And after the war Ukraine needs to keep the proverbial nose clean especially avoiding close relationships with the west or Putler will return. Its all understood. The west will only support via a distant proxy war.

It's shades of Hong Kong. And more similar to what might happen in Taiwan.
 
Where to start. For me the list is almost endless. Ukraine has the heart, right to protect its borders, support from international law, etc. but it doesn't matter when the international community refuses to defend Ukraine with its own military. Aside from a few more modern foreign supplied armaments almost everything is stacked against Ukraine. Ukraine and Russian have complex history. There's a sizeable Russian population in Ukraine, a mismatch in GDP/population/natural resources/nuclear weapons/military/leadership.... And dictators are almost impossible to remove.

And after the war Ukraine needs to keep the proverbial nose clean especially avoiding close relationships with the west or Putler will return. Its all understood. The west will only support via a distant proxy war.

It's shades of Hong Kong. And more similar to what might happen in Taiwan.

Are we watching the same conflict unfold?

The US alone, with no partners, has clearly shown that they are willing to fund and supply weapons to Ukraine on a pretty much never-ending basis. The benefits, if I'm being cynical, to the US are nearly endless but include:
1) field-testing new gear at no risk of life to US soldiers (HIMARS, M777 new GPS-based shells, retrofit kits for HARM missiles to work on USSR-based planes, switchblade drones, Javelin - so many different revisions, etc. etc. etc.)
2) literally watching their "nearest peer" in Russia burn through ammo and men at a rate that means they will likely never be a superpower again
3) expanding NATO to include, at least right now, Finland and Switzerland
4) watching China squirm because they clearly want to help Russia, but they also clearly don't want to piss off their largest export customers (USA).
5) Military contractors are getting huge contracts from NATO countries for their gear, having shown how successful it is against Russia's . . . crap.

And that list was with 3 beers in me and off the top of my head.


No, this is going to be a 2-7 year war, the US and partners know that, and are fully expecting to back Ukraine as needed.

Besides, at least to the US, the funds required to do this are a fraction of what we spent in Iraq and Afghanistan. It's not going to put a material dent in the US budget.

Did I mention this is all at "no harm" to us? The Pentagon and military contractors are salivating over this.
 
Last edited:
People in St. Petersburg call themselves "Muscovites"???

The power in the east for centuries was centered on Kyiv from the Viking era to 1240 when the Golden Horde sacked and burned Kyiv. A small vassal kingdom of the Mongols became the dominant power in the eastern part of Europe: Muskovy. I believe Muskovy included both modern day Moscow and St Petersburg. In any case culturally the two cities are closely tied and Putin is from a suburb of St Petersburg.

They won't take the whole country. But you continue to act like it's a foregone conclusion Russia will soon collapse and Ukraine will regain their land. As much as I'd love to see that happen, it's just wishful thinking.

The history of the last 150 years is that when Russia/the USSR has a war go badly there is some sort of rebellion. This war is going badly.

Fantasy leads to bad policy. Many in the west do not want Ukraine to win. A few are outright pro-Russia, but most are either 'peace in our time' fools, America First (or Britain/France/etc. First) types or self-proclaimed grand game players. This wrong-headed fantasy narrative plays right into their hands.

Why spend six months training pilots and ground crews on NATO jets if it'll all be over in three? Or if "sanctions will bring Putin to his knees"? Go back five months and read how Ukraine was on the verge of re-taking Kherson. And would hold Mariupol. And how every inch of ground lost in the Donbas was actually just a brilliant Ukranian "shaping operation". It's all BS, and it directly aids those who want to hamstring Ukraine.

Even if the war ended in three, Ukraine will be transitioning to NATO weapons and ditching their ex-Soviet gear. That will include switching the air force to NATO planes.

I never predicted Mariupol would hold, the city held out longer than I thought it would. The Ukrainians did play Donbas brilliantly, they took more casualties than they would have liked because of Russian artillery, but they tied down the bulk of the Russian army for months with the Russians trying to take ground the entire time, only to end up taking a few KM. The Russians fell far short of their objectives.

Retaking Kherson depends on Ukraine's offensive capabilities. They are receiving offensive equipment from the west, but they have yet to deploy it. They need at least a division strength, probably more a corps with modern equipment together with troops capable of combined arms fighting to really go on the offensive. There are a lot of things happening behind the scenes. We know some Ukrainians are training in the UK and more in Poland. Though we don't know what their training entails. It may be the Ukrainians are putting together an offensive force with western help.

