Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Three speeches at this critical time – politicalbetting.com

1234568

Comments

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,586

    For laughs I just had a quick check on my 1 Jan 2022 predictions:

    1. Boris to still be PM on 31 December 2022.
    2. Labour to end the year ahead in the polls.
    3. Valérie Pécresse to win the French Presidential election.
    4. Dems to lose control of the Senate but narrowly retain the House in November.
    5. Donald Trump indicted for at least one offence.
    6. Two more covid ‘variants of significance’ to sweep the world.
    7. Official number of UK covid deaths to reach 210k by year end.
    8. Russia-Ukraine stand-off to continue.
    9. Bitcoin to collapse.
    10. FTSE 100 to peak above 8,000 before falling back by the end of the year.


    Number 8 is obviously a fail now. 3, 9, and 10 look decidedly unlikely.

    It's quite possible I could achieve 0/10 by the end of the year! :)

    I wouldn't rule out 9 yet.

    Bitcoin had been falling for months and while the past week has seen a recovery of sorts, led reportedly by Russians trying to get their money out of Russia, its even now still lower than it was at the start of the year.

    Russian buying of bitcoin can only continue for so long and eventually people are going to want to convert it to dollars or something else which could lead to it collapsing again.

    4 I don't understand, my understanding is they're far more likely to lose the House than the Senate? Seems odd to propose the opposite.
    Might be my bad, but I was thinking the Dems only need to lose one Senate seat to lose control. Whereas the House may be more promising:

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/

    ...but what do I know.
    My understanding is the 2022 Senate races are more favourable to the Democrats. Of the 34 races being ran, 20 are already GOP so there's only 14 Democrats. Of those 14, most are very safe, there's only one Democrat Senator not seeking re-election this term too.

    However the entire House has to be re-elected in the midterms and the GOP are likely to get enough there, even if they fail in the Senate.
    Well, that'll be another one towards my 0/10 ;-)
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Not the welcome they were expecting?

    The lead Russian soldier is walking around with two hand grenades held in the air. Presumably with their pins out.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1498955188811583492

    When he drives away both his rear tires are flat…..
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,171

    MattW said:

    eek said:

    Are some people terminally stupid when it comes to point scoring

    Alix Culbertson
    @alixculbertson
    OneWeb was saved from bankruptcy by the British taxpayer. It is set to launch 36 satellites from a Russian-owned I in Kazakhstan this week, on Russian-owned rockets.

    It’s believed to already have been paid for.

    Should it still go ahead?

    If it's been paid for then it needs to go ahead - what you can't do is use it for future launches.

    It's an interesting one. Alix Cuthbertson is a Sky political reporter.

    Based in London, but UK Gov stake now down to 20-25%, based in London, plus a golden share and whatever else is built into the agreement. The service can reach N of 50 degrees North. With far larger shares being held by the Indian interest - and India has (if I am up to date) stood back from such thorough sanctions as used elsewhere.

    Do we even have the power to stop it?

    There are another 5 launches planned for 2022, currently from Russia.

    But it would not surprise me if Russia postponed the launch themselves.

    Wasn't this one of Dom's projects?
    The launches were booked and bought before the bankruptcy. The guy who ran OneWeb into the ground was hard core Elon Musk hater and the only way to even vaguely close the numbers was the cheap launch via Russia.

    The first thing that happened, as part of the emergence from bankruptcy was moving to a newer design of satellite (aka Gen 2). This will be launched, almost certainly, from India. It can't be launched from Russia due to export controls issues.

    This was another nail in the coffin of Russian space technology.
    I'm a bit concerned about the International Space Station.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586

    Not the welcome they were expecting?

    The lead Russian soldier is walking around with two hand grenades held in the air. Presumably with their pins out.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1498955188811583492

    When he drives away both his rear tires are flat…..

    Ha.

    Reminds me of the time a senior manager turned up at the outfit I was working at. He was driving a Ferrari 308 GT.

    He was there to deliver the news about cut backs and retrenchment in the company. Including our site. Someone did a bit of digging and discovered that his car was actually being paid for by the company.

    There was a big noise about the fact that when he got back to his car, a couple of the tires were flat.

    I was surprised. That the car wasn't on fire. Or at least the tires slashed. I guess we were a law abiding bunch.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,586
    Andy_JS said:

    MattW said:

    eek said:

    Are some people terminally stupid when it comes to point scoring

    Alix Culbertson
    @alixculbertson
    OneWeb was saved from bankruptcy by the British taxpayer. It is set to launch 36 satellites from a Russian-owned I in Kazakhstan this week, on Russian-owned rockets.

    It’s believed to already have been paid for.

    Should it still go ahead?

    If it's been paid for then it needs to go ahead - what you can't do is use it for future launches.

    It's an interesting one. Alix Cuthbertson is a Sky political reporter.

    Based in London, but UK Gov stake now down to 20-25%, based in London, plus a golden share and whatever else is built into the agreement. The service can reach N of 50 degrees North. With far larger shares being held by the Indian interest - and India has (if I am up to date) stood back from such thorough sanctions as used elsewhere.

    Do we even have the power to stop it?

    There are another 5 launches planned for 2022, currently from Russia.

    But it would not surprise me if Russia postponed the launch themselves.

    Wasn't this one of Dom's projects?
    The launches were booked and bought before the bankruptcy. The guy who ran OneWeb into the ground was hard core Elon Musk hater and the only way to even vaguely close the numbers was the cheap launch via Russia.

    The first thing that happened, as part of the emergence from bankruptcy was moving to a newer design of satellite (aka Gen 2). This will be launched, almost certainly, from India. It can't be launched from Russia due to export controls issues.

    This was another nail in the coffin of Russian space technology.
    I'm a bit concerned about the International Space Station.
    Yes that's an interesting one. However, the loss or shutdown of the ISS would be a very minor tragedy compared with what's going on un Ukraine.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947

    Over the past days, Russian forces have tried to creep past several of these cities, that refuse to surrender, to try and press their offensive.

    This is a very risky strategy, as Ukrainian forces posted in the cities Russia is "bypassing" could raid their supply lines (and have)

    Russia is trying to mitigate/pin Ukrainian forces in these cities by carrying out massive and indiscriminate bombardment with the use of MLRS and cluster ammunition (this is not a justification don't make me say something I am not).

    One of those cities is Konotop, in the east. The Russians have sent it an ultimatum: Surrender or we will destroy the city with artillery strikes.

    This ⬇️ is a video of the Mayor of Konotop informing residents, trying to see what to do next.

    🚩Russian war crime in the making


    https://twitter.com/michaelh992/status/1498948286383804417?s=20

    I don't see why a war of naked aggression isn't all a crime.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,278

    For laughs I just had a quick check on my 1 Jan 2022 predictions:

    1. Boris to still be PM on 31 December 2022.
    2. Labour to end the year ahead in the polls.
    3. Valérie Pécresse to win the French Presidential election.
    4. Dems to lose control of the Senate but narrowly retain the House in November.
    5. Donald Trump indicted for at least one offence.
    6. Two more covid ‘variants of significance’ to sweep the world.
    7. Official number of UK covid deaths to reach 210k by year end.
    8. Russia-Ukraine stand-off to continue.
    9. Bitcoin to collapse.
    10. FTSE 100 to peak above 8,000 before falling back by the end of the year.


    Number 8 is obviously a fail now. 3, 9, and 10 look decidedly unlikely.

    It's quite possible I could achieve 0/10 by the end of the year! :)

    I wouldn't rule out 9 yet.

    Bitcoin had been falling for months and while the past week has seen a recovery of sorts, led reportedly by Russians trying to get their money out of Russia, its even now still lower than it was at the start of the year.

