US intel is briefing that Kiev will fall in 4-6 weeks, but that an insurgency will last ten years or more.
Putin will be gone very long before then.
Maybe.
Russian strategy looks to be to hold the east and south under a puppet government.
Ukranian resolve, and Western sanctions, are more costly than Putin expected. This is taking longer than planned.
But this ends either with Putin’s ouster, or a new Cold War with a de facto NATO frontier down the Dnieper and a Russia increasingly supplicant within a Chinese led economic order.
Longer than planned? Based on what?
I think it's fairly clear this has taken longer than expected: don't forget Putin captured the airport in Kyiv with paratroopers on day one. He expected - unless he was planning on them all getting shot and captured - to relieve them. Which meant he had to have expected to have his ground troops and armor reach them in the first 48 hours, and probably less.
Now, this doesn't mean that the invasion won't be complete in 2-3 weeks (although the State Department reckons 6 to 8 weeks to capture Kyiv), but it does suggest things have been significantly harder than the Russians expected.
US intel is briefing that Kiev will fall in 4-6 weeks, but that an insurgency will last ten years or more.
Putin will be gone very long before then.
Maybe.
Russian strategy looks to be to hold the east and south under a puppet government.
Ukranian resolve, and Western sanctions, are more costly than Putin expected. This is taking longer than planned.
But this ends either with Putin’s ouster, or a new Cold War with a de facto NATO frontier down the Dnieper and a Russia increasingly supplicant within a Chinese led economic order.
Longer than planned? Based on what?
The propaganda outlets simultaneously publishing a victory essay declaring the unification of Rus, Bel, Ukr as a 'solution for future generations' to the 'Ukrainian question' on day 3.
Plus other operations that make no sense outside of a rapid advance, such as Hostomel, and military police entering Kyiv.
US intel is briefing that Kiev will fall in 4-6 weeks, but that an insurgency will last ten years or more.
Putin will be gone very long before then.
Maybe.
Russian strategy looks to be to hold the east and south under a puppet government.
Ukranian resolve, and Western sanctions, are more costly than Putin expected. This is taking longer than planned.
But this ends either with Putin’s ouster, or a new Cold War with a de facto NATO frontier down the Dnieper and a Russia increasingly supplicant within a Chinese led economic order.
Longer than planned? Based on what?
I think it's fairly clear this has taken longer than expected: don't forget Putin captured the airport in Kyiv with paratroopers on day one. He expected - unless he was planning on them all getting shot and captured - to relieve them. Which meant he had to have expected to have his ground troops and armor reach them in the first 48 hours, and probably less.
Now, this doesn't mean that the invasion won't be complete in 2-3 weeks (although the State Department reckons 6 to 8 weeks to capture Kyiv), but it does suggest things have been significantly harder than the Russians expected.
Yep, I just don't buy this argument that it should have been over by now. It's still early days, and despite the setbacks they are still advancing.
US intel is briefing that Kiev will fall in 4-6 weeks, but that an insurgency will last ten years or more.
Putin will be gone very long before then.
Maybe.
Russian strategy looks to be to hold the east and south under a puppet government.
Ukranian resolve, and Western sanctions, are more costly than Putin expected. This is taking longer than planned.
But this ends either with Putin’s ouster, or a new Cold War with a de facto NATO frontier down the Dnieper and a Russia increasingly supplicant within a Chinese led economic order.
Longer than planned? Based on what?
I think it's fairly clear this has taken longer than expected: don't forget Putin captured the airport in Kyiv with paratroopers on day one. He expected - unless he was planning on them all getting shot and captured - to relieve them. Which meant he had to have expected to have his ground troops and armor reach them in the first 48 hours, and probably less.
Now, this doesn't mean that the invasion won't be complete in 2-3 weeks (although the State Department reckons 6 to 8 weeks to capture Kyiv), but it does suggest things have been significantly harder than the Russians expected.
Yep, I just don't buy this argument that it should have been over by now. It's still early days, and despite the setbacks they are still advancing.
I don’t think anyone’s saying that.
Nevertheless, there is a bit of over-optimism in some Western commentary given early Russian set-backs.
Militarily, at least, it is just a matter of time for Russia to “win”. Our job is to help Ukraine make it more costly, but we/they can’t hold off Russia forever.
What I can’t predict is the effect of sanctions (and body count) on Russian society and the Russian elite. How secure is Putin? I haven’t seen any good analysis on that.
US intel is briefing that Kiev will fall in 4-6 weeks, but that an insurgency will last ten years or more.
Putin will be gone very long before then.
Maybe.
Russian strategy looks to be to hold the east and south under a puppet government.
Ukranian resolve, and Western sanctions, are more costly than Putin expected. This is taking longer than planned.
But this ends either with Putin’s ouster, or a new Cold War with a de facto NATO frontier down the Dnieper and a Russia increasingly supplicant within a Chinese led economic order.
Longer than planned? Based on what?
I think it's fairly clear this has taken longer than expected: don't forget Putin captured the airport in Kyiv with paratroopers on day one. He expected - unless he was planning on them all getting shot and captured - to relieve them. Which meant he had to have expected to have his ground troops and armor reach them in the first 48 hours, and probably less.
Now, this doesn't mean that the invasion won't be complete in 2-3 weeks (although the State Department reckons 6 to 8 weeks to capture Kyiv), but it does suggest things have been significantly harder than the Russians expected.
Yep, I just don't buy this argument that it should have been over by now. It's still early days, and despite the setbacks they are still advancing.
I don’t think anyone’s saying that.
Nevertheless, there is a bit of over-optimism in some Western commentary given early Russian set-backs.
Militarily, at least, it is just a matter of time for Russia to “win”. Our job is to help Ukraine make it more costly, but we/they can’t hold off Russia forever.
What I can’t predict is the effect of sanctions (and body count) on Russian society and the Russian elite. How secure is Putin? I haven’t seen any good analysis on that.
Militarily it may be a very rapid win for Russia. I fear the focus is too much on the present, rather than what will be done afterwards. The whole song and dance about EU membership, for example. That's totally moot if the current regime is deposed.
We can't defend you because you didn't sign up in time.
Those signatures are more important than all of your lives.
Goodbye Ukraine.
At least we didn't find out if Putin might have tried to instigate a nuclear war, and his orders might have been obeyed by many different chains of people, and his nuclear weapons might have worked.
But sleep well.
And slava ukraini.
If you're still there Ukraine, I just thought..
Don't worry about your neighbours like Poland. They signed up in time, so their lives are actually worth all that risk.
US intel is briefing that Kiev will fall in 4-6 weeks, but that an insurgency will last ten years or more.
Putin will be gone very long before then.
Maybe.
Russian strategy looks to be to hold the east and south under a puppet government.
Ukranian resolve, and Western sanctions, are more costly than Putin expected. This is taking longer than planned.
But this ends either with Putin’s ouster, or a new Cold War with a de facto NATO frontier down the Dnieper and a Russia increasingly supplicant within a Chinese led economic order.
Longer than planned? Based on what?
I think it's fairly clear this has taken longer than expected: don't forget Putin captured the airport in Kyiv with paratroopers on day one. He expected - unless he was planning on them all getting shot and captured - to relieve them. Which meant he had to have expected to have his ground troops and armor reach them in the first 48 hours, and probably less.
Now, this doesn't mean that the invasion won't be complete in 2-3 weeks (although the State Department reckons 6 to 8 weeks to capture Kyiv), but it does suggest things have been significantly harder than the Russians expected.
Yep, I just don't buy this argument that it should have been over by now. It's still early days, and despite the setbacks they are still advancing.
I don’t think anyone’s saying that.
Nevertheless, there is a bit of over-optimism in some Western commentary given early Russian set-backs.
Militarily, at least, it is just a matter of time for Russia to “win”. Our job is to help Ukraine make it more costly, but we/they can’t hold off Russia forever.
What I can’t predict is the effect of sanctions (and body count) on Russian society and the Russian elite. How secure is Putin? I haven’t seen any good analysis on that.
Militarily it may be a very rapid win for Russia. I fear the focus is too much on the present, rather than what will be done afterwards. The whole song and dance about EU membership, for example. That's totally moot if the current regime is deposed.
IF a rump Ukraine is left, ie with its capital in Lviv, then I would absolutely expect that to be a EU member by 2030.
We can't defend you because you didn't sign up in time.
Those signatures are more important than all of your lives.
Goodbye Ukraine.
At least we didn't find out if Putin might have tried to instigate a nuclear war, and his orders might have been obeyed by many different chains of people, and his nuclear weapons might have worked.
But sleep well.
And slava ukraini.
If you're still there Ukraine, I just thought..
Don't worry about your neighbours like Poland. They signed up in time, so their lives are actually worth all that risk.
US intel is briefing that Kiev will fall in 4-6 weeks, but that an insurgency will last ten years or more.
Putin will be gone very long before then.
Maybe.
Russian strategy looks to be to hold the east and south under a puppet government.
Ukranian resolve, and Western sanctions, are more costly than Putin expected. This is taking longer than planned.
But this ends either with Putin’s ouster, or a new Cold War with a de facto NATO frontier down the Dnieper and a Russia increasingly supplicant within a Chinese led economic order.
Longer than planned? Based on what?
I think it's fairly clear this has taken longer than expected: don't forget Putin captured the airport in Kyiv with paratroopers on day one. He expected - unless he was planning on them all getting shot and captured - to relieve them. Which meant he had to have expected to have his ground troops and armor reach them in the first 48 hours, and probably less.
Now, this doesn't mean that the invasion won't be complete in 2-3 weeks (although the State Department reckons 6 to 8 weeks to capture Kyiv), but it does suggest things have been significantly harder than the Russians expected.
Yep, I just don't buy this argument that it should have been over by now. It's still early days, and despite the setbacks they are still advancing.
I don’t think anyone’s saying that.
Nevertheless, there is a bit of over-optimism in some Western commentary given early Russian set-backs.
Militarily, at least, it is just a matter of time for Russia to “win”. Our job is to help Ukraine make it more costly, but we/they can’t hold off Russia forever.
What I can’t predict is the effect of sanctions (and body count) on Russian society and the Russian elite. How secure is Putin? I haven’t seen any good analysis on that.
Militarily it may be a very rapid win for Russia. I fear the focus is too much on the present, rather than what will be done afterwards. The whole song and dance about EU membership, for example. That's totally moot if the current regime is deposed.
IF a rump Ukraine is left, ie with its capital in Lviv, then I would absolutely expect that to be a EU member by 2030.