What we do know is the western tanks and APCs that are going to Ukraine have not been seen on the battlefield yet, which indicates those are going to units that have not been deployed yet.

Something else could break. And I could soon enjoy a romantic evening with Natalie Portman. But neither is likely. And paradoxically, being 10x more aggressive about arming and training Ukraine makes it more likely 'something else will break'. So we need to do it in either event. And we need to stop playing into the hands of the go-slow crowd with all these wildly overoptimistic forecasts and overblown stories of Russian corruption and ineptitude.

Ukraine is the David fighting the Goliath. Russia has plenty of old equipment to burn through as well as lots of ammunition. A fast battlefield victory for Ukraine has never been in the cards.

The Ukrainians have time on their side. As long as the west keeps them supplied (and it's a small drop in the bucket for US. The war in Afghanistan alone cost the US $300 million a day for 20 years. The US so far has sent a few tens of billions to Ukraine. That's money lost in the couch cushions for the US. There is the danger that a pro-Putin president will win in 2024, but for the next 2 years the US will remain committed to helping Ukraine. The Europeans are also strong supporters of Ukraine, especially the UK and Poland.

The US public may be losing interest, but the government isn't. The US public lost interest in Iraq and Afghanistan too and they had no effect on the budgets for those wars.

As long as the governments stay the course, Ukraine will keep getting arms.

The Russian military has been the most corrupt large military in the world since the fall of the USSR. The Trent Telenko article I posted yesterday on Russian artillery ammunition supplies had an example. The Russians came to the realization that about 2/3 of the old Soviet ammunition had become unstable and was blowing up. They allocated money to build 500 state of the art facilities to store what ammunition could be saved and destroy the unstable stuff. All the money was stolen and none of the unstable ammunition was destroyed, nor any new facilities built.

Unfortunately it's looking more and more like a negotiated settlement with Russia taking a portion of Ukraine's farmlands. There will be skirmishes for years to come. Neither side wins and Ukraine will be lucky if Russian pays anything but a token amount for damages.

Now that oil prices are coming down many Americans have lost interest and the US media isn't getting enough clicks to cover the story.

Negotiations only happen when both sides are wanting to quit the war and at this point Putin can't politically afford to come to the negotiation table and Ukraine is dug in for a total war as long as it takes.

You would probably have been expecting a negotiated settlement between Japan and the US in 1942 also? Ukraine has the determination to see this war through that the US had in 1942. There are some Quislings among the Ukrainians, but the country is more united than it ever has been before. They are seeing what the Russians are doing to the POWs from Mariupol and they know what the Russians have done to other conquered peoples. They know that this is a war that either results in Ukraine getting its borders back or the end of the Ukrainian people. There is no middle ground as far as the Ukrainians are concerned.

Even Russia has quit with the ridiculous demands for Ukraine to disarm. They know the Ukrainians are not going to surrender. Ever.

When an aggressor in a war loses momentum, it's almost always the beginning of the end. The only times that hasn't happened is when something happened somewhere else that caused the defenders to be forced to withdraw from their positions and only if the aggressor has vast resources to draw on.

An example of this is the war in Italy which stalled in 1943. The Allies couldn't move further up the boot and the Germans were deeply dug in and refusing to budge. The Allies started moving in 1944 as the Germans had to draw off troops in the south to shore up for coming invasions in the west and the deteriorating situation in the east. The Allies captured Rome just before D-Day. But after D-Day and Operation Bagration in the east the Italian front really started collapsing for the Germans.

The US and Commonwealth alliance had no shortage of resources to pour into the Italian campaign, so when the Germans started pulled back, they could go on the offensive again and they rolled up the boot over the next several months.

In the Iran-Iraq War is an example of the more common situation when an offensive loses momentum. The Iraqis invaded in 1980, lost momentum fairly quickly. The front ebbed and flowed for 8 years, but they never regained the momentum. Same thing happened to the Germans in France in 1914.

As long as the defenders are willing to fight and they have the ability to fight, the aggressor is screwed. Ultimately for the Russians this is an optional war. It's a war of conquest for Putin. For Ukraine, this is an existential threat war. They win or they cease to exist. Ukraine has more will to keep going. We don't know what the Russian people really think because they won't tell pollsters, but support for the war is a lot weaker than in Ukraine.