    Russian buying of bitcoin can only continue for so long and eventually people are going to want to convert it to dollars or something else which could lead to it collapsing again.

    4 I don't understand, my understanding is they're far more likely to lose the House than the Senate? Seems odd to propose the opposite.
    Might be my bad, but I was thinking the Dems only need to lose one Senate seat to lose control. Whereas the House may be more promising:

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/

    ...but what do I know.
    My understanding is the 2022 Senate races are more favourable to the Democrats. Of the 34 races being ran, 20 are already GOP so there's only 14 Democrats. Of those 14, most are very safe, there's only one Democrat Senator not seeking re-election this term too.

    However the entire House has to be re-elected in the midterms and the GOP are likely to get enough there, even if they fail in the Senate.
    Indeed, plus the last 2 midterms in a President's first term, 2010 and 2018, the House saw a change of party in control, the Senate did not
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,080

    Andy_JS said:

    It is odd how:

    (a) the convoy isn't moving much
    (b) it isn't being attacked

    Not really.

    (A) It can't. They don't have the logistics and the land in front of them is blocked.

    (B) While stationary it will be at its most heavily fortified and well defended.

    Isn't the usual asymmetric way to attack a convoy to do so while it's moving when it enters a trap, not while it's stationary?
    Why not use drones on it?
    Presumably a limited number of drones/none within operational range/target too well defended by anti-aircraft equipment as relatively far behind enemy lines.

    With other easier to hit targets available elsewhere.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586
    kinabalu said:

    Over the past days, Russian forces have tried to creep past several of these cities, that refuse to surrender, to try and press their offensive.

    This is a very risky strategy, as Ukrainian forces posted in the cities Russia is "bypassing" could raid their supply lines (and have)

    Russia is trying to mitigate/pin Ukrainian forces in these cities by carrying out massive and indiscriminate bombardment with the use of MLRS and cluster ammunition (this is not a justification don't make me say something I am not).

    One of those cities is Konotop, in the east. The Russians have sent it an ultimatum: Surrender or we will destroy the city with artillery strikes.

    This ⬇️ is a video of the Mayor of Konotop informing residents, trying to see what to do next.

    🚩Russian war crime in the making


    https://twitter.com/michaelh992/status/1498948286383804417?s=20

    I don't see why a war of naked aggression isn't all a crime.
    "Adamley: All wars are crimes."
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Great map showing how Russian forces have bypassed Ukrainian cities in the east to head towards Kyiv.

    We have seen this leave their supply lines and rear areas vulnerable to attack.


    https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1498944319750909955?s=20
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,314
    Andy_JS said:

    MattW said:

    eek said:

    Are some people terminally stupid when it comes to point scoring

    Alix Culbertson
    @alixculbertson
    OneWeb was saved from bankruptcy by the British taxpayer. It is set to launch 36 satellites from a Russian-owned I in Kazakhstan this week, on Russian-owned rockets.

    It’s believed to already have been paid for.

    Should it still go ahead?

    If it's been paid for then it needs to go ahead - what you can't do is use it for future launches.

    It's an interesting one. Alix Cuthbertson is a Sky political reporter.

    Based in London, but UK Gov stake now down to 20-25%, based in London, plus a golden share and whatever else is built into the agreement. The service can reach N of 50 degrees North. With far larger shares being held by the Indian interest - and India has (if I am up to date) stood back from such thorough sanctions as used elsewhere.

    Do we even have the power to stop it?

    There are another 5 launches planned for 2022, currently from Russia.

    But it would not surprise me if Russia postponed the launch themselves.

    Wasn't this one of Dom's projects?
    The launches were booked and bought before the bankruptcy. The guy who ran OneWeb into the ground was hard core Elon Musk hater and the only way to even vaguely close the numbers was the cheap launch via Russia.

    The first thing that happened, as part of the emergence from bankruptcy was moving to a newer design of satellite (aka Gen 2). This will be launched, almost certainly, from India. It can't be launched from Russia due to export controls issues.

    This was another nail in the coffin of Russian space technology.
    I'm a bit concerned about the International Space Station.
    Very much so. An astonishing international project, that has survived decades of political events between the countries involved.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586
    Andy_JS said:

    MattW said:

    eek said:

    Are some people terminally stupid when it comes to point scoring

    Alix Culbertson
    @alixculbertson
    OneWeb was saved from bankruptcy by the British taxpayer. It is set to launch 36 satellites from a Russian-owned I in Kazakhstan this week, on Russian-owned rockets.

    It’s believed to already have been paid for.

    Should it still go ahead?

    If it's been paid for then it needs to go ahead - what you can't do is use it for future launches.

    It's an interesting one. Alix Cuthbertson is a Sky political reporter.

    Based in London, but UK Gov stake now down to 20-25%, based in London, plus a golden share and whatever else is built into the agreement. The service can reach N of 50 degrees North. With far larger shares being held by the Indian interest - and India has (if I am up to date) stood back from such thorough sanctions as used elsewhere.

    Do we even have the power to stop it?

    There are another 5 launches planned for 2022, currently from Russia.

    But it would not surprise me if Russia postponed the launch themselves.

    Wasn't this one of Dom's projects?
    The launches were booked and bought before the bankruptcy. The guy who ran OneWeb into the ground was hard core Elon Musk hater and the only way to even vaguely close the numbers was the cheap launch via Russia.

    The first thing that happened, as part of the emergence from bankruptcy was moving to a newer design of satellite (aka Gen 2). This will be launched, almost certainly, from India. It can't be launched from Russia due to export controls issues.

    This was another nail in the coffin of Russian space technology.
    I'm a bit concerned about the International Space Station.
    I am, a bit. But, if nothing else, the Russians have people on the station. To actually fuck things up would require them to be suicidal.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    BREAKING:

    Russia has brought former Ukrainian President Yanukovych to Minsk.

    Putin is preparing to proclaim him the new President of Ukraine.

    Source: @ukrpravda_news


    https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1498959815703506944?s=20
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,729



    But does Putin want one? I do worry that we've driven sanctions to the maximum already, leaving little incentive for Putin not to go the whole hog and simply occupy the country. It'd be quite mad to want to occupy an entire, largely hostile, country, but thinking Putin wasn't mad is what made me think he wouldn't invade at all, so who knows?

    I think Putin is motivated by his historico-philosophical fantasy.

    He wants the lands back that he believes historically belong to Russia, so not the whole of the present-day Ukraine.

    Of course, Western Ukraine was never part of historic Russia. He wants the Black Sea coast and the lands east of the Dneiper.

    The question is whether he could occupy and keep those parts of the country. That depends on how much the rest of Russia shares his vision & are willing to accept the pain.

    I think Putin's view of history is quite common amongst Russians.
    I think this is probably right. Unfortunately not sure what is going to prevent it. He's already annexed Crimea and turned Belarus into a puppet.

    My belief FWIW is that Putin is most interested in his legacy. Sees himself in the tradition of Stalin and the more consequential Tsars.

    He found Mother Russia: weak, diminished, despised.

    He left Mother Russia: strong, enlarged, feared.

    ...and bankrupted.
    Well, yes. But I really don't think Putin is bothered much by economic pain, or any other form of pain for that matter. Russia will endure. It's not as though Moscow or St Petersburg are being invested, and they survived that a few times.

    The point is that the map has changed. Russia will, quite literally, be bigger. And that is likely to be a keeper.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,314

    Andy_JS said:

    MattW said:

    eek said:

    Are some people terminally stupid when it comes to point scoring

    Alix Culbertson
    @alixculbertson
    OneWeb was saved from bankruptcy by the British taxpayer. It is set to launch 36 satellites from a Russian-owned I in Kazakhstan this week, on Russian-owned rockets.

    It’s believed to already have been paid for.

    Should it still go ahead?