I'm not so sure. Perhaps if relations with Russia had been normalised. Otherwise I don't think there's much chance of it getting the approval of all the other member states.
US intel is briefing that Kiev will fall in 4-6 weeks, but that an insurgency will last ten years or more.
Putin will be gone very long before then.
Maybe.
Russian strategy looks to be to hold the east and south under a puppet government.
Ukranian resolve, and Western sanctions, are more costly than Putin expected. This is taking longer than planned.
But this ends either with Putin’s ouster, or a new Cold War with a de facto NATO frontier down the Dnieper and a Russia increasingly supplicant within a Chinese led economic order.
Longer than planned? Based on what?
I think it's fairly clear this has taken longer than expected: don't forget Putin captured the airport in Kyiv with paratroopers on day one. He expected - unless he was planning on them all getting shot and captured - to relieve them. Which meant he had to have expected to have his ground troops and armor reach them in the first 48 hours, and probably less.
Now, this doesn't mean that the invasion won't be complete in 2-3 weeks (although the State Department reckons 6 to 8 weeks to capture Kyiv), but it does suggest things have been significantly harder than the Russians expected.
Yep, I just don't buy this argument that it should have been over by now. It's still early days, and despite the setbacks they are still advancing.
I don’t think anyone’s saying that.
Nevertheless, there is a bit of over-optimism in some Western commentary given early Russian set-backs.
Militarily, at least, it is just a matter of time for Russia to “win”. Our job is to help Ukraine make it more costly, but we/they can’t hold off Russia forever.
What I can’t predict is the effect of sanctions (and body count) on Russian society and the Russian elite. How secure is Putin? I haven’t seen any good analysis on that.
Militarily it may be a very rapid win for Russia. I fear the focus is too much on the present, rather than what will be done afterwards. The whole song and dance about EU membership, for example. That's totally moot if the current regime is deposed.
IF a rump Ukraine is left, ie with its capital in Lviv, then I would absolutely expect that to be a EU member by 2030.
I'm not so sure. Perhaps if relations with Russia had been normalised. Otherwise I don't think there's much chance of it getting the approval of all the other member states.
I would have agreed with you a week ago. But I think the world has changed, quite suddenly.
US intel is briefing that Kiev will fall in 4-6 weeks, but that an insurgency will last ten years or more.
Putin will be gone very long before then.
Maybe.
Russian strategy looks to be to hold the east and south under a puppet government.
Ukranian resolve, and Western sanctions, are more costly than Putin expected. This is taking longer than planned.
But this ends either with Putin’s ouster, or a new Cold War with a de facto NATO frontier down the Dnieper and a Russia increasingly supplicant within a Chinese led economic order.
Longer than planned? Based on what?
I think it's fairly clear this has taken longer than expected: don't forget Putin captured the airport in Kyiv with paratroopers on day one. He expected - unless he was planning on them all getting shot and captured - to relieve them. Which meant he had to have expected to have his ground troops and armor reach them in the first 48 hours, and probably less.
Now, this doesn't mean that the invasion won't be complete in 2-3 weeks (although the State Department reckons 6 to 8 weeks to capture Kyiv), but it does suggest things have been significantly harder than the Russians expected.
Yep, I just don't buy this argument that it should have been over by now. It's still early days, and despite the setbacks they are still advancing.
I don’t think anyone’s saying that.
Nevertheless, there is a bit of over-optimism in some Western commentary given early Russian set-backs.
Militarily, at least, it is just a matter of time for Russia to “win”. Our job is to help Ukraine make it more costly, but we/they can’t hold off Russia forever.
What I can’t predict is the effect of sanctions (and body count) on Russian society and the Russian elite. How secure is Putin? I haven’t seen any good analysis on that.
Militarily it may be a very rapid win for Russia. I fear the focus is too much on the present, rather than what will be done afterwards. The whole song and dance about EU membership, for example. That's totally moot if the current regime is deposed.
IF a rump Ukraine is left, ie with its capital in Lviv, then I would absolutely expect that to be a EU member by 2030.
I'm not so sure. Perhaps if relations with Russia had been normalised. Otherwise I don't think there's much chance of it getting the approval of all the other member states.
I would have agreed with you a week ago. But I think the world has changed, quite suddenly.
What they did today was easy, and cost-free. Following through, on the other hand.
US intel is briefing that Kiev will fall in 4-6 weeks, but that an insurgency will last ten years or more.
Putin will be gone very long before then.
Maybe.
Russian strategy looks to be to hold the east and south under a puppet government.
Ukranian resolve, and Western sanctions, are more costly than Putin expected. This is taking longer than planned.
But this ends either with Putin’s ouster, or a new Cold War with a de facto NATO frontier down the Dnieper and a Russia increasingly supplicant within a Chinese led economic order.
Longer than planned? Based on what?
I think it's fairly clear this has taken longer than expected: don't forget Putin captured the airport in Kyiv with paratroopers on day one. He expected - unless he was planning on them all getting shot and captured - to relieve them. Which meant he had to have expected to have his ground troops and armor reach them in the first 48 hours, and probably less.
Now, this doesn't mean that the invasion won't be complete in 2-3 weeks (although the State Department reckons 6 to 8 weeks to capture Kyiv), but it does suggest things have been significantly harder than the Russians expected.
Yep, I just don't buy this argument that it should have been over by now. It's still early days, and despite the setbacks they are still advancing.
You literally just wrote "Longer than planned? Based on what?"
US intel is briefing that Kiev will fall in 4-6 weeks, but that an insurgency will last ten years or more.
Putin will be gone very long before then.
Maybe.
Russian strategy looks to be to hold the east and south under a puppet government.
Ukranian resolve, and Western sanctions, are more costly than Putin expected. This is taking longer than planned.
But this ends either with Putin’s ouster, or a new Cold War with a de facto NATO frontier down the Dnieper and a Russia increasingly supplicant within a Chinese led economic order.
Longer than planned? Based on what?
I think it's fairly clear this has taken longer than expected: don't forget Putin captured the airport in Kyiv with paratroopers on day one. He expected - unless he was planning on them all getting shot and captured - to relieve them. Which meant he had to have expected to have his ground troops and armor reach them in the first 48 hours, and probably less.
Now, this doesn't mean that the invasion won't be complete in 2-3 weeks (although the State Department reckons 6 to 8 weeks to capture Kyiv), but it does suggest things have been significantly harder than the Russians expected.
Yep, I just don't buy this argument that it should have been over by now. It's still early days, and despite the setbacks they are still advancing.
You literally just wrote "Longer than planned? Based on what?"
The comment implied some sort of insight into Russia's planning/thoughts about how long it should take. If completed in a four weeks, it would be faster then Poland in WW2, and that was a much larger opposing force.
A son of Leningrad, now an IntPol professor in Toronto sums up the issue neatly.
"The people calling for a no-fly zone should explicitly say they are willing to risk nuclear war and the people calling for backing off should explicitly say they are willing to tolerate war crimes. There is no moral high ground for anyone here, sorry."
US intel is briefing that Kiev will fall in 4-6 weeks, but that an insurgency will last ten years or more.
Putin will be gone very long before then.
Maybe.
Russian strategy looks to be to hold the east and south under a puppet government.
Ukranian resolve, and Western sanctions, are more costly than Putin expected. This is taking longer than planned.
But this ends either with Putin’s ouster, or a new Cold War with a de facto NATO frontier down the Dnieper and a Russia increasingly supplicant within a Chinese led economic order.
Longer than planned? Based on what?
I think it's fairly clear this has taken longer than expected: don't forget Putin captured the airport in Kyiv with paratroopers on day one. He expected - unless he was planning on them all getting shot and captured - to relieve them. Which meant he had to have expected to have his ground troops and armor reach them in the first 48 hours, and probably less.
Now, this doesn't mean that the invasion won't be complete in 2-3 weeks (although the State Department reckons 6 to 8 weeks to capture Kyiv), but it does suggest things have been significantly harder than the Russians expected.
Yep, I just don't buy this argument that it should have been over by now. It's still early days, and despite the setbacks they are still advancing.
I don’t think anyone’s saying that.
Nevertheless, there is a bit of over-optimism in some Western commentary given early Russian set-backs.
Militarily, at least, it is just a matter of time for Russia to “win”. Our job is to help Ukraine make it more costly, but we/they can’t hold off Russia forever.
What I can’t predict is the effect of sanctions (and body count) on Russian society and the Russian elite. How secure is Putin? I haven’t seen any good analysis on that.
Militarily it may be a very rapid win for Russia. I fear the focus is too much on the present, rather than what will be done afterwards. The whole song and dance about EU membership, for example. That's totally moot if the current regime is deposed.
IF a rump Ukraine is left, ie with its capital in Lviv, then I would absolutely expect that to be a EU member by 2030.
Kyiv is on the West Bank of the Dnieper isn't it? It would still be the official capital of a rump Ukraine. Also I am not convinced Russia can hold South Eastern Ukraine long term unless there is massive ethnic cleansing. There are ten million Ukrainians there and they all hate Russia now. Virtually all of them are Ukrainian speakers, and Putin has even turned many Russian speakers against Russia. Novorussyia will be a state of perpetual resistance, fed by a constant supply of weapons over the border from rump Ukraine. Whether it is in six months or ten years, this ends in Russian withdrawal.
US intel is briefing that Kiev will fall in 4-6 weeks, but that an insurgency will last ten years or more.
Putin will be gone very long before then.
Maybe.
Russian strategy looks to be to hold the east and south under a puppet government.
Ukranian resolve, and Western sanctions, are more costly than Putin expected. This is taking longer than planned.
But this ends either with Putin’s ouster, or a new Cold War with a de facto NATO frontier down the Dnieper and a Russia increasingly supplicant within a Chinese led economic order.
Longer than planned? Based on what?
I think it's fairly clear this has taken longer than expected: don't forget Putin captured the airport in Kyiv with paratroopers on day one. He expected - unless he was planning on them all getting shot and captured - to relieve them. Which meant he had to have expected to have his ground troops and armor reach them in the first 48 hours, and probably less.
Now, this doesn't mean that the invasion won't be complete in 2-3 weeks (although the State Department reckons 6 to 8 weeks to capture Kyiv), but it does suggest things have been significantly harder than the Russians expected.
Yep, I just don't buy this argument that it should have been over by now. It's still early days, and despite the setbacks they are still advancing.
I don’t think anyone’s saying that.
Nevertheless, there is a bit of over-optimism in some Western commentary given early Russian set-backs.
