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.
Would that have been possible without West Germany and then all of Germany being a Democracy?... I don't think so.
The term 'democracy' is very broad. Technically Russia and China have elections, too (and claim publicly to be democratic - I've read the Chinese Constitution, very interesting...). I didn't want to get into that for the sake of going too far off the thread. American 'democracy' is very different than the UK or Canada; and Scandinavian countries or New Zealand might question how much power regular citizens have in our North American elections... In the USA because there's a choice between only 2 options (and a very polarized society, not to mention the electoral college structure), and in Canada because as low as 37% of the popular vote can create a majority government, and most votes don't go towards electing any representative (in NZ as high as 97% of cast votes are represented in Parliament in past elections). There's more at play than a mere mechanical vote.

Back to Russia/Ukraine. Simply saying they are democratic now and voting to elect Boris Yeltsin clearly did not create lasting change. The hope I see for Ukraine is that before the war, they were starting the difficult task of slowly rooting out corruption. It's what directly led to this conflict - Putin lost his puppet leader and other bribed officials that were pro-Putin.

Post-war, the so-called Free World's response will contribute to how Russia recovers (or not), but in the end, the people of Russia will have to change, admit their mistakes, make reparations honestly, and become more involved in ensuring a just society, or they'll revert to despotism so they can blame someone else.

When it comes to Ukraine, it looks very likely that they're committed to overcoming corruption and joining the EU. The general population seems to have woken up and decided to become involved in saving their culture and country. The ones that have historically done that in Russia have either been arrested, murdered, or exiled.
 
The term 'democracy' is very broad. Technically Russia and China have elections, too (and claim publicly to be democratic - I've read the Chinese Constitution, very interesting...). I didn't want to get into that for the sake of going too far off the thread. [...

The way Wikipedia describes Chinese elections doesn't sound anything like a Democracy to me.

Elections in the People's Republic of China occur under a one-party authoritarian political system controlled by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).[1][2] Direct elections, except in the special administrative regions of Hong Kong and Macau, occur only at the local level people's congresses and village committees, with all candidate nominations preapproved by the CCP.[1][3]. [...


It seems to me that a pretty good way of measuring whether a country is a Democracy or not, is if they live up to "FREE" label from the perspective of Freedom House.

Russia and China does not.

Russia gets 16/100 and China gets 9/100.

Compare that with 99/100 for New Zealand or 100/100 for Norway.

But I do agree with your points regarding Canada and the US.

 
What exactly is Ukraine's intention with the left bank of the dnipro? They cannot get vehicles across the river any time soon, so expanding out is entirely by infantry. Doesn't this make them hyper vulnerable to russia counter-attacking with vehicles?



The last few years of political observation has made me the most cynical I've ever been of the competency of people in general to rule themselves and/or choose their rulers. I agree there is no meaningful groundswell in russia for a change in governance. The fact is a great percentage of people like bullies as long as they can convince themselves the bully is on their side.

Russia has thrown pretty much everything it had in Kherson oblast at the first bridgehead and failed to budge the Ukrainians. The second bridgehead is likely going to be more of the same.

If Ukraine can expand one of the birdgeheads deep enough to push the river out of Russian artillery range they can build pontoon bridges across the river and start moving heavier equipment. At that point the balance in the area will tilt Ukraine's way pretty quickly. Up until now the Ukrainians could move enough into the first bridgehead to prevent the Russians from forcing them out, but couldn't bring in enough equipment to break out of the bridgehead. I think the terrain in the second bridgehead area will allow Ukraine to make a deeper bridgehead.
 
What exactly is Ukraine's intention with the left bank of the dnipro? They cannot get vehicles across the river any time soon, so expanding out is entirely by infantry.

Have you forgotten that the Russians blew the dam, which drained the reservoir? You're looking at maps instead of air photos. Ask yourself when freezeup is due as Winter descends on Ukraine, and remind yourself how much better heavy vehicles move on frozen ground. Engineering bridging equipment will be key; reports are that lots of such kit has been spotted on the right bank of the Dnipro. This front could be 100 km wide. That's too big a salient for Russia to cover, especially given their needs in the East, and the South (and ATACMS in the rear).
 
WaPo article on methods of cutting the multiple heads off the Ru bear/snake, not paywalled
(I have 8 more articles to share this month)

Exceptionally good article. Most folks here would be well advised to read it, IMHO. Confirms a lot of what I suspected, and adds a lot of info.
BTW, it sounds like our speculations were wrong on the initial Kerch bridge attack; we were all pretty convinced that it was a sub / drone IIRC, yes? Apparently the Russians were correct in that it was a truck bomb. The second attack was indeed a naval drone.