    If it's been paid for then it needs to go ahead - what you can't do is use it for future launches.

    It's an interesting one. Alix Cuthbertson is a Sky political reporter.

    Based in London, but UK Gov stake now down to 20-25%, based in London, plus a golden share and whatever else is built into the agreement. The service can reach N of 50 degrees North. With far larger shares being held by the Indian interest - and India has (if I am up to date) stood back from such thorough sanctions as used elsewhere.

    Do we even have the power to stop it?

    There are another 5 launches planned for 2022, currently from Russia.

    But it would not surprise me if Russia postponed the launch themselves.

    Wasn't this one of Dom's projects?
    The launches were booked and bought before the bankruptcy. The guy who ran OneWeb into the ground was hard core Elon Musk hater and the only way to even vaguely close the numbers was the cheap launch via Russia.

    The first thing that happened, as part of the emergence from bankruptcy was moving to a newer design of satellite (aka Gen 2). This will be launched, almost certainly, from India. It can't be launched from Russia due to export controls issues.

    This was another nail in the coffin of Russian space technology.
    I'm a bit concerned about the International Space Station.
    I am, a bit. But, if nothing else, the Russians have people on the station. To actually fuck things up would require them to be suicidal.
    If they have any sense, they’ll ask the Americans for a ride home with SpaceX, and claim asylum when they get there.
  • Andy_JS said:

    MattW said:

    eek said:

    Are some people terminally stupid when it comes to point scoring

    Alix Culbertson
    @alixculbertson
    OneWeb was saved from bankruptcy by the British taxpayer. It is set to launch 36 satellites from a Russian-owned I in Kazakhstan this week, on Russian-owned rockets.

    It’s believed to already have been paid for.

    Should it still go ahead?

    If it's been paid for then it needs to go ahead - what you can't do is use it for future launches.

    It's an interesting one. Alix Cuthbertson is a Sky political reporter.

    Based in London, but UK Gov stake now down to 20-25%, based in London, plus a golden share and whatever else is built into the agreement. The service can reach N of 50 degrees North. With far larger shares being held by the Indian interest - and India has (if I am up to date) stood back from such thorough sanctions as used elsewhere.

    Do we even have the power to stop it?

    There are another 5 launches planned for 2022, currently from Russia.

    But it would not surprise me if Russia postponed the launch themselves.

    Wasn't this one of Dom's projects?
    The launches were booked and bought before the bankruptcy. The guy who ran OneWeb into the ground was hard core Elon Musk hater and the only way to even vaguely close the numbers was the cheap launch via Russia.

    The first thing that happened, as part of the emergence from bankruptcy was moving to a newer design of satellite (aka Gen 2). This will be launched, almost certainly, from India. It can't be launched from Russia due to export controls issues.

    This was another nail in the coffin of Russian space technology.
    I'm a bit concerned about the International Space Station.
    Simply order the American astronauts into the Discovery and leave the Soviet astronauts on the Leonov. HAL is capable of guiding the now resurrected Discovery on a path back to earth.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513



    But does Putin want one? I do worry that we've driven sanctions to the maximum already, leaving little incentive for Putin not to go the whole hog and simply occupy the country. It'd be quite mad to want to occupy an entire, largely hostile, country, but thinking Putin wasn't mad is what made me think he wouldn't invade at all, so who knows?

    I think Putin is motivated by his historico-philosophical fantasy.

    He wants the lands back that he believes historically belong to Russia, so not the whole of the present-day Ukraine.

    Of course, Western Ukraine was never part of historic Russia. He wants the Black Sea coast and the lands east of the Dneiper.

    The question is whether he could occupy and keep those parts of the country. That depends on how much the rest of Russia shares his vision & are willing to accept the pain.

    I think Putin's view of history is quite common amongst Russians.
    I think this is probably right. Unfortunately not sure what is going to prevent it. He's already annexed Crimea and turned Belarus into a puppet.

    My belief FWIW is that Putin is most interested in his legacy. Sees himself in the tradition of Stalin and the more consequential Tsars.

    He found Mother Russia: weak, diminished, despised.

    He left Mother Russia: strong, enlarged, feared.

    He spent two decades trying to rebuild Russia.
    And undid that in two weeks.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,283
    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    I hate the “it’s all about us” tone of much internet commentary about the crisis but, dipping my toe in, the demands for a NFZ are not going to help Johnson. He can’t do it because the U.K. doesn’t alone have the resources and, well, WW3 but increasingly there are calls from the armchair generals for one. Ultimately, when Kyiv falls and this war turns into Syria redux, a lot of the blame for that will come from said Monday morning quarterbacks and fall on Johnson’s shoulders. He can’t really win.

    Please enlighten me on which NATO country disagrees with Boris over no fly zones

    When have you heard UVDL, Macron, Biden endorse enforcing no fly zones
    You miss my point spectacularly. Our narcissistic political culture will blame Johnson for this - ignoring the fact that he can’t do it without the others. The fact that the other leaders take the same line doest matter. Johnson is to blame for that having implicitly peddled the line that we can do everything on our own.
    I simply do not agree with you - there is no appetite for the RAF to confront Russian aircraft over Ukraine, and it is the agreed position of the entire opposition
    It’s not the agreed position of the entire Tory Party or press. Not by a long shot.
    If Johnson gets the blame for something that is not his fault it is karma. He has got away with lots of things that he shouldn't have got away with him. I think he will have little sympathy from many of us. That said, I would far rather he lost power for being an incompetent hypocritical liar. When? It can't be too soon.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,586

    Not the welcome they were expecting?

    The lead Russian soldier is walking around with two hand grenades held in the air. Presumably with their pins out.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1498955188811583492

    When he drives away both his rear tires are flat…..

    Ha.

    Reminds me of the time a senior manager turned up at the outfit I was working at. He was driving a Ferrari 308 GT.

    He was there to deliver the news about cut backs and retrenchment in the company. Including our site. Someone did a bit of digging and discovered that his car was actually being paid for by the company.

    There was a big noise about the fact that when he got back to his car, a couple of the tires were flat.

    I was surprised. That the car wasn't on fire. Or at least the tires slashed. I guess we were a law abiding bunch.
    I always wonder why 'letting the tires down' isn't used more often as a tactic in novels and drama. (Thinks: I guess it makes car chases a bit less interesting.)
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586
    Sandpit said:

    Andy_JS said:

    MattW said:

    eek said:

    Are some people terminally stupid when it comes to point scoring

    Alix Culbertson
    @alixculbertson
    OneWeb was saved from bankruptcy by the British taxpayer. It is set to launch 36 satellites from a Russian-owned I in Kazakhstan this week, on Russian-owned rockets.

    It’s believed to already have been paid for.

    Should it still go ahead?

    If it's been paid for then it needs to go ahead - what you can't do is use it for future launches.

    It's an interesting one. Alix Cuthbertson is a Sky political reporter.

    Based in London, but UK Gov stake now down to 20-25%, based in London, plus a golden share and whatever else is built into the agreement. The service can reach N of 50 degrees North. With far larger shares being held by the Indian interest - and India has (if I am up to date) stood back from such thorough sanctions as used elsewhere.

    Do we even have the power to stop it?

    There are another 5 launches planned for 2022, currently from Russia.

    But it would not surprise me if Russia postponed the launch themselves.

    Wasn't this one of Dom's projects?
    The launches were booked and bought before the bankruptcy. The guy who ran OneWeb into the ground was hard core Elon Musk hater and the only way to even vaguely close the numbers was the cheap launch via Russia.

    The first thing that happened, as part of the emergence from bankruptcy was moving to a newer design of satellite (aka Gen 2). This will be launched, almost certainly, from India. It can't be launched from Russia due to export controls issues.