Militarily, at least, it is just a matter of time for Russia to “win”. Our job is to help Ukraine make it more costly, but we/they can’t hold off Russia forever.
What I can’t predict is the effect of sanctions (and body count) on Russian society and the Russian elite. How secure is Putin? I haven’t seen any good analysis on that.
Militarily it may be a very rapid win for Russia. I fear the focus is too much on the present, rather than what will be done afterwards. The whole song and dance about EU membership, for example. That's totally moot if the current regime is deposed.
IF a rump Ukraine is left, ie with its capital in Lviv, then I would absolutely expect that to be a EU member by 2030.
Kyiv is on the West Bank of the Dnieper isn't it? It would still be the official capital of a rump Ukraine. Also I am not convinced Russia can hold South Eastern Ukraine long term unless there is massive ethnic cleansing. There are ten million Ukrainians there and they all hate Russia now. Virtually all of them are Ukrainian speakers, and Putin has even turned many Russian speakers against Russia. Novorussyia will be a state of perpetual resistance, fed by a constant supply of weapons over the border from rump Ukraine. Whether it is in six months or ten years, this ends in Russian withdrawal.
Russia has created a Helmand province 15 million strong, which it will have to hold despite minimal equipment, capability, and morale advantages. It is impossible for Russia to hold any but the smallest of cities without overstretching themselves and sustaining massive casualties.
New definition of ridiculous: believing that the UK should have a totally open door policy on refugees from Ukraine without any checks whatsoever. Tip: there are still bad people out there who might take advantage of such an offer. This is the same type of idealism that led to Germany shutting down its nuclear power stations and coming to rely on Russian gas for most of its energy needs, which is one of the things that led to the current crisis.
"Bad people" can already just apply for tourist visas and show up and do their bad things, it's not like the Home Office is capable of telling the difference.
A son of Leningrad, now an IntPol professor in Toronto sums up the issue neatly.
"The people calling for a no-fly zone should explicitly say they are willing to risk nuclear war and the people calling for backing off should explicitly say they are willing to tolerate war crimes. There is no moral high ground for anyone here, sorry."
Pick your fighter, neither are pretty.
"willing to risk nuclear war."
IMO that's a bogus argument. Putin is threatening to use nukes. If we are afraid he might do it, then *anything* we do might be an excuse to use them. If we're afraid he'll escalate over a NFZ and do nothing, he'll then just hint that (say) 'supplying arms' to Ukraine might provoke a nuclear response. Or NATO being in Poland. Or Lithuania. etc, etc.
The questions become: 1) Can we successfully impose a NFZ? 2) would a NFZ alone make much of a difference in this war? 3) Is it the morally correct thing to do?
We can all provide our own answers to these questions. Personally, I'd argue strongly yes to 3) and probably 1). 2) is where I have grave doubts,
US intel is briefing that Kiev will fall in 4-6 weeks, but that an insurgency will last ten years or more.
Putin will be gone very long before then.
Maybe.
Russian strategy looks to be to hold the east and south under a puppet government.
Ukranian resolve, and Western sanctions, are more costly than Putin expected. This is taking longer than planned.
But this ends either with Putin’s ouster, or a new Cold War with a de facto NATO frontier down the Dnieper and a Russia increasingly supplicant within a Chinese led economic order.
Longer than planned? Based on what?
I think it's fairly clear this has taken longer than expected: don't forget Putin captured the airport in Kyiv with paratroopers on day one. He expected - unless he was planning on them all getting shot and captured - to relieve them. Which meant he had to have expected to have his ground troops and armor reach them in the first 48 hours, and probably less.
Now, this doesn't mean that the invasion won't be complete in 2-3 weeks (although the State Department reckons 6 to 8 weeks to capture Kyiv), but it does suggest things have been significantly harder than the Russians expected.
Your point about the paratroopers and the airport is an excellent piece of analysis I haven't seen elsewhere. So yes, they intended to reach that area and relieve those forces a lot faster than they did.
(Unless it was either a feint using 'disposable' troops to distract Ukrainian forces from elsewhere, or a Market-Garden lets-try-this gamble.)
⚡️Russian troops in Crimea refuse to take part in Ukraine invasion.
The Center for Defense Strategies, citing their sources in the marine personnel in Crimea, says members of Russia’s 810th Detached Marine Brigade are in a “demoralized state."
Russia isn't even going to win the invasion, let alone the peace afterwards.
Humiliating, absolutely humiliating for Russia.
And don't forget, the longer this goes on, the less power Russia has. Their military/industrial complex was all geared towards overwhelming power to blitzkrieg and make it a fait accompli. Russia even before the sanctions was a poorer nation than Italy, let alone the combined economies of NATO which are reinforcing Ukraine.
NATO can keep reinforcing Ukraine with munitions and arms with a virtual blank cheque. Russia has nothing: This is it. Decrepit thirty year old Soviet hand-me-downs that were obsolete when the Soviet Union fell and nothing more behind the curtain.
Russia is dead as a world power.
At 4.3% of GDP Russia has quite a high expenditure on defence compared with the nations it is up against. You would think its Armed Forces would be relatively well equiped, but it seems they are not getting much bang for their buck.
That's what happens when your budget goes on upgrading your property portfolio and villas instead of your forces.
Not just that: their manpower levels are large, almost on parity with the US (they have more if you include non-regulars), but operate on one-eighth to one-tenth of the US's budget. Training and weaponry for the men being an obvious one. Even with Russia's better PPP, something has to give.
I think Russia's spent far too much of its money on the 'sexy' weapons designed to try to lee up with the west and inspire the nation, and not enough on the military's roots. The men.
Called up to change our reservation from SF to LHR to MEX to LHR, the nice lady offered us an upgrade to club class from premium economy for £210 each. I don't usually pay for club out of my own money but it seemed like too much of a steal to pass up. All confirmed too in the app so it definitely wasn't a scam by BA.
£210 for Club upgrades on a nine-hour flight. Yes please. I don’t buy myself Club tickets either, but sometimes the offer is so silly you have to take it.
My dear mum was once offered an upgrade at checkin by Emirates, for something like £150, and turned it down. I did try and explain that her economy ticket was £400 and the business ticket £4,000, so the upgrade on one leg for £150 was, umm, something of a bargain.
That’s probably the single most effective Russian sanction so far.
I know we can laugh, but it hits the millions of Russian middle classes really hard, and immediately so. No waiting for inflation or sanctions on oligarchs to feed through into the system, they’ll all be screaming about this one today in Moscow.
New definition of ridiculous: believing that the UK should have a totally open door policy on refugees from Ukraine without any checks whatsoever. Tip: there are still bad people out there who might take advantage of such an offer. This is the same type of idealism that led to Germany shutting down its nuclear power stations and coming to rely on Russian gas for most of its energy needs, which is one of the things that led to the current crisis.
"Bad people" can already just apply for tourist visas and show up and do their bad things, it's not like the Home Office is capable of telling the difference.
To be fair, if these bad people subsequently intend to become deeply embedded in an infrastructure organisation, or bank or civil service, then they could do more damage. They are more likely to achieve this if they start on something more beefy than a tourist visa. Just saying.
US intel is briefing that Kiev will fall in 4-6 weeks, but that an insurgency will last ten years or more.
Putin will be gone very long before then.
Maybe.
Russian strategy looks to be to hold the east and south under a puppet government.
Ukranian resolve, and Western sanctions, are more costly than Putin expected. This is taking longer than planned.
But this ends either with Putin’s ouster, or a new Cold War with a de facto NATO frontier down the Dnieper and a Russia increasingly supplicant within a Chinese led economic order.
Longer than planned? Based on what?
I think it's fairly clear this has taken longer than expected: don't forget Putin captured the airport in Kyiv with paratroopers on day one. He expected - unless he was planning on them all getting shot and captured - to relieve them. Which meant he had to have expected to have his ground troops and armor reach them in the first 48 hours, and probably less.
⚡️Russian troops in Crimea refuse to take part in Ukraine invasion.
The Center for Defense Strategies, citing their sources in the marine personnel in Crimea, says members of Russia’s 810th Detached Marine Brigade are in a “demoralized state."
Russia isn't even going to win the invasion, let alone the peace afterwards.
Humiliating, absolutely humiliating for Russia.
And don't forget, the longer this goes on, the less power Russia has. Their military/industrial complex was all geared towards overwhelming power to blitzkrieg and make it a fait accompli. Russia even before the sanctions was a poorer nation than Italy, let alone the combined economies of NATO which are reinforcing Ukraine.
NATO can keep reinforcing Ukraine with munitions and arms with a virtual blank cheque. Russia has nothing: This is it. Decrepit thirty year old Soviet hand-me-downs that were obsolete when the Soviet Union fell and nothing more behind the curtain.
Russia is dead as a world power.
At 4.3% of GDP Russia has quite a high expenditure on defence compared with the nations it is up against. You would think its Armed Forces would be relatively well equiped, but it seems they are not getting much bang for their buck.
That's what happens when your budget goes on upgrading your property portfolio and villas instead of your forces.
Not just that: their manpower levels are large, almost on parity with the US (they have more if you include non-regulars), but operate on one-eighth to one-tenth of the US's budget. Training and weaponry for the men being an obvious one. Even with Russia's better PPP, something has to give.
I think Russia's spent far too much of its money on the 'sexy' weapons designed to try to lee up with the west and inspire the nation, and not enough on the military's roots. The men.
Ultimately, the quality of all armed forces comes down to people and organisational culture.
Who'd want to be the general to tell Putin things he wouldn't want to hear about the Russian army's combat readiness?
US intel is briefing that Kiev will fall in 4-6 weeks, but that an insurgency will last ten years or more.
Putin will be gone very long before then.
Maybe.
Russian strategy looks to be to hold the east and south under a puppet government.
Ukranian resolve, and Western sanctions, are more costly than Putin expected. This is taking longer than planned.
But this ends either with Putin’s ouster, or a new Cold War with a de facto NATO frontier down the Dnieper and a Russia increasingly supplicant within a Chinese led economic order.
Longer than planned? Based on what?
I think it's fairly clear this has taken longer than expected: don't forget Putin captured the airport in Kyiv with paratroopers on day one. He expected - unless he was planning on them all getting shot and captured - to relieve them. Which meant he had to have expected to have his ground troops and armor reach them in the first 48 hours, and probably less.
Now, this doesn't mean that the invasion won't be complete in 2-3 weeks (although the State Department reckons 6 to 8 weeks to capture Kyiv), but it does suggest things have been significantly harder than the Russians expected.
