Russian Invasion of Ukraine - tactics and logistics

[ZiprHead]

A western form of liberal democracy does not appear possible for Russia.

Stating what has been widely reported for years, Putin and his government is a criminal enterprise. In the news stolen Ukrainian wheat is showing up in the Mediterranean region. Imagine Trump with the dictatorial powers he wanted.

Putin came out of nowhere in becoming the head of Russia. His primary qualification was being reliable in not prosecuting Boris Yeltsin and his family for corruption.

Putin ran on a campaign of anti-corruption. He was supported by many westerners because of that.

Then he put the first corrupt oligarch in the stocks and scared the crap out of the rest of them. How do we stay on your good side, Mr. Putin? they asked. 50 percent was the answer. Give me my 50% cut and all will be good.

 

[Jayjay]

It's often difficult to tell what information sources are reliable and what are not. Vladimir from Moscow has some tips for the rest of us how to solve this dilemma:



The interviewer agrees, so there has to be something to it...

 

[bilby]

A western form of liberal democracy does not appear possible for Russia.

To be fair, a western form of liberal democracy doesn't appear possible for the USA, either. Just ask the Supreme Court. Or President-elect Gore.

 

[Tigers!]

A western form of liberal democracy does not appear possible for Russia.

To be fair, a western form of liberal democracy doesn't appear possible for the USA, either. Just ask the Supreme Court. Or President-elect Gore.

Despite that the flow of people is very much to USA and not to Russia so it appears there is a little something the yanks might be getting right.

 

[bilby]

A western form of liberal democracy does not appear possible for Russia.

To be fair, a western form of liberal democracy doesn't appear possible for the USA, either. Just ask the Supreme Court. Or President-elect Gore.

Despite that the flow of people is very much to USA and not to Russia so it appears there is a little something the yanks might be getting right.

Sure. But there's also a massive flow of people to Shanghai today, and there was a massive flow of people to the almost entirely lawless goldfields regions of Australia and California on the 1800s; so it appears that western liberal democracy isn't as attractive as money.

 

[Tigers!]

A western form of liberal democracy does not appear possible for Russia.

To be fair, a western form of liberal democracy doesn't appear possible for the USA, either. Just ask the Supreme Court. Or President-elect Gore.

Despite that the flow of people is very much to USA and not to Russia so it appears there is a little something the yanks might be getting right.

Sure. But there's also a massive flow of people to Shanghai today, and there was a massive flow of people to the almost entirely lawless goldfields regions of Australia and California on the 1800s; so it appears that western liberal democracy isn't as attractive as money.

Is the flow of people to Shanghai internal i.e. Chinese or external i.e. non-Chinese? If largely internal then that does not mean much when we are talking of external people moving.
I do not dispute that money is an attractive force but it only takes you so far. If you are in place where you are repressed or unable to live your life then a place that seems to offer that will be attractive to many, even if not financially alluring.

 

[SLD]

From ISW:

“Russian forces continue to face widespread force generation challenges. A senior US defense official stated on May 9 that the US has not observed any indicators of a “new major Russian mobilization” and that members of the private military company Wagner Group “urgently” requested hundreds of thousands of additional troops to reinforce Russian efforts in Donbas. The official noted that Russia currently has 97 battalion tactical groups (BTGs) in Ukraine, but that BTGs have been moving in and out of Ukraine to refit and resupply, suggesting that Russian troops continue to sustain substantial damage in combat. ISW has previously assessed that most Russian BTGs are heavily degraded and counting BTGs is not a useful metric of Russian combat power. The Main Ukrainian Intelligence Directorate (GUR) claimed that under-trained, ill-equipped Russian conscripts are still being sent into active combat despite the Kremlin denying this practice. A prisoner of war from the BARS-7 detachment of the Wagner Group claimed that a ”covert mobilization” is underway in Russian to send conscripts to clean damage caused by combat in the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics.”

It’s a stalemate. Nothing much is happening besides the counteroffensive by Ukraine around Kharkiv. That’s tying up Russian troops and preventing further actions. The Ukrainians are getting stronger. Their troops are now battle hardened and highly motivated. Russian troops are demoralized and don’t want to be there. They can’t be expected to do much and lack any initiative to take the fight to the enemy. They can probably be compelled to stand their ground, but after some point they may not even do that.

 

[bilby]

A western form of liberal democracy does not appear possible for Russia.

To be fair, a western form of liberal democracy doesn't appear possible for the USA, either. Just ask the Supreme Court. Or President-elect Gore.

Despite that the flow of people is very much to USA and not to Russia so it appears there is a little something the yanks might be getting right.

Sure. But there's also a massive flow of people to Shanghai today, and there was a massive flow of people to the almost entirely lawless goldfields regions of Australia and California on the 1800s; so it appears that western liberal democracy isn't as attractive as money.

Is the flow of people to Shanghai internal i.e. Chinese or external i.e. non-Chinese? If largely internal then that does not mean much when we are talking of external people moving.
I do not dispute that money is an attractive force but it only takes you so far. If you are in place where you are repressed or unable to live your life then a place that seems to offer that will be attractive to many, even if not financially alluring.