    This was another nail in the coffin of Russian space technology.
    I'm a bit concerned about the International Space Station.
    I am, a bit. But, if nothing else, the Russians have people on the station. To actually fuck things up would require them to be suicidal.
    If they have any sense, they’ll ask the Americans for a ride home with SpaceX, and claim asylum when they get there.
    They physically can't do that - the SpaceX space suits are custom to the astronaut and the Dragon systems aren't compatible with the Russian suits. So even if SpaceX sent up an empty Dragon.....

    Unless they were to return to earth without a space suit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz_11
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,231
    kle4 said:

    Morning all. I'm gonzo busy with work so only dip in when I can. Whilst its heartening to see the Ukranians resist the bear and watch Putin's war plan fall apart, this is the point where the conflict gets the most dangerous.

    Putin smashing Ukraine is bad for Ukraine. Putin not smashing Ukraine and instead having his own economy smashed and being turned into a global pariah is bad for all of us if he decides bigger / broader action is needed.

    Thoughts are with @Sandpit , @Cicero and anyone else with direct involvement. My Romanian colleagues are over near Cluj mainly and report a lot of military traffic and increasing numbers of refugees, but otherwise Romania feels more secure thanks to NATO.

    Providing this doesn't blow up into WWIII I think we are seeing a rapid reshaping of European geopolitics. That the EU and especially Germany have so rapidly shifted their approach to defence matters will only strengthen both the EU and the pull towards EU and NATO membership of all of the nations not currently fully protected.

    Sadly, it is clear that both Ukraine and Russia's economy are being smashed.

    War has certainties - death, destruction, misery & chaos.
    Epic poetry another one.
    My epic Putin v Johnson rap battle is evidence of that.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    kinabalu said:

    Over the past days, Russian forces have tried to creep past several of these cities, that refuse to surrender, to try and press their offensive.

    This is a very risky strategy, as Ukrainian forces posted in the cities Russia is "bypassing" could raid their supply lines (and have)

    Russia is trying to mitigate/pin Ukrainian forces in these cities by carrying out massive and indiscriminate bombardment with the use of MLRS and cluster ammunition (this is not a justification don't make me say something I am not).

    One of those cities is Konotop, in the east. The Russians have sent it an ultimatum: Surrender or we will destroy the city with artillery strikes.

    This ⬇️ is a video of the Mayor of Konotop informing residents, trying to see what to do next.

    🚩Russian war crime in the making


    https://twitter.com/michaelh992/status/1498948286383804417?s=20

    I don't see why a war of naked aggression isn't all a crime.
    It is.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,586

    Sandpit said:

    Andy_JS said:

    MattW said:

    eek said:

    Are some people terminally stupid when it comes to point scoring

    Alix Culbertson
    @alixculbertson
    OneWeb was saved from bankruptcy by the British taxpayer. It is set to launch 36 satellites from a Russian-owned I in Kazakhstan this week, on Russian-owned rockets.

    It’s believed to already have been paid for.

    Should it still go ahead?

    If it's been paid for then it needs to go ahead - what you can't do is use it for future launches.

    It's an interesting one. Alix Cuthbertson is a Sky political reporter.

    Based in London, but UK Gov stake now down to 20-25%, based in London, plus a golden share and whatever else is built into the agreement. The service can reach N of 50 degrees North. With far larger shares being held by the Indian interest - and India has (if I am up to date) stood back from such thorough sanctions as used elsewhere.

    Do we even have the power to stop it?

    There are another 5 launches planned for 2022, currently from Russia.

    But it would not surprise me if Russia postponed the launch themselves.

    Wasn't this one of Dom's projects?
    The launches were booked and bought before the bankruptcy. The guy who ran OneWeb into the ground was hard core Elon Musk hater and the only way to even vaguely close the numbers was the cheap launch via Russia.

    The first thing that happened, as part of the emergence from bankruptcy was moving to a newer design of satellite (aka Gen 2). This will be launched, almost certainly, from India. It can't be launched from Russia due to export controls issues.

    This was another nail in the coffin of Russian space technology.
    I'm a bit concerned about the International Space Station.
    I am, a bit. But, if nothing else, the Russians have people on the station. To actually fuck things up would require them to be suicidal.
    If they have any sense, they’ll ask the Americans for a ride home with SpaceX, and claim asylum when they get there.
    They physically can't do that - the SpaceX space suits are custom to the astronaut and the Dragon systems aren't compatible with the Russian suits. So even if SpaceX sent up an empty Dragon.....

    Unless they were to return to earth without a space suit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz_11
    I'm sure Sandra Bullock would manage it.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_(2013_film)
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677

    Sandpit said:

    Andy_JS said:

    MattW said:

    eek said:

    Are some people terminally stupid when it comes to point scoring

    Alix Culbertson
    @alixculbertson
    OneWeb was saved from bankruptcy by the British taxpayer. It is set to launch 36 satellites from a Russian-owned I in Kazakhstan this week, on Russian-owned rockets.

    It’s believed to already have been paid for.

    Should it still go ahead?

    If it's been paid for then it needs to go ahead - what you can't do is use it for future launches.

    It's an interesting one. Alix Cuthbertson is a Sky political reporter.

    Based in London, but UK Gov stake now down to 20-25%, based in London, plus a golden share and whatever else is built into the agreement. The service can reach N of 50 degrees North. With far larger shares being held by the Indian interest - and India has (if I am up to date) stood back from such thorough sanctions as used elsewhere.

    Do we even have the power to stop it?

    There are another 5 launches planned for 2022, currently from Russia.

    But it would not surprise me if Russia postponed the launch themselves.

    Wasn't this one of Dom's projects?
    The launches were booked and bought before the bankruptcy. The guy who ran OneWeb into the ground was hard core Elon Musk hater and the only way to even vaguely close the numbers was the cheap launch via Russia.

    The first thing that happened, as part of the emergence from bankruptcy was moving to a newer design of satellite (aka Gen 2). This will be launched, almost certainly, from India. It can't be launched from Russia due to export controls issues.

    This was another nail in the coffin of Russian space technology.
    I'm a bit concerned about the International Space Station.
    I am, a bit. But, if nothing else, the Russians have people on the station. To actually fuck things up would require them to be suicidal.
    If they have any sense, they’ll ask the Americans for a ride home with SpaceX, and claim asylum when they get there.
    They physically can't do that - the SpaceX space suits are custom to the astronaut and the Dragon systems aren't compatible with the Russian suits. So even if SpaceX sent up an empty Dragon.....

    Unless they were to return to earth without a space suit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz_11
    I'm sure Sandra Bullock would manage it.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_(2013_film)
    Buddy jumps from one spaceship to another wrapped in what looks like baking foil in that film Sunshine.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,586

    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    I hate the “it’s all about us” tone of much internet commentary about the crisis but, dipping my toe in, the demands for a NFZ are not going to help Johnson. He can’t do it because the U.K. doesn’t alone have the resources and, well, WW3 but increasingly there are calls from the armchair generals for one. Ultimately, when Kyiv falls and this war turns into Syria redux, a lot of the blame for that will come from said Monday morning quarterbacks and fall on Johnson’s shoulders. He can’t really win.

    Please enlighten me on which NATO country disagrees with Boris over no fly zones

    When have you heard UVDL, Macron, Biden endorse enforcing no fly zones
    You miss my point spectacularly. Our narcissistic political culture will blame Johnson for this - ignoring the fact that he can’t do it without the others. The fact that the other leaders take the same line doest matter. Johnson is to blame for that having implicitly peddled the line that we can do everything on our own.
    I simply do not agree with you - there is no appetite for the RAF to confront Russian aircraft over Ukraine, and it is the agreed position of the entire opposition
    It’s not the agreed position of the entire Tory Party or press. Not by a long shot.
    If Johnson gets the blame for something that is not his fault it is karma. He has got away with lots of things that he shouldn't have got away with him. I think he will have little sympathy from many of us. That said, I would far rather he lost power for being an incompetent hypocritical liar. When? It can't be too soon.
    Er...