Yep, I just don't buy this argument that it should have been over by now. It's still early days, and despite the setbacks they are still advancing.
I don’t think anyone’s saying that.
Nevertheless, there is a bit of over-optimism in some Western commentary given early Russian set-backs.
Militarily, at least, it is just a matter of time for Russia to “win”. Our job is to help Ukraine make it more costly, but we/they can’t hold off Russia forever.
What I can’t predict is the effect of sanctions (and body count) on Russian society and the Russian elite. How secure is Putin? I haven’t seen any good analysis on that.
I think all branches of the Russian government go through him, he's historically crushed all opposition, and he's very well protected, but, he's also only human - absolutely no-one is invincible.
Britain accused creating massive loophole in sanctions designed to hobble Putin’s regime by granting Russia’s second biggest bank #VTB an “absurd” month-long examption before assets are frozen. via @cahalmilmo
Funny how no-one complained when the US did exactly the same. The UK is falling into line with the US's timescale.
The purpose of the 30-day lead-in for sanctions is not to enable Russians to "shift assets", but to prevent a 2008-style financial crisis. It gives financial institutions time to unwind their Russian positions without defaulting and find alternative sources of funding. https://twitter.com/frances_coppola/status/1498799522142560259?s=21
"hackers breached a maritime traffic tracking site to give Russian President Vladimir Putin’s yacht “Graceful” a new call sign, ANONYMO, and a new destination, FCKPTN...."
I heard the World at One today. Heartbreaking. I know people become inured to the human consequences of this but it is a necessary listen.
Same watching Newsnight.
The number of refugees Poland is already accepting is astonishing - and depending on the event of the next few weeks that might be only a small fraction of the numbers to come.
Poland/Ukraine is an interesting one. There seems to be quite a rapport. Catholicism is dominant in west Ukraine.
They were part of the same country for very many years
That's really not a good thing in the medium-term.
But it shows another piss-poor effort in protecting vital infrastructure by the Russians. What if they had altered all their systems to have them return to Earth? No satellites to cover the war, thanks to some teenage guy in his bedroom.
You can only imagine the level of panic when they realised they were hacked....
"hackers breached a maritime traffic tracking site to give Russian President Vladimir Putin’s yacht “Graceful” a new call sign, ANONYMO, and a new destination, FCKPTN...."
After decades of Russian hackers pissing off the world with their stupid antics, it is rather amusing to see the rest of the world’s hackers turn their attention to Russia.
Knocking Russian spy satellites offline is a big one if true, means they’ll have to rely on the Chinese - if Xi can be bothered to even take Putin’s calls at the moment.
That's really not a good thing in the medium-term.
But it shows another piss-poor effort in protecting vital infrastructure by the Russians. What if they had altered all their systems to have them return to Earth? No satellites to cover the war, thanks to some teenage guy in his bedroom.
You can only imagine the level of panic when they realised they were hacked....
That's what I mean by it not being a good thing: lots of uncontrolled satellites reducing their orbit would imperil other satellites, let alone the ISS.
Satellites generally don't need to change orbits regularly, but they do sometimes need to shift position slightly.
Britain accused creating massive loophole in sanctions designed to hobble Putin’s regime by granting Russia’s second biggest bank #VTB an “absurd” month-long examption before assets are frozen. via @cahalmilmo
Funny how no-one complained when the US did exactly the same. The UK is falling into line with the US's timescale.
The purpose of the 30-day lead-in for sanctions is not to enable Russians to "shift assets", but to prevent a 2008-style financial crisis. It gives financial institutions time to unwind their Russian positions without defaulting and find alternative sources of funding. https://twitter.com/frances_coppola/status/1498799522142560259?s=21
It’s almost as if many of the UK media are more interested in bashing their own government, than they are about good research and accurate reporting.
Do they understand what’s meant by a no-fly zone yet?
New definition of ridiculous: believing that the UK should have a totally open door policy on refugees from Ukraine without any checks whatsoever. Tip: there are still bad people out there who might take advantage of such an offer. This is the same type of idealism that led to Germany shutting down its nuclear power stations and coming to rely on Russian gas for most of its energy needs, which is one of the things that led to the current crisis.
"Bad people" can already just apply for tourist visas and show up and do their bad things, it's not like the Home Office is capable of telling the difference.
It’s also nonsense to imply that there isn’t a very great deal of room between our current policy, and a “totally open door”. We are being decidedly ungenerous in our willingness to accept refugees.
If even a small percentage of those films have anything to do with this war the drones are having a major impact.
But why has a 40 mile column not got them buzzing like bees around a honeypot? It’s odd.
Is it possible their commanders are negotiating their surrender?
I understand it’s not a 40 mile column but multiple “packets” spread out over 40 miles.
A lot of them are supply & logistics vs assault vehicles.
So it might be a question of priorities. Or May be the Russians are devoting disproportionate resources to defending it so creating opportunities elsewhere?
US intel is briefing that Kiev will fall in 4-6 weeks, but that an insurgency will last ten years or more.
Putin will be gone very long before then.
Maybe.
Russian strategy looks to be to hold the east and south under a puppet government.
Ukranian resolve, and Western sanctions, are more costly than Putin expected. This is taking longer than planned.
But this ends either with Putin’s ouster, or a new Cold War with a de facto NATO frontier down the Dnieper and a Russia increasingly supplicant within a Chinese led economic order.
I think the change in tone from China is rather significant. They are probably looking at this as a potential future case study in how authoritarian regimes fail. Also, an opportunity for them to step in as the promotor of 'peace' and 'harmony'.
The idea that Russia-sympathetic or typically neutral states would let their banks test the limits of combined US/European sanctions was always pretty silly but it's still impressive to see how quickly it collapsed.
Mr. Age, China may also be taking notes on how to both withstand and inflict economic damage. I think the economic scale and degree of integration globally means they're way less likely to either impose or suffer them from the West generally, as Russia now is, but on a smaller, local scale that may be otherwise.
New definition of ridiculous: believing that the UK should have a totally open door policy on refugees from Ukraine without any checks whatsoever. Tip: there are still bad people out there who might take advantage of such an offer. This is the same type of idealism that led to Germany shutting down its nuclear power stations and coming to rely on Russian gas for most of its energy needs, which is one of the things that led to the current crisis.
"Bad people" can already just apply for tourist visas and show up and do their bad things, it's not like the Home Office is capable of telling the difference.
It’s also nonsense to imply that there isn’t a very great deal of room between our current policy, and a “totally open door”. We are being decidedly ungenerous in our willingness to accept refugees.
I think the problem is that there is no clear policy, what policy there is arrives too late and is confusing, and certain principles for the Home office (eg maintaining extortionate visa fees) are never compromised on, no matter what the consequences are for Britain's reputation in the world. I've no doubt that the Home Office does a lot of good work in keeping us safe, but it is a major embarrassment and liability in other respects.
Mr. Age, China may also be taking notes on how to both withstand and inflict economic damage. I think the economic scale and degree of integration globally means they're way less likely to either impose or suffer them from the West generally, as Russia now is, but on a smaller, local scale that may be otherwise.
Yes - good points.
One of the interesting things about this conflict is that it takes cancel culture to a whole new level. Russia has been cancelled, and it may actually be this that does Putins regime in. Interesting times.
⚡️Russian troops in Crimea refuse to take part in Ukraine invasion.
The Center for Defense Strategies, citing their sources in the marine personnel in Crimea, says members of Russia’s 810th Detached Marine Brigade are in a “demoralized state."
Russia isn't even going to win the invasion, let alone the peace afterwards.
Humiliating, absolutely humiliating for Russia.
And don't forget, the longer this goes on, the less power Russia has. Their military/industrial complex was all geared towards overwhelming power to blitzkrieg and make it a fait accompli. Russia even before the sanctions was a poorer nation than Italy, let alone the combined economies of NATO which are reinforcing Ukraine.
NATO can keep reinforcing Ukraine with munitions and arms with a virtual blank cheque. Russia has nothing: This is it. Decrepit thirty year old Soviet hand-me-downs that were obsolete when the Soviet Union fell and nothing more behind the curtain.
Russia is dead as a world power.
At 4.3% of GDP Russia has quite a high expenditure on defence compared with the nations it is up against. You would think its Armed Forces would be relatively well equiped, but it seems they are not getting much bang for their buck.
That's what happens when your budget goes on upgrading your property portfolio and villas instead of your forces.
Not just that: their manpower levels are large, almost on parity with the US (they have more if you include non-regulars), but operate on one-eighth to one-tenth of the US's budget. Training and weaponry for the men being an obvious one. Even with Russia's better PPP, something has to give.
I think Russia's spent far too much of its money on the 'sexy' weapons designed to try to lee up with the west and inspire the nation, and not enough on the military's roots. The men.
Ultimately, the quality of all armed forces comes down to people and organisational culture.
Who'd want to be the general to tell Putin things he wouldn't want to hear about the Russian army's combat readiness?
The Russians almost certainly have a special forces operation that compares to the very best in the world - and it's one that would probably make an immense difference in small-scale, confined wars. But general male life expectancy in Russia is 66. That does not imply there is an unending supply of physically and mentally robust soldiers out there, especially as there has been a long-term decline in the birth rate. Basically, I don't see how the Russians successfully fight a long war that takes in Ukraine and other places, too.
To do an NFZ you have to be prepared to bomb and kill Russians (and probably civilians by accident) on the Russian side of the border because their air defences have to be suppressed to the make the NFZ viable.
So 'NFZ' is really just shorthand for war with Russia.
Britain accused creating massive loophole in sanctions designed to hobble Putin’s regime by granting Russia’s second biggest bank #VTB an “absurd” month-long examption before assets are frozen. via @cahalmilmo
Funny how no-one complained when the US did exactly the same. The UK is falling into line with the US's timescale.
The purpose of the 30-day lead-in for sanctions is not to enable Russians to "shift assets", but to prevent a 2008-style financial crisis. It gives financial institutions time to unwind their Russian positions without defaulting and find alternative sources of funding. https://twitter.com/frances_coppola/status/1498799522142560259?s=21
It’s almost as if many of the UK media are more interested in bashing their own government, than they are about good research and accurate reporting.
Do they understand what’s meant by a no-fly zone yet?
They think that's what the Americans use SWAT teams for.
⚡️Russian troops in Crimea refuse to take part in Ukraine invasion.
The Center for Defense Strategies, citing their sources in the marine personnel in Crimea, says members of Russia’s 810th Detached Marine Brigade are in a “demoralized state."
Russia isn't even going to win the invasion, let alone the peace afterwards.