Zelensky initially denied Ukrainian responsibility. But SBU director Malyuk described the operation in extraordinary detail in an interview earlier this year, acknowledging that his service had placed a powerful explosive inside a truck hauling industrial-size rolls of cellophane.
Like other SBU plots, the operation involved unwitting accomplices, including the truck driver killed in the explosion. “We went through seven circles of hell keeping so many people in the dark,” Malyuk said in an interview about the operation, which he said hinged on the susceptibility of “ordinary Russian smugglers.”
U.S. officials who had been notified in advance raised concerns about the attack, officials said, fearing Russian escalation. Those misgivings had presumably dissipated by the time the SBU launched a second strike on the bridge nine months later using naval drones that were developed as part of a top secret operation involving the CIA and other Western intelligence services.
@winfield100 Thank you for posting the article.
 
Russia has thrown pretty much everything it had in Kherson oblast at the first bridgehead and failed to budge the Ukrainians. The second bridgehead is likely going to be more of the same.

If Ukraine can expand one of the birdgeheads deep enough to push the river out of Russian artillery range they can build pontoon bridges across the river and start moving heavier equipment. At that point the balance in the area will tilt Ukraine's way pretty quickly. Up until now the Ukrainians could move enough into the first bridgehead to prevent the Russians from forcing them out, but couldn't bring in enough equipment to break out of the bridgehead. I think the terrain in the second bridgehead area will allow Ukraine to make a deeper bridgehead.
Seems to me they'd have to get really deep to get out of artillery range, though. I think it's something like 1/4 mile which is a very long and vulnerable pontoon bridge.
 
Exceptionally good article. Most folks here would be well advised to read it, IMHO. Confirms a lot of what I suspected, and adds a lot of info.
BTW, it sounds like our speculations were wrong on the initial Kerch bridge attack; we were all pretty convinced that it was a sub / drone IIRC, yes? Apparently the Russians were correct in that it was a truck bomb. The second attack was indeed a naval drone.


@winfield100 Thank you for posting the article.

I think a pretty decent proportion of us immediately realized that the first Kerch bridge bombing was indeed a truck bomb. The video was extremely compelling.
 
Russia has thrown pretty much everything it had in Kherson oblast at the first bridgehead and failed to budge the Ukrainians. The second bridgehead is likely going to be more of the same.

If Ukraine can expand one of the birdgeheads deep enough to push the river out of Russian artillery range they can build pontoon bridges across the river and start moving heavier equipment. At that point the balance in the area will tilt Ukraine's way pretty quickly. Up until now the Ukrainians could move enough into the first bridgehead to prevent the Russians from forcing them out, but couldn't bring in enough equipment to break out of the bridgehead. I think the terrain in the second bridgehead area will allow Ukraine to make a deeper bridgehead.

At this stage, that's more of a pipe dream.

The main point of the UKR crossings of the river is to fix Russian positions in that area and prevent them from being drawn down by any significant amount and reinforcing the main thrust further east. Small moves like this prevent the Russians from moving tanks, artillery, etc. over to that region. They cannot push pontoon bridges and large scale equipment without pushing Russian artillery and aviation back, and they won't do that by any significant measure with the light infantry and special forces groups they have there now.
 
One thing Timothy Snyder has frequently been critical of leaders in western democracies about is the seeming belief that given a change democracy just springs up on its own. That isn't how democracies come about...

The EU has required new member states to adopt democratic norms and fair market reforms if they don't already have them. Some countries have been in EU limbo for years because they struggle to adapt.
The following statement is the profound one, in my opinion:
"For a democracy to work long term, a relatively high level of civics education among the whole population is necessary. A lot of countries that were healthy democracies are now backsliding."

Examples of that include the USA, which cannot seem to manage representative democracy because of anti-democratic electoral rules that prevent the most votes from electing the leaders. Similarly numerous countries that have had working decries see themselves sliding towards "partial democracies" such as Turkey, Hungary and numerous others flirting with sliding away such as Brazil, Uk, France, italy etc.

Now, when the Ukrainian survival is under threat, much support is also being threatened.

Without question this is the largest threat to Ukraine, in my opinion, exacerbated by Putin, Xi et al feeling quite pleased with themselves for their successful media manipulation efforts in the West, whether admitted or not.

I cannot see any way out unless Ukraine can make enormous progresss within the next few months.

This should not be so.
But, look at the trends:
 
Last edited:
...] and numerous others flirting with sliding away such as Brazil, Uk, France, italy etc. [...

Isn't that 'just a little' unnecessarily dark...

I agree that Brazil seems problematic. And I will admit that I probably know to little about Italy to really say, but still...

The UK gets 93/100 from Freedom House. France gets 89/100. And Italy gets 90/100...

But yeah... Brazil is down to 72/100 in 2023 from 79/100 in 2017... Still ranked as "FREE" though, but I suppose they're getting close to just being "PARTLY FREE".