    If Johnson gets the blame for starting WWIII when it's not his fault, I am struggling to see that as karma, given, y'know... WWIII.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172



    But does Putin want one? I do worry that we've driven sanctions to the maximum already, leaving little incentive for Putin not to go the whole hog and simply occupy the country. It'd be quite mad to want to occupy an entire, largely hostile, country, but thinking Putin wasn't mad is what made me think he wouldn't invade at all, so who knows?

    I think Putin is motivated by his historico-philosophical fantasy.

    He wants the lands back that he believes historically belong to Russia, so not the whole of the present-day Ukraine.

    Of course, Western Ukraine was never part of historic Russia. He wants the Black Sea coast and the lands east of the Dneiper.

    The question is whether he could occupy and keep those parts of the country. That depends on how much the rest of Russia shares his vision & are willing to accept the pain.

    I think Putin's view of history is quite common amongst Russians.
    I think this is probably right. Unfortunately not sure what is going to prevent it. He's already annexed Crimea and turned Belarus into a puppet.

    My belief FWIW is that Putin is most interested in his legacy. Sees himself in the tradition of Stalin and the more consequential Tsars.

    He found Mother Russia: weak, diminished, despised.

    He left Mother Russia: strong, enlarged, feared.

    ...and bankrupted.
    Well, yes. But I really don't think Putin is bothered much by economic pain, or any other form of pain for that matter. Russia will endure. It's not as though Moscow or St Petersburg are being invested, and they survived that a few times.

    The point is that the map has changed. Russia will, quite literally, be bigger. And that is likely to be a keeper.
    Once Ukraine has been divided, then (as in Cyprus) the populations will re-arrange themselves.

    The process will only be accelerated by the accession of rump-Ukraine into the EU (if/when it happens). Because that will lead to still further de-population -- at least if Estonia, Latvia & Lithuania are any guide.

    I think Putin might have wanted to swallow all of Ukraine at outset. The strength of the resistance probably makes that very unlikely now.

    But the parts of Ukraine that Putin is really interested in, I think he will get & probably keep.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,586
    edited March 2022
    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:

    Andy_JS said:

    MattW said:

    eek said:

    Are some people terminally stupid when it comes to point scoring

    Alix Culbertson
    @alixculbertson
    OneWeb was saved from bankruptcy by the British taxpayer. It is set to launch 36 satellites from a Russian-owned I in Kazakhstan this week, on Russian-owned rockets.

    It’s believed to already have been paid for.

    Should it still go ahead?

    If it's been paid for then it needs to go ahead - what you can't do is use it for future launches.

    It's an interesting one. Alix Cuthbertson is a Sky political reporter.

    Based in London, but UK Gov stake now down to 20-25%, based in London, plus a golden share and whatever else is built into the agreement. The service can reach N of 50 degrees North. With far larger shares being held by the Indian interest - and India has (if I am up to date) stood back from such thorough sanctions as used elsewhere.

    Do we even have the power to stop it?

    There are another 5 launches planned for 2022, currently from Russia.

    But it would not surprise me if Russia postponed the launch themselves.

    Wasn't this one of Dom's projects?
    The launches were booked and bought before the bankruptcy. The guy who ran OneWeb into the ground was hard core Elon Musk hater and the only way to even vaguely close the numbers was the cheap launch via Russia.

    The first thing that happened, as part of the emergence from bankruptcy was moving to a newer design of satellite (aka Gen 2). This will be launched, almost certainly, from India. It can't be launched from Russia due to export controls issues.

    This was another nail in the coffin of Russian space technology.
    I'm a bit concerned about the International Space Station.
    I am, a bit. But, if nothing else, the Russians have people on the station. To actually fuck things up would require them to be suicidal.
    If they have any sense, they’ll ask the Americans for a ride home with SpaceX, and claim asylum when they get there.
    They physically can't do that - the SpaceX space suits are custom to the astronaut and the Dragon systems aren't compatible with the Russian suits. So even if SpaceX sent up an empty Dragon.....

    Unless they were to return to earth without a space suit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz_11
    I'm sure Sandra Bullock would manage it.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_(2013_film)
    Buddy jumps from one spaceship to another wrapped in what looks like baking foil in that film Sunshine.
    Not see that one. Did they also use the fire extinguisher for propulsion?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,359

    BREAKING:

    Russia has brought former Ukrainian President Yanukovych to Minsk.

    Putin is preparing to proclaim him the new President of Ukraine.

    Source: @ukrpravda_news


    https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1498959815703506944?s=20

    Well, at least part of Putin's plan is still on the original timeline....
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586

    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:

    Andy_JS said:

    MattW said:

    eek said:

    Are some people terminally stupid when it comes to point scoring

    Alix Culbertson
    @alixculbertson
    OneWeb was saved from bankruptcy by the British taxpayer. It is set to launch 36 satellites from a Russian-owned I in Kazakhstan this week, on Russian-owned rockets.

    It’s believed to already have been paid for.

    Should it still go ahead?

    If it's been paid for then it needs to go ahead - what you can't do is use it for future launches.

    It's an interesting one. Alix Cuthbertson is a Sky political reporter.

    Based in London, but UK Gov stake now down to 20-25%, based in London, plus a golden share and whatever else is built into the agreement. The service can reach N of 50 degrees North. With far larger shares being held by the Indian interest - and India has (if I am up to date) stood back from such thorough sanctions as used elsewhere.

    Do we even have the power to stop it?

    There are another 5 launches planned for 2022, currently from Russia.

    But it would not surprise me if Russia postponed the launch themselves.

    Wasn't this one of Dom's projects?
    The launches were booked and bought before the bankruptcy. The guy who ran OneWeb into the ground was hard core Elon Musk hater and the only way to even vaguely close the numbers was the cheap launch via Russia.

    The first thing that happened, as part of the emergence from bankruptcy was moving to a newer design of satellite (aka Gen 2). This will be launched, almost certainly, from India. It can't be launched from Russia due to export controls issues.

    This was another nail in the coffin of Russian space technology.
    I'm a bit concerned about the International Space Station.
    I am, a bit. But, if nothing else, the Russians have people on the station. To actually fuck things up would require them to be suicidal.
    If they have any sense, they’ll ask the Americans for a ride home with SpaceX, and claim asylum when they get there.
    They physically can't do that - the SpaceX space suits are custom to the astronaut and the Dragon systems aren't compatible with the Russian suits. So even if SpaceX sent up an empty Dragon.....

    Unless they were to return to earth without a space suit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz_11
    I'm sure Sandra Bullock would manage it.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_(2013_film)
    Buddy jumps from one spaceship to another wrapped in what looks like baking foil in that film Sunshine.
    Not see that one. Did they also use the fire extinguisher for propulsion?
    Using a fire extinguisher/spare oxygen cylinder as a manoeuvring device has been a trope since Destination Moon.
  • AlistairMAlistairM Posts: 2,005
    A Russian military column tried to enter Bucha, a suburb to Kyiv, last night.

    The Ukrainian Army launched an ambush attack on it with the NLAW anti-tank missiles donated in large numbers by Great Britain.

    The result can be seen below.

    More NLAWs need to be sent to Kyiv!

    🇺🇦

    https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1498919606370590725

    Hopefully this is genuine. If the Ukrainians have got anti-tank positions encircling Kyiv then it is going to be very bloody for the Russians to get through. On narrow streets one knocked out tank is going to then present a serious obstacle to overcome.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,205

    Sandpit said:

    Andy_JS said:

    MattW said:

    eek said:

    Are some people terminally stupid when it comes to point scoring

    Alix Culbertson
    @alixculbertson
    OneWeb was saved from bankruptcy by the British taxpayer. It is set to launch 36 satellites from a Russian-owned I in Kazakhstan this week, on Russian-owned rockets.