Humiliating, absolutely humiliating for Russia.
And don't forget, the longer this goes on, the less power Russia has. Their military/industrial complex was all geared towards overwhelming power to blitzkrieg and make it a fait accompli. Russia even before the sanctions was a poorer nation than Italy, let alone the combined economies of NATO which are reinforcing Ukraine.
NATO can keep reinforcing Ukraine with munitions and arms with a virtual blank cheque. Russia has nothing: This is it. Decrepit thirty year old Soviet hand-me-downs that were obsolete when the Soviet Union fell and nothing more behind the curtain.
Russia is dead as a world power.
At 4.3% of GDP Russia has quite a high expenditure on defence compared with the nations it is up against. You would think its Armed Forces would be relatively well equiped, but it seems they are not getting much bang for their buck.
That's what happens when your budget goes on upgrading your property portfolio and villas instead of your forces.
Not just that: their manpower levels are large, almost on parity with the US (they have more if you include non-regulars), but operate on one-eighth to one-tenth of the US's budget. Training and weaponry for the men being an obvious one. Even with Russia's better PPP, something has to give.
I think Russia's spent far too much of its money on the 'sexy' weapons designed to try to lee up with the west and inspire the nation, and not enough on the military's roots. The men.
Ultimately, the quality of all armed forces comes down to people and organisational culture.
Who'd want to be the general to tell Putin things he wouldn't want to hear about the Russian army's combat readiness?
The Russians almost certainly have a special forces operation that compares to the very best in the world - and it's one that would probably make an immense difference in small-scale, confined wars. But general male life expectancy in Russia is 66. That does not imply there is an unending supply of physically and mentally robust soldiers out there, especially as there has been a long-term decline in the birth rate. Basically, I don't see how the Russians successfully fight a long war that takes in Ukraine and other places, too.
It goes back to the arguments in that twitter thread on corruption in the Russian armed forces as an explanation for why Russia will lose - Ukraine spent the last 8 years facing reality, preparing for the worst and prioritising efficiency. Russia was complacent, prioritised keeping interest groups happy and tolerated corruption.
Massive contrast in the organisational culture, as Casino says. Those stories about Russian soldiers selling their fuel to buy alcohol that came out of Belarus appear to be symptomatic of a problem that runs from top to bottom.
This implies, though, that the shock of this humiliation might lead Russia to prioritise efficiency in its armed forces over providing opportunities for corruption, and so the Russian armed forces might become a lot more effective in the next few years, even as the Russian economy suffers under the pressure of sanctions.
It also means we have to be vigilant against the dangers posed by corruption in the UK, and should not airily wave away the money stolen during the pandemic.
So the Ukrainian journalist yesterday beautifully summed up the poverty of Johnson's response to the crisis, which can essentially be summed up as PR for the domestic audience.
The usual rhetoric and grandstanding but action lagging far far behind, especially with regard to individual Russian wealth held in the UK.
Is it 3 oligarchs or 5 that we're directly sanctioning? Or have a few more been added.
Freeze all Russian owned assets unless clearly aligned with the opposition, place property in escrow pending a resolution to the crisis. Intern family members, why not? They might benefit from a taste of one of Priti's immigration centres.
To do an NFZ you have to be prepared to bomb and kill Russians (and probably civilians by accident) on the Russian side of the border because their air defences have to be suppressed to the make the NFZ viable.
So 'NFZ' is really just shorthand for war with Russia.
Plus there’s too much discussion of this as if the U.K. could choose to do it. At best, on a war footing, we might free up 50 a/c. Russia is said to have 300 in theatre and, as you say, is playing at home and has a local air defence network. It would need to be a NATO decision, by which we really mean the US. And they (rightly) won’t do it,
To do an NFZ you have to be prepared to bomb and kill Russians (and probably civilians by accident) on the Russian side of the border because their air defences have to be suppressed to the make the NFZ viable.
So 'NFZ' is really just shorthand for war with Russia.
Plus there’s too much discussion of this as if the U.K. could choose to do it. At best, on a war footing, we might free up 50 a/c. Russia is said to have 300 in theatre and, as you say, is playing at home and has a local air defence network. It would need to be a NATO decision, by which we really mean the US. And they (rightly) won’t do it,
Yes, Biden isn't mad enough to provoke war with a nuclear power.
Which is why despite his many shortcomings he is still rather a refreshing change from Donald 'locked and loaded' Trump.
Mr. Age, China may also be taking notes on how to both withstand and inflict economic damage. I think the economic scale and degree of integration globally means they're way less likely to either impose or suffer them from the West generally, as Russia now is, but on a smaller, local scale that may be otherwise.
Yes - good points.
One of the interesting things about this conflict is that it takes cancel culture to a whole new level. Russia has been cancelled, and it may actually be this that does Putins regime in. Interesting times.
We’ve deployed the millennial weapon of choice…. and it worked…..
The trouble with a no fly zone is its name. It sounds like to most people a green initiative cooked up by Greta thurnberg. Not mutually assured destruction.
To do an NFZ you have to be prepared to bomb and kill Russians (and probably civilians by accident) on the Russian side of the border because their air defences have to be suppressed to the make the NFZ viable.
So 'NFZ' is really just shorthand for war with Russia.
Glad we survived yesterday. Felt like we were close to nuclear war.
⚡️Russian troops in Crimea refuse to take part in Ukraine invasion.
The Center for Defense Strategies, citing their sources in the marine personnel in Crimea, says members of Russia’s 810th Detached Marine Brigade are in a “demoralized state."
There is a small but not negligible chance that Putin might be remembered for the most monumental military fuck up since the Battle of Cannae.
Still a bit bemused how badly it has gone for Russia, although maybe that's a by-product of today's 24-hour news media. Poland took a month to fall in WW2.
I'll tell you what amazes me: it's been some of the monumentally stupid things the Russians did.
On day one, they captured Kyiv airfield with paratroopers. Elite troops on the ground.
And then they were all dead and captured, and two troop planes with 100+ soldiers on board were shot done.
Monumentally stupid.
And then there was the seaborne assault in the South West of the country. They came ashore. They were killed or captured. They sailed off again.
Why?
Yes, certainly a lot of blunders. It's surprising, you'd have thought an invasion of Ukraine would be one of the things they would have planned very carefully.
The current state of play doesn't look all that dissimilar from the invasion of Poland on day five. Expectations are clearly a lot different in the modern era!
Well, Poland was invaded from East and West, so it is a *little* different.
Not on day five. My point is that everyone is suggesting this is a disaster for Russia, when they would probably consider Poland to have been a walkover in WW2.
It's a fair point: the Germans registered 45,000 casualties and lost close to 1,000 tanks in the invasion of Poland.
Yes, the Poles fought furiously and despite most of the country being overrun in twelve days, the capital held out for more than a month. And there was continued fighting/resistance after victory was declared. It's still the closest historical comparator.
Meanwhile, I notice that the amount of spam going into my email account's spam filter has reduced dramatically.
⚡️Russian troops in Crimea refuse to take part in Ukraine invasion.
The Center for Defense Strategies, citing their sources in the marine personnel in Crimea, says members of Russia’s 810th Detached Marine Brigade are in a “demoralized state."
Russia isn't even going to win the invasion, let alone the peace afterwards.
Humiliating, absolutely humiliating for Russia.
And don't forget, the longer this goes on, the less power Russia has. Their military/industrial complex was all geared towards overwhelming power to blitzkrieg and make it a fait accompli. Russia even before the sanctions was a poorer nation than Italy, let alone the combined economies of NATO which are reinforcing Ukraine.
NATO can keep reinforcing Ukraine with munitions and arms with a virtual blank cheque. Russia has nothing: This is it. Decrepit thirty year old Soviet hand-me-downs that were obsolete when the Soviet Union fell and nothing more behind the curtain.
Russia is dead as a world power.
At 4.3% of GDP Russia has quite a high expenditure on defence compared with the nations it is up against. You would think its Armed Forces would be relatively well equiped, but it seems they are not getting much bang for their buck.
That's what happens when your budget goes on upgrading your property portfolio and villas instead of your forces.
Not just that: their manpower levels are large, almost on parity with the US (they have more if you include non-regulars), but operate on one-eighth to one-tenth of the US's budget. Training and weaponry for the men being an obvious one. Even with Russia's better PPP, something has to give.
I think Russia's spent far too much of its money on the 'sexy' weapons designed to try to lee up with the west and inspire the nation, and not enough on the military's roots. The men.
Ultimately, the quality of all armed forces comes down to people and organisational culture.
Who'd want to be the general to tell Putin things he wouldn't want to hear about the Russian army's combat readiness?
The Russians almost certainly have a special forces operation that compares to the very best in the world - and it's one that would probably make an immense difference in small-scale, confined wars. But general male life expectancy in Russia is 66. That does not imply there is an unending supply of physically and mentally robust soldiers out there, especially as there has been a long-term decline in the birth rate. Basically, I don't see how the Russians successfully fight a long war that takes in Ukraine and other places, too.
My personal guess is that the dis-coordination we have seen in reports from the ground extended up the Russian chain of command. The repeated paratrooper assaults that eventaully failed, the infiltration stuff - it suggest to me that the "strategy" was for everyone to do "war stuff" and hope it joined up. Either that or people were using small maps and big thumbs....
The main front is now, I think, in the economic sphere - it is a race between the military ability of Russia to grind their way to their objectives and the Russia economy breaking down. I wonder what the burn rate of the central bank reserves is now? Supporting a collapsing currency is a very good way to run out money - post war Britain proved that several times.
Big development on this story overnight as Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss confirms he and three other parties have been invited to make bids for Chelsea #cfc
The trouble with a no fly zone is its name. It sounds like to most people a green initiative cooked up by Greta thurnberg. Not mutually assured destruction.
Indeed. It’s something that sounds peaceful, but very much isn’t.
As our resident retired military pilot points out, preventing the Russians from flying in Ukraine means taking out their air defences on the ground, then aggressively patrolling the airspace ourselves.
Britain accused creating massive loophole in sanctions designed to hobble Putin’s regime by granting Russia’s second biggest bank #VTB an “absurd” month-long examption before assets are frozen. via @cahalmilmo
Funny how no-one complained when the US did exactly the same. The UK is falling into line with the US's timescale.
The purpose of the 30-day lead-in for sanctions is not to enable Russians to "shift assets", but to prevent a 2008-style financial crisis. It gives financial institutions time to unwind their Russian positions without defaulting and find alternative sources of funding. https://twitter.com/frances_coppola/status/1498799522142560259?s=21
It’s almost as if many of the UK media are more interested in bashing their own government, than they are about good research and accurate reporting.