That's a lovely hypothesis.

Have you any evidence that it's true?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

A western form of liberal democracy does not appear possible for Russia.

To be fair, a western form of liberal democracy doesn't appear possible for the USA, either. Just ask the Supreme Court. Or President-elect Gore.

Despite that the flow of people is very much to USA and not to Russia so it appears there is a little something the yanks might be getting right.

Sure. But there's also a massive flow of people to Shanghai today, and there was a massive flow of people to the almost entirely lawless goldfields regions of Australia and California on the 1800s; so it appears that western liberal democracy isn't as attractive as money.

Ever consider that it was the gold, not the government that attracted them?

 

[Tigers!]

A western form of liberal democracy does not appear possible for Russia.

To be fair, a western form of liberal democracy doesn't appear possible for the USA, either. Just ask the Supreme Court. Or President-elect Gore.

Despite that the flow of people is very much to USA and not to Russia so it appears there is a little something the yanks might be getting right.

Sure. But there's also a massive flow of people to Shanghai today, and there was a massive flow of people to the almost entirely lawless goldfields regions of Australia and California on the 1800s; so it appears that western liberal democracy isn't as attractive as money.

Is the flow of people to Shanghai internal i.e. Chinese or external i.e. non-Chinese? If largely internal then that does not mean much when we are talking of external people moving.
I do not dispute that money is an attractive force but it only takes you so far. If you are in place where you are repressed or unable to live your life then a place that seems to offer that will be attractive to many, even if not financially alluring.

That's a lovely hypothesis.

Have you any evidence that it's true?

Evidence what is true? People movement to Shanghai or the fact that the USA/Commonwealth/ Europe gets lots of people going there as immigrants?

 

[ZiprHead]

Column of Russian tanks destroyed by Ukrainian missile squad​

 

[bilby]

A western form of liberal democracy does not appear possible for Russia.

To be fair, a western form of liberal democracy doesn't appear possible for the USA, either. Just ask the Supreme Court. Or President-elect Gore.

Despite that the flow of people is very much to USA and not to Russia so it appears there is a little something the yanks might be getting right.

Sure. But there's also a massive flow of people to Shanghai today, and there was a massive flow of people to the almost entirely lawless goldfields regions of Australia and California on the 1800s; so it appears that western liberal democracy isn't as attractive as money.

Is the flow of people to Shanghai internal i.e. Chinese or external i.e. non-Chinese? If largely internal then that does not mean much when we are talking of external people moving.
I do not dispute that money is an attractive force but it only takes you so far. If you are in place where you are repressed or unable to live your life then a place that seems to offer that will be attractive to many, even if not financially alluring.

That's a lovely hypothesis.

Have you any evidence that it's true?

Evidence what is true? People movement to Shanghai or the fact that the USA/Commonwealth/ Europe gets lots of people going there as immigrants?

That money isn't the primary driver of voluntary migration.

People move away from danger, and/or towards money.

There's no need to invoke democracy as a driving force.

 

[Hermit]

A western form of liberal democracy does not appear possible for Russia.

To be fair, a western form of liberal democracy doesn't appear possible for the USA, either. Just ask the Supreme Court. Or President-elect Gore.

Despite that the flow of people is very much to USA and not to Russia so it appears there is a little something the yanks might be getting right.

Sure. But there's also a massive flow of people to Shanghai today, and there was a massive flow of people to the almost entirely lawless goldfields regions of Australia and California on the 1800s; so it appears that western liberal democracy isn't as attractive as money.

Ever consider that it was the gold, not the government that attracted them?

Yes. Money.

In the US it's the green card. It's pretty much why Rupert Murdoch became a US citizen.

 

[DrZoidberg]

A western form of liberal democracy does not appear possible for Russia.

To be fair, a western form of liberal democracy doesn't appear possible for the USA, either. Just ask the Supreme Court. Or President-elect Gore.

Despite that the flow of people is very much to USA and not to Russia so it appears there is a little something the yanks might be getting right.

Sure. But there's also a massive flow of people to Shanghai today, and there was a massive flow of people to the almost entirely lawless goldfields regions of Australia and California on the 1800s; so it appears that western liberal democracy isn't as attractive as money.

Is the flow of people to Shanghai internal i.e. Chinese or external i.e. non-Chinese? If largely internal then that does not mean much when we are talking of external people moving.
I do not dispute that money is an attractive force but it only takes you so far. If you are in place where you are repressed or unable to live your life then a place that seems to offer that will be attractive to many, even if not financially alluring.

I don't think people care that much about personal liberty compared to wealth and personal security.

But democracy tends to lead to wealth and personal security. That's why people like it and the world drifts in that direction.

Like my brother's Chinese wife said, as long as the Chinese economy is growing the Chinese communist party has nothing to fear from the people.

 

[bilby]

A western form of liberal democracy does not appear possible for Russia.