    It’s believed to already have been paid for.

    Should it still go ahead?

    If it's been paid for then it needs to go ahead - what you can't do is use it for future launches.

    It's an interesting one. Alix Cuthbertson is a Sky political reporter.

    Based in London, but UK Gov stake now down to 20-25%, based in London, plus a golden share and whatever else is built into the agreement. The service can reach N of 50 degrees North. With far larger shares being held by the Indian interest - and India has (if I am up to date) stood back from such thorough sanctions as used elsewhere.

    Do we even have the power to stop it?

    There are another 5 launches planned for 2022, currently from Russia.

    But it would not surprise me if Russia postponed the launch themselves.

    Wasn't this one of Dom's projects?
    The launches were booked and bought before the bankruptcy. The guy who ran OneWeb into the ground was hard core Elon Musk hater and the only way to even vaguely close the numbers was the cheap launch via Russia.

    The first thing that happened, as part of the emergence from bankruptcy was moving to a newer design of satellite (aka Gen 2). This will be launched, almost certainly, from India. It can't be launched from Russia due to export controls issues.

    This was another nail in the coffin of Russian space technology.
    I'm a bit concerned about the International Space Station.
    I am, a bit. But, if nothing else, the Russians have people on the station. To actually fuck things up would require them to be suicidal.
    If they have any sense, they’ll ask the Americans for a ride home with SpaceX, and claim asylum when they get there.
    They physically can't do that - the SpaceX space suits are custom to the astronaut and the Dragon systems aren't compatible with the Russian suits. So even if SpaceX sent up an empty Dragon.....

    Unless they were to return to earth without a space suit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz_11
    AIUI the 'space suits' currently used by SpaceX are basically just emergency pressure suits - and nowhere near EVA suits (although it looks like they're working on them). Is there a technical reason why the suits would be required for human 'cargo' ? They wouldn't have comms or emergency supplies such as air, but AFAIAA a person could return in shirt sleeves.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586

    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    I hate the “it’s all about us” tone of much internet commentary about the crisis but, dipping my toe in, the demands for a NFZ are not going to help Johnson. He can’t do it because the U.K. doesn’t alone have the resources and, well, WW3 but increasingly there are calls from the armchair generals for one. Ultimately, when Kyiv falls and this war turns into Syria redux, a lot of the blame for that will come from said Monday morning quarterbacks and fall on Johnson’s shoulders. He can’t really win.

    Please enlighten me on which NATO country disagrees with Boris over no fly zones

    When have you heard UVDL, Macron, Biden endorse enforcing no fly zones
    You miss my point spectacularly. Our narcissistic political culture will blame Johnson for this - ignoring the fact that he can’t do it without the others. The fact that the other leaders take the same line doest matter. Johnson is to blame for that having implicitly peddled the line that we can do everything on our own.
    I simply do not agree with you - there is no appetite for the RAF to confront Russian aircraft over Ukraine, and it is the agreed position of the entire opposition
    It’s not the agreed position of the entire Tory Party or press. Not by a long shot.
    If Johnson gets the blame for something that is not his fault it is karma. He has got away with lots of things that he shouldn't have got away with him. I think he will have little sympathy from many of us. That said, I would far rather he lost power for being an incompetent hypocritical liar. When? It can't be too soon.
    Er...

    If Johnson gets the blame for starting WWIII when it's not his fault, I am struggling to see that as karma, given, y'know... WWIII.
    For some reason I can see certain people in the state of the traffic warden from Threads going - "At least that fucker Johnson....."
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,231
    AlistairM said:

    A Russian military column tried to enter Bucha, a suburb to Kyiv, last night.

    The Ukrainian Army launched an ambush attack on it with the NLAW anti-tank missiles donated in large numbers by Great Britain.

    The result can be seen below.

    More NLAWs need to be sent to Kyiv!

    🇺🇦

    https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1498919606370590725

    Hopefully this is genuine. If the Ukrainians have got anti-tank positions encircling Kyiv then it is going to be very bloody for the Russians to get through. On narrow streets one knocked out tank is going to then present a serious obstacle to overcome.

    I hope that they were paid for rather than donated.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586

    AlistairM said:

    A Russian military column tried to enter Bucha, a suburb to Kyiv, last night.

    The Ukrainian Army launched an ambush attack on it with the NLAW anti-tank missiles donated in large numbers by Great Britain.

    The result can be seen below.

    More NLAWs need to be sent to Kyiv!

    🇺🇦

    https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1498919606370590725

    Hopefully this is genuine. If the Ukrainians have got anti-tank positions encircling Kyiv then it is going to be very bloody for the Russians to get through. On narrow streets one knocked out tank is going to then present a serious obstacle to overcome.

    I hope that they were paid for rather than donated.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease

    They pay for or return anything not used?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,586

    AlistairM said:

    A Russian military column tried to enter Bucha, a suburb to Kyiv, last night.

    The Ukrainian Army launched an ambush attack on it with the NLAW anti-tank missiles donated in large numbers by Great Britain.

    The result can be seen below.

    More NLAWs need to be sent to Kyiv!

    🇺🇦

    https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1498919606370590725

    Hopefully this is genuine. If the Ukrainians have got anti-tank positions encircling Kyiv then it is going to be very bloody for the Russians to get through. On narrow streets one knocked out tank is going to then present a serious obstacle to overcome.

    I hope that they were paid for rather than donated.
    Why?
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,080
    edited March 2022

    AlistairM said:

    A Russian military column tried to enter Bucha, a suburb to Kyiv, last night.

    The Ukrainian Army launched an ambush attack on it with the NLAW anti-tank missiles donated in large numbers by Great Britain.

    The result can be seen below.

    More NLAWs need to be sent to Kyiv!

    🇺🇦

    https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1498919606370590725

    Hopefully this is genuine. If the Ukrainians have got anti-tank positions encircling Kyiv then it is going to be very bloody for the Russians to get through. On narrow streets one knocked out tank is going to then present a serious obstacle to overcome.

    I hope that they were paid for rather than donated.
    Why?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586

    Sandpit said:

    Andy_JS said:

    MattW said:

    eek said:

    Are some people terminally stupid when it comes to point scoring

    Alix Culbertson
    @alixculbertson
    OneWeb was saved from bankruptcy by the British taxpayer. It is set to launch 36 satellites from a Russian-owned I in Kazakhstan this week, on Russian-owned rockets.

    It’s believed to already have been paid for.

    Should it still go ahead?

    If it's been paid for then it needs to go ahead - what you can't do is use it for future launches.

    It's an interesting one. Alix Cuthbertson is a Sky political reporter.

    Based in London, but UK Gov stake now down to 20-25%, based in London, plus a golden share and whatever else is built into the agreement. The service can reach N of 50 degrees North. With far larger shares being held by the Indian interest - and India has (if I am up to date) stood back from such thorough sanctions as used elsewhere.

    Do we even have the power to stop it?

    There are another 5 launches planned for 2022, currently from Russia.

    But it would not surprise me if Russia postponed the launch themselves.

    Wasn't this one of Dom's projects?
    The launches were booked and bought before the bankruptcy. The guy who ran OneWeb into the ground was hard core Elon Musk hater and the only way to even vaguely close the numbers was the cheap launch via Russia.

    The first thing that happened, as part of the emergence from bankruptcy was moving to a newer design of satellite (aka Gen 2). This will be launched, almost certainly, from India. It can't be launched from Russia due to export controls issues.