Do they understand what’s meant by a no-fly zone yet?
They think that's what the Americans use SWAT teams for.
Your argument has holes in it; you’ll be on sticky ground if you aren’t careful
The trouble with a no fly zone is its name. It sounds like to most people a green initiative cooked up by Greta thurnberg. Not mutually assured destruction.
I mean, we could try doing it by leafleting and asking nicely. Like “no nuclear zones” set up by city councils.
To do an NFZ you have to be prepared to bomb and kill Russians (and probably civilians by accident) on the Russian side of the border because their air defences have to be suppressed to the make the NFZ viable.
So 'NFZ' is really just shorthand for war with Russia.
Yet there seems to be a groundswell of opinion, mostly non military, that we should do it anyway.
Various journalists are jumping on the bandwagon and simply dismissing the risk.
It’s lunacy. They need to read that piece by Fiona Hill.
Big development on this story overnight as Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss confirms he and three other parties have been invited to make bids for Chelsea #cfc
The trouble with a no fly zone is its name. It sounds like to most people a green initiative cooked up by Greta thurnberg. Not mutually assured destruction.
Or a farming strategy to protect crops from insects.
So the Ukrainian journalist yesterday beautifully summed up the poverty of Johnson's response to the crisis, which can essentially be summed up as PR for the domestic audience.
The usual rhetoric and grandstanding but action lagging far far behind, especially with regard to individual Russian wealth held in the UK.
Is it 3 oligarchs or 5 that we're directly sanctioning? Or have a few more been added.
Freeze all Russian owned assets unless clearly aligned with the opposition, place property in escrow pending a resolution to the crisis. Intern family members, why not? They might benefit from a taste of one of Priti's immigration centres.
And let’s abandon due process, the rule of law and the principle of innocent until proven guilty while we are at it
The trouble with a no fly zone is its name. It sounds like to most people a green initiative cooked up by Greta thurnberg. Not mutually assured destruction.
I mean, we could try doing it by leafleting and asking nicely. Like “no nuclear zones” set up by city councils.
The World's End pub in Camden is still a nuclear free zone, IIRC
Britain accused creating massive loophole in sanctions designed to hobble Putin’s regime by granting Russia’s second biggest bank #VTB an “absurd” month-long examption before assets are frozen. via @cahalmilmo
Funny how no-one complained when the US did exactly the same. The UK is falling into line with the US's timescale.
The purpose of the 30-day lead-in for sanctions is not to enable Russians to "shift assets", but to prevent a 2008-style financial crisis. It gives financial institutions time to unwind their Russian positions without defaulting and find alternative sources of funding. https://twitter.com/frances_coppola/status/1498799522142560259?s=21
It’s almost as if many of the UK media are more interested in bashing their own government, than they are about good research and accurate reporting.
Do they understand what’s meant by a no-fly zone yet?
They think that's what the Americans use SWAT teams for.
Your argument has jokes it it; you’ll be on sticky ground if you aren’t careful
⚡️Russian troops in Crimea refuse to take part in Ukraine invasion.
The Center for Defense Strategies, citing their sources in the marine personnel in Crimea, says members of Russia’s 810th Detached Marine Brigade are in a “demoralized state."
Russia isn't even going to win the invasion, let alone the peace afterwards.
Humiliating, absolutely humiliating for Russia.
And don't forget, the longer this goes on, the less power Russia has. Their military/industrial complex was all geared towards overwhelming power to blitzkrieg and make it a fait accompli. Russia even before the sanctions was a poorer nation than Italy, let alone the combined economies of NATO which are reinforcing Ukraine.
NATO can keep reinforcing Ukraine with munitions and arms with a virtual blank cheque. Russia has nothing: This is it. Decrepit thirty year old Soviet hand-me-downs that were obsolete when the Soviet Union fell and nothing more behind the curtain.
Russia is dead as a world power.
At 4.3% of GDP Russia has quite a high expenditure on defence compared with the nations it is up against. You would think its Armed Forces would be relatively well equiped, but it seems they are not getting much bang for their buck.
That's what happens when your budget goes on upgrading your property portfolio and villas instead of your forces.
Not just that: their manpower levels are large, almost on parity with the US (they have more if you include non-regulars), but operate on one-eighth to one-tenth of the US's budget. Training and weaponry for the men being an obvious one. Even with Russia's better PPP, something has to give.
I think Russia's spent far too much of its money on the 'sexy' weapons designed to try to lee up with the west and inspire the nation, and not enough on the military's roots. The men.
Ultimately, the quality of all armed forces comes down to people and organisational culture.
Who'd want to be the general to tell Putin things he wouldn't want to hear about the Russian army's combat readiness?
The Russians almost certainly have a special forces operation that compares to the very best in the world - and it's one that would probably make an immense difference in small-scale, confined wars. But general male life expectancy in Russia is 66. That does not imply there is an unending supply of physically and mentally robust soldiers out there, especially as there has been a long-term decline in the birth rate. Basically, I don't see how the Russians successfully fight a long war that takes in Ukraine and other places, too.
My personal guess is that the dis-coordination we have seen in reports from the ground extended up the Russian chain of command. The repeated paratrooper assaults that eventaully failed, the infiltration stuff - it suggest to me that the "strategy" was for everyone to do "war stuff" and hope it joined up. Either that or people were using small maps and big thumbs....
The main front is now, I think, in the economic sphere - it is a race between the military ability of Russia to grind their way to their objectives and the Russia economy breaking down. I wonder what the burn rate of the central bank reserves is now? Supporting a collapsing currency is a very good way to run out money - post war Britain proved that several times.
Oooo does this mean we get to go all 60s and monitor the Russian balance of payments figures?
The trouble with a no fly zone is its name. It sounds like to most people a green initiative cooked up by Greta thurnberg. Not mutually assured destruction.
I mean, we could try doing it by leafleting and asking nicely. Like “no nuclear zones” set up by city councils.
Get into your head we cannot win everything.you spread dangerous hubris
The trouble with a no fly zone is its name. It sounds like to most people a green initiative cooked up by Greta thurnberg. Not mutually assured destruction.
I mean, we could try doing it by leafleting and asking nicely. Like “no nuclear zones” set up by city councils.
The World's End pub in Camden is still a nuclear free zone, IIRC
Damn, there was me thinking of booking a table and taking my suitcase nuke with me.
Big development on this story overnight as Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss confirms he and three other parties have been invited to make bids for Chelsea #cfc
The trouble with a no fly zone is its name. It sounds like to most people a green initiative cooked up by Greta thurnberg. Not mutually assured destruction.
I mean, we could try doing it by leafleting and asking nicely. Like “no nuclear zones” set up by city councils.
The World's End pub in Camden is still a nuclear free zone, IIRC
Damn, there was me thinking of booking a table and taking my suitcase nuke with me.
Big development on this story overnight as Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss confirms he and three other parties have been invited to make bids for Chelsea #cfc
Abramovich has been granted all the time he needs to disburse himself of physical assets in the UK. Why?
It has long been my opinion that his ownership of Chelsea was an insurance policy. The way that he has "lent" the club vast sums of money means that it collapses if something happens to him.
Given the power that Premier League has in the political sphere, not a bad idea.
So the Ukrainian journalist yesterday beautifully summed up the poverty of Johnson's response to the crisis, which can essentially be summed up as PR for the domestic audience.
The usual rhetoric and grandstanding but action lagging far far behind, especially with regard to individual Russian wealth held in the UK.
Is it 3 oligarchs or 5 that we're directly sanctioning? Or have a few more been added.
Freeze all Russian owned assets unless clearly aligned with the opposition, place property in escrow pending a resolution to the crisis. Intern family members, why not? They might benefit from a taste of one of Priti's immigration centres.
And let’s abandon due process, the rule of law and the principle of innocent until proven guilty while we are at it
We can sanction whomsoever we like. Nor is internment a new device - it was good enough for WW2. Our Government's response has been weak.
Britain accused creating massive loophole in sanctions designed to hobble Putin’s regime by granting Russia’s second biggest bank #VTB an “absurd” month-long examption before assets are frozen. via @cahalmilmo
Funny how no-one complained when the US did exactly the same. The UK is falling into line with the US's timescale.
The purpose of the 30-day lead-in for sanctions is not to enable Russians to "shift assets", but to prevent a 2008-style financial crisis. It gives financial institutions time to unwind their Russian positions without defaulting and find alternative sources of funding. https://twitter.com/frances_coppola/status/1498799522142560259?s=21
It’s almost as if many of the UK media are more interested in bashing their own government, than they are about good research and accurate reporting.
Do they understand what’s meant by a no-fly zone yet?
They think that's what the Americans use SWAT teams for.
Your argument has holes in it; you’ll be on sticky ground if you aren’t careful
No flies on you.
I’m like a deceptively deep river with a strong current, not a stagnant watering hole
The trouble with a no fly zone is its name. It sounds like to most people a green initiative cooked up by Greta thurnberg. Not mutually assured destruction.
I mean, we could try doing it by leafleting and asking nicely. Like “no nuclear zones” set up by city councils.
Get into your head we cannot win everything.you spread dangerous hubris
So the Ukrainian journalist yesterday beautifully summed up the poverty of Johnson's response to the crisis, which can essentially be summed up as PR for the domestic audience.
The usual rhetoric and grandstanding but action lagging far far behind, especially with regard to individual Russian wealth held in the UK.
Is it 3 oligarchs or 5 that we're directly sanctioning? Or have a few more been added.
Freeze all Russian owned assets unless clearly aligned with the opposition, place property in escrow pending a resolution to the crisis. Intern family members, why not? They might benefit from a taste of one of Priti's immigration centres.
The U.K. has been arming and training the Ukrainians for many years and has been providing material support.
Johnson has had a good war so far. So has Biden. The EU are getting their act together. This is a coordinated response from western allies. With sanctions you don’t go all in on your first hand and you co ordinate.
I get that Johnson’s political opponents don’t like him but he deserves some credit here.
Britain accused creating massive loophole in sanctions designed to hobble Putin’s regime by granting Russia’s second biggest bank #VTB an “absurd” month-long examption before assets are frozen. via @cahalmilmo
Funny how no-one complained when the US did exactly the same. The UK is falling into line with the US's timescale.