To be fair, a western form of liberal democracy doesn't appear possible for the USA, either. Just ask the Supreme Court. Or President-elect Gore.

Despite that the flow of people is very much to USA and not to Russia so it appears there is a little something the yanks might be getting right.

Sure. But there's also a massive flow of people to Shanghai today, and there was a massive flow of people to the almost entirely lawless goldfields regions of Australia and California on the 1800s; so it appears that western liberal democracy isn't as attractive as money.

Ever consider that it was the gold, not the government that attracted them?

Well, that is my entire argument here, but seeing as you ask, no, I had never for an instant considered that I might be correct

 

[TV and credit cards]

A western form of liberal democracy does not appear possible for Russia.

To be fair, a western form of liberal democracy doesn't appear possible for the USA, either. Just ask the Supreme Court. Or President-elect Gore.

Despite that the flow of people is very much to USA and not to Russia so it appears there is a little something the yanks might be getting right.

Sure. But there's also a massive flow of people to Shanghai today, and there was a massive flow of people to the almost entirely lawless goldfields regions of Australia and California on the 1800s; so it appears that western liberal democracy isn't as attractive as money.

Is the flow of people to Shanghai internal i.e. Chinese or external i.e. non-Chinese? If largely internal then that does not mean much when we are talking of external people moving.
I do not dispute that money is an attractive force but it only takes you so far. If you are in place where you are repressed or unable to live your life then a place that seems to offer that will be attractive to many, even if not financially alluring.

I don't think people care that

But democracy tends to lead to wealth and personal security. That's why people like it and the world drifts in that direction.

Like my brother's Chinese wife said, as long as the Chinese economy is growing the Chinese communist party has nothing to fear from the people.

Well the Chinese people hardly know what they are missing now do they? I mean if you are starting from a point of poverty under the thumb of an authoritarian regime and are now given the opportunity to make a little money and have a few nice things under that same authoritarian regime, you’re going to think life is great.

It all depends on your reference point.

 

[DrZoidberg]

A western form of liberal democracy does not appear possible for Russia.

To be fair, a western form of liberal democracy doesn't appear possible for the USA, either. Just ask the Supreme Court. Or President-elect Gore.

Despite that the flow of people is very much to USA and not to Russia so it appears there is a little something the yanks might be getting right.

Sure. But there's also a massive flow of people to Shanghai today, and there was a massive flow of people to the almost entirely lawless goldfields regions of Australia and California on the 1800s; so it appears that western liberal democracy isn't as attractive as money.

Is the flow of people to Shanghai internal i.e. Chinese or external i.e. non-Chinese? If largely internal then that does not mean much when we are talking of external people moving.
I do not dispute that money is an attractive force but it only takes you so far. If you are in place where you are repressed or unable to live your life then a place that seems to offer that will be attractive to many, even if not financially alluring.

I don't think people care that

But democracy tends to lead to wealth and personal security. That's why people like it and the world drifts in that direction.

Like my brother's Chinese wife said, as long as the Chinese economy is growing the Chinese communist party has nothing to fear from the people.

Well the Chinese people hardly know what they are missing now do they? I mean if you are starting from a point of poverty under the thumb of an authoritarian regime and are now given the opportunity to make a little money and have a few nice things under that same authoritarian regime, you’re going to think life is great.

It all depends on your reference point.

They have Internet. We live in a global world now. There's no difference between what information people in different countries have access to. They know the same things as us. They just draw different conclusions based on those same facts.

We are all influenced by the culture of where we live. All of us. We all have unsupported beliefs we cling to because people around us think in the same way. That is what makes us different.

 

[steve_bank]

China has a middle class and is not a nation of poor peasants anymore. From a news segment they have gone electronic, no paper currency. China is very much a modern state.

From analysis I listened to Chinese leadership is sensitive to the opinions. People are happy as long as they see progress. The expectation that your kids will fare better than you did.

China has an entirely differnt cultural history and foundation then the west. They do not have our hyper individualism. They are npot uncomfortable with authoritarian leadership as long as it works out for them.

Here in the USA the waelth disparity is getting destructive and security is diminishing. It has not been democracy per se, it has been laissez faire wide open free market economic that created wealth.

 

[bilby]

China has a middle class and is not a nation of poor peasants anymore. From a news segment they have gone electronic, no paper currency.

You desperately need to stop believing the nonsense your "news segments" feed you.

No modern nation has gone over to an entirely electronic system of money, and China isn't even close to being able to make such a transition.

They likely have a plan to do so, but that's no indication that it's ever going to happen, much less that it's going to happen soon.

Your "news segment" sounds to me like propaganda against the increasing irrelevance of non-electronic money in the US, which is a bugbear of the batshit-right, who want to return to the gold standard because they're fucking insane.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

China has a middle class and is not a nation of poor peasants anymore. From a news segment they have gone electronic, no paper currency. China is very much a modern state.

I bet Chinese leadership will be happy to hear they no longer have a poverty problem.