    This was another nail in the coffin of Russian space technology.
    I'm a bit concerned about the International Space Station.
    I am, a bit. But, if nothing else, the Russians have people on the station. To actually fuck things up would require them to be suicidal.
    If they have any sense, they’ll ask the Americans for a ride home with SpaceX, and claim asylum when they get there.
    They physically can't do that - the SpaceX space suits are custom to the astronaut and the Dragon systems aren't compatible with the Russian suits. So even if SpaceX sent up an empty Dragon.....

    Unless they were to return to earth without a space suit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz_11
    AIUI the 'space suits' currently used by SpaceX are basically just emergency pressure suits - and nowhere near EVA suits (although it looks like they're working on them). Is there a technical reason why the suits would be required for human 'cargo' ? They wouldn't have comms or emergency supplies such as air, but AFAIAA a person could return in shirt sleeves.
    Returning in shirt sleeves is what killed the Soyuz 11 crew - cabin pressure leak and they couldn't do anything.

    The SpaceX suits are, apparently half way to EVA suits. Because they are much more form fitted and have a lot of resistance to ballooning built in, when inflated they don't completely immobilise the wearer, unlike many of the capsule suit design. Most of the work to create an EVA suit based on them is adding multiple redundancies to systems, and "hardening" the outside of the suit. Not sure if they are adding another layer - I don't think so.
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,729



    But does Putin want one? I do worry that we've driven sanctions to the maximum already, leaving little incentive for Putin not to go the whole hog and simply occupy the country. It'd be quite mad to want to occupy an entire, largely hostile, country, but thinking Putin wasn't mad is what made me think he wouldn't invade at all, so who knows?

    I think Putin is motivated by his historico-philosophical fantasy.

    He wants the lands back that he believes historically belong to Russia, so not the whole of the present-day Ukraine.

    Of course, Western Ukraine was never part of historic Russia. He wants the Black Sea coast and the lands east of the Dneiper.

    The question is whether he could occupy and keep those parts of the country. That depends on how much the rest of Russia shares his vision & are willing to accept the pain.

    I think Putin's view of history is quite common amongst Russians.
    I think this is probably right. Unfortunately not sure what is going to prevent it. He's already annexed Crimea and turned Belarus into a puppet.

    My belief FWIW is that Putin is most interested in his legacy. Sees himself in the tradition of Stalin and the more consequential Tsars.

    He found Mother Russia: weak, diminished, despised.

    He left Mother Russia: strong, enlarged, feared.

    ...and bankrupted.
    Well, yes. But I really don't think Putin is bothered much by economic pain, or any other form of pain for that matter. Russia will endure. It's not as though Moscow or St Petersburg are being invested, and they survived that a few times.

    The point is that the map has changed. Russia will, quite literally, be bigger. And that is likely to be a keeper.
    Once Ukraine has been divided, then (as in Cyprus) the populations will re-arrange themselves.

    The process will only be accelerated by the accession of rump-Ukraine into the EU (if/when it happens). Because that will lead to still further de-population -- at least if Estonia, Latvia & Lithuania are any guide.

    I think Putin might have wanted to swallow all of Ukraine at outset. The strength of the resistance probably makes that very unlikely now.

    But the parts of Ukraine that Putin is really interested in, I think he will get & probably keep.
    So we end up with East Ukraine being integrated into Russia, while West Ukraine joins the EU and NATO. Quite a contrast in fate.

    Question, I suppose, then is how will the people in the East react? We know that even there they overwhelmingly voted for independence. And what of Belarus? Not a happy population there, either, under the thumb of a dictator.

    Both populations behind a new Iron Curtain.

    You may be right about a re-arrangement of population but it will have to be an enormous one if those two entities are to be kept willingly within the Russian sphere in the longer term. It's not the end of history by any means.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 54,677



    But does Putin want one? I do worry that we've driven sanctions to the maximum already, leaving little incentive for Putin not to go the whole hog and simply occupy the country. It'd be quite mad to want to occupy an entire, largely hostile, country, but thinking Putin wasn't mad is what made me think he wouldn't invade at all, so who knows?

    I think Putin is motivated by his historico-philosophical fantasy.

    He wants the lands back that he believes historically belong to Russia, so not the whole of the present-day Ukraine.

    Of course, Western Ukraine was never part of historic Russia. He wants the Black Sea coast and the lands east of the Dneiper.

    The question is whether he could occupy and keep those parts of the country. That depends on how much the rest of Russia shares his vision & are willing to accept the pain.

    I think Putin's view of history is quite common amongst Russians.
    I think this is probably right. Unfortunately not sure what is going to prevent it. He's already annexed Crimea and turned Belarus into a puppet.

    My belief FWIW is that Putin is most interested in his legacy. Sees himself in the tradition of Stalin and the more consequential Tsars.

    He found Mother Russia: weak, diminished, despised.

    He left Mother Russia: strong, enlarged, feared.

    ...and bankrupted.
    Well, yes. But I really don't think Putin is bothered much by economic pain, or any other form of pain for that matter. Russia will endure. It's not as though Moscow or St Petersburg are being invested, and they survived that a few times.

    The point is that the map has changed. Russia will, quite literally, be bigger. And that is likely to be a keeper.
    Once Ukraine has been divided, then (as in Cyprus) the populations will re-arrange themselves.

    The process will only be accelerated by the accession of rump-Ukraine into the EU (if/when it happens). Because that will lead to still further de-population -- at least if Estonia, Latvia & Lithuania are any guide.

    I think Putin might have wanted to swallow all of Ukraine at outset. The strength of the resistance probably makes that very unlikely now.

    But the parts of Ukraine that Putin is really interested in, I think he will get & probably keep.
    He’s already got the best Russian bit. Crimea. The only remaining chunks that he could sustain and subdue are coalmining dumps that will be a drain on the Russian Treasury.

    I suppose the whole Black Sea/Azov coast to Crimea would help make the geography look more coherently “Russian”

    I can’t see putin ever successfully capturing and pacifying Kharkiv, Kyiv and Lviv, not now. He can either smash them so hard everyone leaves (literally starve and/or erase them), or enforce temporary, ruthless and expensive puppet rule that will fall in months
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,342
    Can anyone see a plausible route to a relatively peaceful solution?
    I'm struggling.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Russia's soldiers loot food from a supermarket in Kherson. Lavrov would call it a "special liberation operation"

    https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1498969294104891393?s=20
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,491
    AlistairM said:

    A Russian military column tried to enter Bucha, a suburb to Kyiv, last night.

    The Ukrainian Army launched an ambush attack on it with the NLAW anti-tank missiles donated in large numbers by Great Britain.

    The result can be seen below.

    More NLAWs need to be sent to Kyiv!

    🇺🇦

    https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1498919606370590725

    Hopefully this is genuine. If the Ukrainians have got anti-tank positions encircling Kyiv then it is going to be very bloody for the Russians to get through. On narrow streets one knocked out tank is going to then present a serious obstacle to overcome.

    I hope that is accurate, and that NLAWs are being sent as fast as they can use them!

    In the photo, it looks like one, (maybe 2) tanks at the back have not been damaged, I assume they are Russian. perhaps the Russians have taken command of the area anyway, sad it so.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 21,965
    AlistairM said:

    A Russian military column tried to enter Bucha, a suburb to Kyiv, last night.

    The Ukrainian Army launched an ambush attack on it with the NLAW anti-tank missiles donated in large numbers by Great Britain.

    The result can be seen below.

    More NLAWs need to be sent to Kyiv!

    🇺🇦

    https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1498919606370590725

    Hopefully this is genuine. If the Ukrainians have got anti-tank positions encircling Kyiv then it is going to be very bloody for the Russians to get through. On narrow streets one knocked out tank is going to then present a serious obstacle to overcome.