The purpose of the 30-day lead-in for sanctions is not to enable Russians to "shift assets", but to prevent a 2008-style financial crisis. It gives financial institutions time to unwind their Russian positions without defaulting and find alternative sources of funding. https://twitter.com/frances_coppola/status/1498799522142560259?s=21
It’s almost as if many of the UK media are more interested in bashing their own government, than they are about good research and accurate reporting.
Do they understand what’s meant by a no-fly zone yet?
They think that's what the Americans use SWAT teams for.
Your argument has holes in it; you’ll be on sticky ground if you aren’t careful
No flies on you.
I’m like a deceptively deep river with a strong current, not a stagnant watering hole
Fly fishing for a compliment, eh? what kind of lure?
"hackers breached a maritime traffic tracking site to give Russian President Vladimir Putin’s yacht “Graceful” a new call sign, ANONYMO, and a new destination, FCKPTN...."
After decades of Russian hackers pissing off the world with their stupid antics, it is rather amusing to see the rest of the world’s hackers turn their attention to Russia.
Knocking Russian spy satellites offline is a big one if true, means they’ll have to rely on the Chinese - if Xi can be bothered to even take Putin’s calls at the moment.
It's striking how many successes freelance hacking groups are claiming while NATO cyberwarfare units claim absolutely none. I think it virtually certain that CIA or similar activity is being ascribed to Anonymous
Mr. Age, China may also be taking notes on how to both withstand and inflict economic damage. I think the economic scale and degree of integration globally means they're way less likely to either impose or suffer them from the West generally, as Russia now is, but on a smaller, local scale that may be otherwise.
Yes - good points.
One of the interesting things about this conflict is that it takes cancel culture to a whole new level. Russia has been cancelled, and it may actually be this that does Putins regime in. Interesting times.
We’ve deployed the millennial weapon of choice…. and it worked…..
And may be the single feature of this episode that concentrates Chinese minds, as well. China values being respected on the world stage considerably.
So the Ukrainian journalist yesterday beautifully summed up the poverty of Johnson's response to the crisis, which can essentially be summed up as PR for the domestic audience.
The usual rhetoric and grandstanding but action lagging far far behind, especially with regard to individual Russian wealth held in the UK.
Is it 3 oligarchs or 5 that we're directly sanctioning? Or have a few more been added.
Freeze all Russian owned assets unless clearly aligned with the opposition, place property in escrow pending a resolution to the crisis. Intern family members, why not? They might benefit from a taste of one of Priti's immigration centres.
And let’s abandon due process, the rule of law and the principle of innocent until proven guilty while we are at it
We can sanction whomsoever we like. Nor is internment a new device - it was good enough for WW2. Our Government's response has been weak.
There is evidence to support sanctions. You are advocating a collective guilt approach, which is immoral, unethical and counterproductive.
We are also not at war with Russia. De jure, at least. Which makes internment an inappropriate measure.
I know you are desperate to attack the UK government. But they’ve done well on Ukraine over an extended period.
Britain accused creating massive loophole in sanctions designed to hobble Putin’s regime by granting Russia’s second biggest bank #VTB an “absurd” month-long examption before assets are frozen. via @cahalmilmo
Funny how no-one complained when the US did exactly the same. The UK is falling into line with the US's timescale.
The purpose of the 30-day lead-in for sanctions is not to enable Russians to "shift assets", but to prevent a 2008-style financial crisis. It gives financial institutions time to unwind their Russian positions without defaulting and find alternative sources of funding. https://twitter.com/frances_coppola/status/1498799522142560259?s=21
It’s almost as if many of the UK media are more interested in bashing their own government, than they are about good research and accurate reporting.
Do they understand what’s meant by a no-fly zone yet?
They think that's what the Americans use SWAT teams for.
Your argument has holes in it; you’ll be on sticky ground if you aren’t careful
No flies on you.
I’m like a deceptively deep river with a strong current, not a stagnant watering hole
Fly fishing for a compliment, eh? what kind of lure?
Big development on this story overnight as Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss confirms he and three other parties have been invited to make bids for Chelsea #cfc
⚡️Russian troops in Crimea refuse to take part in Ukraine invasion.
The Center for Defense Strategies, citing their sources in the marine personnel in Crimea, says members of Russia’s 810th Detached Marine Brigade are in a “demoralized state."
Russia isn't even going to win the invasion, let alone the peace afterwards.
Humiliating, absolutely humiliating for Russia.
And don't forget, the longer this goes on, the less power Russia has. Their military/industrial complex was all geared towards overwhelming power to blitzkrieg and make it a fait accompli. Russia even before the sanctions was a poorer nation than Italy, let alone the combined economies of NATO which are reinforcing Ukraine.
NATO can keep reinforcing Ukraine with munitions and arms with a virtual blank cheque. Russia has nothing: This is it. Decrepit thirty year old Soviet hand-me-downs that were obsolete when the Soviet Union fell and nothing more behind the curtain.
Russia is dead as a world power.
At 4.3% of GDP Russia has quite a high expenditure on defence compared with the nations it is up against. You would think its Armed Forces would be relatively well equiped, but it seems they are not getting much bang for their buck.
That's what happens when your budget goes on upgrading your property portfolio and villas instead of your forces.
Not just that: their manpower levels are large, almost on parity with the US (they have more if you include non-regulars), but operate on one-eighth to one-tenth of the US's budget. Training and weaponry for the men being an obvious one. Even with Russia's better PPP, something has to give.
I think Russia's spent far too much of its money on the 'sexy' weapons designed to try to lee up with the west and inspire the nation, and not enough on the military's roots. The men.
Ultimately, the quality of all armed forces comes down to people and organisational culture.
Who'd want to be the general to tell Putin things he wouldn't want to hear about the Russian army's combat readiness?
The Russians almost certainly have a special forces operation that compares to the very best in the world - and it's one that would probably make an immense difference in small-scale, confined wars. But general male life expectancy in Russia is 66. That does not imply there is an unending supply of physically and mentally robust soldiers out there, especially as there has been a long-term decline in the birth rate. Basically, I don't see how the Russians successfully fight a long war that takes in Ukraine and other places, too.
My personal guess is that the dis-coordination we have seen in reports from the ground extended up the Russian chain of command. The repeated paratrooper assaults that eventaully failed, the infiltration stuff - it suggest to me that the "strategy" was for everyone to do "war stuff" and hope it joined up. Either that or people were using small maps and big thumbs....
The main front is now, I think, in the economic sphere - it is a race between the military ability of Russia to grind their way to their objectives and the Russia economy breaking down. I wonder what the burn rate of the central bank reserves is now? Supporting a collapsing currency is a very good way to run out money - post war Britain proved that several times.
Oooo does this mean we get to go all 60s and monitor the Russian balance of payments figures?
Seriously, yes.
I bet the economic research team at the Bank of England are burning the midnight oil at the moment.
"hackers breached a maritime traffic tracking site to give Russian President Vladimir Putin’s yacht “Graceful” a new call sign, ANONYMO, and a new destination, FCKPTN...."
After decades of Russian hackers pissing off the world with their stupid antics, it is rather amusing to see the rest of the world’s hackers turn their attention to Russia.
Knocking Russian spy satellites offline is a big one if true, means they’ll have to rely on the Chinese - if Xi can be bothered to even take Putin’s calls at the moment.
It's striking how many successes freelance hacking groups are claiming while NATO cyberwarfare units claim absolutely none. I think it virtually certain that CIA or similar activity is being ascribed to Anonymous
Oh, there’s plenty of very unofficial and completely deniable western activity going on at the moment, both physically and virtually.
There’s going to be a very brave few, whose names we will never know, putting themselves in harm’s way to help Ukraine at the moment, and we should be forever grateful to them.
The trouble with a no fly zone is its name. It sounds like to most people a green initiative cooked up by Greta thurnberg. Not mutually assured destruction.
I mean, we could try doing it by leafleting and asking nicely. Like “no nuclear zones” set up by city councils.
The World's End pub in Camden is still a nuclear free zone, IIRC
Damn, there was me thinking of booking a table and taking my suitcase nuke with me.
You could always try the policy adopted by the maidservant who was found to have had a baby out of wedlock - "Please sir, it is only a very small one."
Britain accused creating massive loophole in sanctions designed to hobble Putin’s regime by granting Russia’s second biggest bank #VTB an “absurd” month-long examption before assets are frozen. via @cahalmilmo
Funny how no-one complained when the US did exactly the same. The UK is falling into line with the US's timescale.
The purpose of the 30-day lead-in for sanctions is not to enable Russians to "shift assets", but to prevent a 2008-style financial crisis. It gives financial institutions time to unwind their Russian positions without defaulting and find alternative sources of funding. https://twitter.com/frances_coppola/status/1498799522142560259?s=21
It’s almost as if many of the UK media are more interested in bashing their own government, than they are about good research and accurate reporting.
Do they understand what’s meant by a no-fly zone yet?
They think that's what the Americans use SWAT teams for.
Your argument has jokes it it; you’ll be on sticky ground if you aren’t careful
The trouble with a no fly zone is its name. It sounds like to most people a green initiative cooked up by Greta thurnberg. Not mutually assured destruction.
I mean, we could try doing it by leafleting and asking nicely. Like “no nuclear zones” set up by city councils.
The World's End pub in Camden is still a nuclear free zone, IIRC
Damn, there was me thinking of booking a table and taking my suitcase nuke with me.
Vlad, is that you?
We people who want to concentrate wealth into the hands of gangsters need our suitcase nukes with us at all time.
"hackers breached a maritime traffic tracking site to give Russian President Vladimir Putin’s yacht “Graceful” a new call sign, ANONYMO, and a new destination, FCKPTN...."
After decades of Russian hackers pissing off the world with their stupid antics, it is rather amusing to see the rest of the world’s hackers turn their attention to Russia.
Knocking Russian spy satellites offline is a big one if true, means they’ll have to rely on the Chinese - if Xi can be bothered to even take Putin’s calls at the moment.
It's striking how many successes freelance hacking groups are claiming while NATO cyberwarfare units claim absolutely none. I think it virtually certain that CIA or similar activity is being ascribed to Anonymous
So the Ukrainian journalist yesterday beautifully summed up the poverty of Johnson's response to the crisis, which can essentially be summed up as PR for the domestic audience.
The usual rhetoric and grandstanding but action lagging far far behind, especially with regard to individual Russian wealth held in the UK.
Is it 3 oligarchs or 5 that we're directly sanctioning? Or have a few more been added.
Freeze all Russian owned assets unless clearly aligned with the opposition, place property in escrow pending a resolution to the crisis. Intern family members, why not? They might benefit from a taste of one of Priti's immigration centres.