Corrected. Happy Hour started early today. :D

Not to nitpick (as someone with lifelong aphasia I do it way too often), but it says Finland and Switzerland as I write this.
 
It's really hard to predict how and when the war will end. Have heard experts use so many different rationalisations for why x will happen, it seems very arbitrary. I liked the book Superforecasting. They still have forecasting competitions running with some questions regarding the conflict. Here are two that I found relevant:

Will President Volodymyr Zelensky either flee Ukraine or cease to be its president before 25 November 2022?​

Possible AnswerCrowd ForecastChange in last 24 hoursChange in last weekChange in last month
Yes5.00%+0.00%+0.00%+1.00%

Will Vladimir Putin cease to be the president of the Russian Federation before 1 January 2023?​

Possible AnswerCrowd ForecastChange in last 24 hoursChange in last weekChange in last month
Yes3.00%+0.00%-0.50%-3.00%

So I guess for now, the experts are assuming that both Putin and Zelensky will survive and remain in control for the rest of the year. And I assume that if the war ends in peace before then, Putin would might struggle to remain in control and if Russia wins, Zelensky would not remain in control. So my extrapolation is that the experts believe we are in for a longer conflict, at least until next year.
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: navguy12
More ammo depots were hit, this time in Crimea. There are some reports that it might be guerrilla warfare this time.

I was thinking about this, and the way the Russians have these things just wide open for everyone to see, it wouldn't take much to set them off. An old, cheap, RPG shot from 500-1000m away would do the trick.
 
More ammo depots were hit, this time in Crimea. There are some reports that it might be guerrilla warfare this time.

I was thinking about this, and the way the Russians have these things just wide open for everyone to see, it wouldn't take much to set them off. An old, cheap, RPG shot from 500-1000m away would do the trick.

According to Trent Telenko a high percentage of Russian artillery ammunition is so old it has gotten unstable. They realized this back in 2013, but haven't been able to do anything about it.

It is possible they are digging deep enough into the old stockpile they are moving some unstable ammunition that is going off on its own. However, Russian ammunition is so easy to set off that it doesn't take much.

One advantage of NATO ammunition is the US came up with artillery ammo after an accident some years ago that is very difficult to set off without the fuze installed.
 
An old, cheap, RPG shot from 500-1000m away would do the trick.

Old, cheap RPGs have an effective range of about 330m. Max rge 500m. I personally wouldn't use one beyond about a hundred meters, it's very hard to hit a target with deadly accuracy beyond perhaps 50m.

In Viet Nam, the one that hit my friend's M-48 Sheridan was fired point-blank from forest cover (he said his ears never stopped ringing afterward).

TL;dr not an easy thing to be a partisan, behind enemy lines.
 
According to Trent Telenko a high percentage of Russian artillery ammunition is so old it has gotten unstable. They realized this back in 2013, but haven't been able to do anything about it.

It is possible they are digging deep enough into the old stockpile they are moving some unstable ammunition that is going off on its own. However, Russian ammunition is so easy to set off that it doesn't take much.

One advantage of NATO ammunition is the US came up with artillery ammo after an accident some years ago that is very difficult to set off without the fuze installed.

Even better, they Russians might be blowing up themselves with no help. That's karma.
 
Old, cheap RPGs have an effective range of about 330m. Max rge 500m. I personally wouldn't use one beyond about a hundred meters, it's very hard to hit a target with deadly accuracy beyond perhaps 50m.

In Viet Nam, the one that hit my friend's M-48 Sheridan was fired point-blank from forest cover (he said his ears never stopped ringing afterward).

TL;dr not an easy thing to be a partisan, behind enemy lines.

It's very risky. But it's something the Ukrainians have a lot of experience doing. They bore the brunt of Soviet partisan activity in WW II.

Even better, they Russians might be blowing up themselves with no help. That's karma.

Yup!
 
After ignoring many years of warnings of risk of blackmail from dangerous addiction to cheap Russian NG…

Hopefully Germany/Europe has a mild winter like the last. 2 LNG floating terminals will be online by the end of this year and another 2 apparently sometime next year.
I think the belief back when they started was that by buying NG from Russia, Russia would be dependent on the cash inflow and would decide that being a partner was more advantageous than being an enemy. They neglected the unhinged homicidal maniac aspect of Russian dictators. But they should have had gamed this scenario and how to provide for their own citizens needs during yet another insane war and bizarre threats by Putin.