And let’s abandon due process, the rule of law and the principle of innocent until proven guilty while we are at it
We can sanction whomsoever we like. Nor is internment a new device - it was good enough for WW2. Our Government's response has been weak.
You're either ignorant of what's going on or trolling, the government's response (like the response of all nations of the West now) has been very strong.
Just because we had internment in WW2 is not a justification to have it today. We also had the death penalty, conscription and rationing too.
US intel is briefing that Kiev will fall in 4-6 weeks, but that an insurgency will last ten years or more.
Putin will be gone very long before then.
Maybe.
Russian strategy looks to be to hold the east and south under a puppet government.
Ukranian resolve, and Western sanctions, are more costly than Putin expected. This is taking longer than planned.
But this ends either with Putin’s ouster, or a new Cold War with a de facto NATO frontier down the Dnieper and a Russia increasingly supplicant within a Chinese led economic order.
Longer than planned? Based on what?
I think it's fairly clear this has taken longer than expected: don't forget Putin captured the airport in Kyiv with paratroopers on day one. He expected - unless he was planning on them all getting shot and captured - to relieve them. Which meant he had to have expected to have his ground troops and armor reach them in the first 48 hours, and probably less.
Now, this doesn't mean that the invasion won't be complete in 2-3 weeks (although the State Department reckons 6 to 8 weeks to capture Kyiv), but it does suggest things have been significantly harder than the Russians expected.
Yep, I just don't buy this argument that it should have been over by now. It's still early days, and despite the setbacks they are still advancing.
I don’t think anyone’s saying that.
Nevertheless, there is a bit of over-optimism in some Western commentary given early Russian set-backs.
Militarily, at least, it is just a matter of time for Russia to “win”. Our job is to help Ukraine make it more costly, but we/they can’t hold off Russia forever.
What I can’t predict is the effect of sanctions (and body count) on Russian society and the Russian elite. How secure is Putin? I haven’t seen any good analysis on that.
I think all branches of the Russian government go through him, he's historically crushed all opposition, and he's very well protected, but, he's also only human - absolutely no-one is invincible.
A leader can seem untouchable - until he isn't. His lieutenant can quite suddenly come to the conclusion that they'd be better off without him, than sticking with him. Russian history provides a number of precedents.
To do an NFZ you have to be prepared to bomb and kill Russians (and probably civilians by accident) on the Russian side of the border because their air defences have to be suppressed to the make the NFZ viable.
So 'NFZ' is really just shorthand for war with Russia.
Plus there’s too much discussion of this as if the U.K. could choose to do it. At best, on a war footing, we might free up 50 a/c. Russia is said to have 300 in theatre and, as you say, is playing at home and has a local air defence network. It would need to be a NATO decision, by which we really mean the US. And they (rightly) won’t do it,
Yes, Biden isn't mad enough to provoke war with a nuclear power.
Which is why despite his many shortcomings he is still rather a refreshing change from Donald 'locked and loaded' Trump.
Comments
Now, this doesn't mean that the invasion won't be complete in 2-3 weeks (although the State Department reckons 6 to 8 weeks to capture Kyiv), but it does suggest things have been significantly harder than the Russians expected.
Plus other operations that make no sense outside of a rapid advance, such as Hostomel, and military police entering Kyiv.
Nevertheless, there is a bit of over-optimism in some Western commentary given early Russian set-backs.
Militarily, at least, it is just a matter of time for Russia to “win”. Our job is to help Ukraine make it more costly, but we/they can’t hold off Russia forever.
What I can’t predict is the effect of sanctions (and body count) on Russian society and the Russian elite. How secure is Putin? I haven’t seen any good analysis on that.
Don't worry about your neighbours like Poland. They signed up in time, so their lives are actually worth all that risk.
Adieu.
But I think the world has changed, quite suddenly.
A son of Leningrad, now an IntPol professor in Toronto sums up the issue neatly.
"The people calling for a no-fly zone should explicitly say they are willing to risk nuclear war and the people calling for backing off should explicitly say they are willing to tolerate war crimes. There is no moral high ground for anyone here, sorry."
Pick your fighter, neither are pretty.
https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1498862605821169666?s=20&t=SsFS7wetK6nxJI-qEnU9BA
IMO that's a bogus argument. Putin is threatening to use nukes. If we are afraid he might do it, then *anything* we do might be an excuse to use them. If we're afraid he'll escalate over a NFZ and do nothing, he'll then just hint that (say) 'supplying arms' to Ukraine might provoke a nuclear response. Or NATO being in Poland. Or Lithuania. etc, etc.
The questions become:
1) Can we successfully impose a NFZ?
2) would a NFZ alone make much of a difference in this war?
3) Is it the morally correct thing to do?
We can all provide our own answers to these questions. Personally, I'd argue strongly yes to 3) and probably 1). 2) is where I have grave doubts,
(Unless it was either a feint using 'disposable' troops to distract Ukrainian forces from elsewhere, or a Market-Garden lets-try-this gamble.)
I think Russia's spent far too much of its money on the 'sexy' weapons designed to try to lee up with the west and inspire the nation, and not enough on the military's roots. The men.
My dear mum was once offered an upgrade at checkin by Emirates, for something like £150, and turned it down. I did try and explain that her economy ticket was £400 and the business ticket £4,000, so the upgrade on one leg for £150 was, umm, something of a bargain.
I know we can laugh, but it hits the millions of Russian middle classes really hard, and immediately so. No waiting for inflation or sanctions on oligarchs to feed through into the system, they’ll all be screaming about this one today in Moscow.
Who'd want to be the general to tell Putin things he wouldn't want to hear about the Russian army's combat readiness?
https://www.ft.com/content/d3b2f81e-7ddb-4078-a96d-1c78ce7fcccd
(C&P into a google search in a private window to jump over the paywall)
https://twitter.com/ian_fraser/status/1498779292582531072?s=21
Funny how no-one complained when the US did exactly the same. The UK is falling into line with the US's timescale.
The purpose of the 30-day lead-in for sanctions is not to enable Russians to "shift assets", but to prevent a 2008-style financial crisis. It gives financial institutions time to unwind their Russian positions without defaulting and find alternative sources of funding.
https://twitter.com/frances_coppola/status/1498799522142560259?s=21
https://twitter.com/yanevskyy/status/1498895711110324235
"hackers breached a maritime traffic tracking site to give Russian President Vladimir Putin’s yacht “Graceful” a new call sign, ANONYMO, and a new destination, FCKPTN...."
https://www.hstoday.us/subject-matter-areas/cybersecurity/anonymous-vs-russia-hackers-say-space-agency-breached-more-than-1500-websites-hit/
You can only imagine the level of panic when they realised they were hacked....
Knocking Russian spy satellites offline is a big one if true, means they’ll have to rely on the Chinese - if Xi can be bothered to even take Putin’s calls at the moment.
Satellites generally don't need to change orbits regularly, but they do sometimes need to shift position slightly.
Do they understand what’s meant by a no-fly zone yet?
We are being decidedly ungenerous in our willingness to accept refugees.
A lot of them are supply & logistics vs assault vehicles.
So it might be a question of priorities. Or May be the Russians are devoting disproportionate resources to defending it so creating opportunities elsewhere?
We just don’t know
https://twitter.com/Birdyword/status/1498882955741069313
Mr. Age, China may also be taking notes on how to both withstand and inflict economic damage. I think the economic scale and degree of integration globally means they're way less likely to either impose or suffer them from the West generally, as Russia now is, but on a smaller, local scale that may be otherwise.
One of the interesting things about this conflict is that it takes cancel culture to a whole new level. Russia has been cancelled, and it may actually be this that does Putins regime in. Interesting times.
So 'NFZ' is really just shorthand for war with Russia.
Massive contrast in the organisational culture, as Casino says. Those stories about Russian soldiers selling their fuel to buy alcohol that came out of Belarus appear to be symptomatic of a problem that runs from top to bottom.
This implies, though, that the shock of this humiliation might lead Russia to prioritise efficiency in its armed forces over providing opportunities for corruption, and so the Russian armed forces might become a lot more effective in the next few years, even as the Russian economy suffers under the pressure of sanctions.
It also means we have to be vigilant against the dangers posed by corruption in the UK, and should not airily wave away the money stolen during the pandemic.
If they were already a bit paranoid you'd imagine they'd be absolutely panicking if that was the case.
The usual rhetoric and grandstanding but action lagging far far behind, especially with regard to individual Russian wealth held in the UK.
Is it 3 oligarchs or 5 that we're directly sanctioning? Or have a few more been added.
Freeze all Russian owned assets unless clearly aligned with the opposition, place property in escrow pending a resolution to the crisis. Intern family members, why not? They might benefit from a taste of one of Priti's immigration centres.
Which is why despite his many shortcomings he is still rather a refreshing change from Donald 'locked and loaded' Trump.
Meanwhile, I notice that the amount of spam going into my email account's spam filter has reduced dramatically.
The main front is now, I think, in the economic sphere - it is a race between the military ability of Russia to grind their way to their objectives and the Russia economy breaking down. I wonder what the burn rate of the central bank reserves is now? Supporting a collapsing currency is a very good way to run out money - post war Britain proved that several times.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2022/03/02/swiss-billionaire-reveals-has-approached-buy-chelsea-roman-abramovich/ https://twitter.com/Matt_Law_DT/status/1498714814419513353
As our resident retired military pilot points out, preventing the Russians from flying in Ukraine means taking out their air defences on the ground, then aggressively patrolling the airspace ourselves.
Various journalists are jumping on the bandwagon and simply dismissing the risk.
It’s lunacy. They need to read that piece by Fiona Hill.
Given the power that Premier League has in the political sphere, not a bad idea.
Johnson has had a good war so far. So has Biden. The EU are getting their act together. This is a coordinated response from western allies. With sanctions you don’t go all in on your first hand and you co ordinate.
I get that Johnson’s political opponents don’t like him but he deserves some credit here.
#StandWithUkraine https://twitter.com/avalaina/status/1498708691436150787/photo/1
We are also not at war with Russia. De jure, at least. Which makes internment an inappropriate measure.
I know you are desperate to attack the UK government. But they’ve done well on Ukraine over an extended period.
I bet the economic research team at the Bank of England are burning the midnight oil at the moment.
There’s going to be a very brave few, whose names we will never know, putting themselves in harm’s way to help Ukraine at the moment, and we should be forever grateful to them.
Just because we had internment in WW2 is not a justification to have it today. We also had the death penalty, conscription and rationing too.