    I hope the rest of the lads sat in their tanks ready for the off get to see that photograph.

    Out the hatch, across the fields, back across the border.


  • But does Putin want one? I do worry that we've driven sanctions to the maximum already, leaving little incentive for Putin not to go the whole hog and simply occupy the country. It'd be quite mad to want to occupy an entire, largely hostile, country, but thinking Putin wasn't mad is what made me think he wouldn't invade at all, so who knows?

    I think Putin is motivated by his historico-philosophical fantasy.

    He wants the lands back that he believes historically belong to Russia, so not the whole of the present-day Ukraine.

    Of course, Western Ukraine was never part of historic Russia. He wants the Black Sea coast and the lands east of the Dneiper.

    The question is whether he could occupy and keep those parts of the country. That depends on how much the rest of Russia shares his vision & are willing to accept the pain.

    I think Putin's view of history is quite common amongst Russians.
    I think this is probably right. Unfortunately not sure what is going to prevent it. He's already annexed Crimea and turned Belarus into a puppet.

    My belief FWIW is that Putin is most interested in his legacy. Sees himself in the tradition of Stalin and the more consequential Tsars.

    He found Mother Russia: weak, diminished, despised.

    He left Mother Russia: strong, enlarged, feared.

    ...and bankrupted.
    Well, yes. But I really don't think Putin is bothered much by economic pain, or any other form of pain for that matter. Russia will endure. It's not as though Moscow or St Petersburg are being invested, and they survived that a few times.

    The point is that the map has changed. Russia will, quite literally, be bigger. And that is likely to be a keeper.
    Once Ukraine has been divided, then (as in Cyprus) the populations will re-arrange themselves.

    The process will only be accelerated by the accession of rump-Ukraine into the EU (if/when it happens). Because that will lead to still further de-population -- at least if Estonia, Latvia & Lithuania are any guide.

    I think Putin might have wanted to swallow all of Ukraine at outset. The strength of the resistance probably makes that very unlikely now.

    But the parts of Ukraine that Putin is really interested in, I think he will get & probably keep.
    He seems interested in Kyiv but I struggle to see how he can get and keep it?
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    Leon said:



    But does Putin want one? I do worry that we've driven sanctions to the maximum already, leaving little incentive for Putin not to go the whole hog and simply occupy the country. It'd be quite mad to want to occupy an entire, largely hostile, country, but thinking Putin wasn't mad is what made me think he wouldn't invade at all, so who knows?

    I think Putin is motivated by his historico-philosophical fantasy.

    He wants the lands back that he believes historically belong to Russia, so not the whole of the present-day Ukraine.

    Of course, Western Ukraine was never part of historic Russia. He wants the Black Sea coast and the lands east of the Dneiper.

    The question is whether he could occupy and keep those parts of the country. That depends on how much the rest of Russia shares his vision & are willing to accept the pain.

    I think Putin's view of history is quite common amongst Russians.
    I think this is probably right. Unfortunately not sure what is going to prevent it. He's already annexed Crimea and turned Belarus into a puppet.

    My belief FWIW is that Putin is most interested in his legacy. Sees himself in the tradition of Stalin and the more consequential Tsars.

    He found Mother Russia: weak, diminished, despised.

    He left Mother Russia: strong, enlarged, feared.

    ...and bankrupted.
    Well, yes. But I really don't think Putin is bothered much by economic pain, or any other form of pain for that matter. Russia will endure. It's not as though Moscow or St Petersburg are being invested, and they survived that a few times.

    The point is that the map has changed. Russia will, quite literally, be bigger. And that is likely to be a keeper.
    Once Ukraine has been divided, then (as in Cyprus) the populations will re-arrange themselves.

    The process will only be accelerated by the accession of rump-Ukraine into the EU (if/when it happens). Because that will lead to still further de-population -- at least if Estonia, Latvia & Lithuania are any guide.

    I think Putin might have wanted to swallow all of Ukraine at outset. The strength of the resistance probably makes that very unlikely now.

    But the parts of Ukraine that Putin is really interested in, I think he will get & probably keep.
    He’s already got the best Russian bit. Crimea. The only remaining chunks that he could sustain and subdue are coalmining dumps that will be a drain on the Russian Treasury.

    I suppose the whole Black Sea/Azov coast to Crimea would help make the geography look more coherently “Russian”

    I can’t see putin ever successfully capturing and pacifying Kharkiv, Kyiv and Lviv, not now. He can either smash them so hard everyone leaves (literally starve and/or erase them), or enforce temporary, ruthless and expensive puppet rule that will fall in months
    Certainly, the Crimea is the best bit.

    I'd say Odesa/Odessa is the next best.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,314
    BigRich said:

    AlistairM said:

    A Russian military column tried to enter Bucha, a suburb to Kyiv, last night.

    The Ukrainian Army launched an ambush attack on it with the NLAW anti-tank missiles donated in large numbers by Great Britain.

    The result can be seen below.

    More NLAWs need to be sent to Kyiv!

    🇺🇦

    https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1498919606370590725

    Hopefully this is genuine. If the Ukrainians have got anti-tank positions encircling Kyiv then it is going to be very bloody for the Russians to get through. On narrow streets one knocked out tank is going to then present a serious obstacle to overcome.

    I hope that is accurate, and that NLAWs are being sent as fast as they can use them!

    In the photo, it looks like one, (maybe 2) tanks at the back have not been damaged, I assume they are Russian. perhaps the Russians have taken command of the area anyway, sad it so.
    That is a new photo, but there have been similar images from that area yesterday. It’s at the head of “that convoy”, blocking yet another road to Kiev for the Russians.

    Yes, of course lets send every NLAW we can get our hands on, and order a few thousand more. Seriously effective weapons in this conflict.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,428

    BREAKING:

    Russia has brought former Ukrainian President Yanukovych to Minsk.

    Putin is preparing to proclaim him the new President of Ukraine.

    Source: @ukrpravda_news


    https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1498959815703506944?s=20

    This probably would have worked if Zelenskyy had not taken on almost a godlike status
  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 4,264

    BREAKING:

    Russia has brought former Ukrainian President Yanukovych to Minsk.

    Putin is preparing to proclaim him the new President of Ukraine.

    Source: @ukrpravda_news


    https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1498959815703506944?s=20

    This probably would have worked if Zelenskyy had not taken on almost a godlike status
    I don't think it would have worked regardless, the Ukrainian people have already overthrown him twice, and only become more independent since.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,599
    dixiedean said:

    Can anyone see a plausible route to a relatively peaceful solution?
    I'm struggling.

    Russia gets Crimea plus referenda in Donbass and Luhansk.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677

    Russia's soldiers loot food from a supermarket in Kherson. Lavrov would call it a "special liberation operation"

    https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1498969294104891393?s=20

    We used to do that on the reg in Basra. Although the Russians are probably far better provisioned than we were and have less of an excuse.

    If that's all they're doing then they are behaving extraordinarily well by the standards of occupying forces.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,851
    The political weather in the UK has definitely changed.

    During 'Partygate' the there was more chance of bumping into the Loch Ness Monster than a Tory on PB......

    But now they're slowly raising their heads above the parapet and even saying nice things about 'Boris'.....

    In fact if it wasn't that so many of them have returned with a different username it would be like old times!

  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,491
    dixiedean said:

    Can anyone see a plausible route to a relatively peaceful solution?
    I'm struggling.

    Putin has a hart attack?

    Other than that, I dont see a peaceful one, but outcomes include:

    1) Russian protests in Russian cities grow and overthrow the government.
    2) Russian solders mutiny or desert in such large numbers that Russia has to retreat
    3) Ukraine agrees cease fire, and ceads a big bit of land.
    4) it goes Nuclear.

    the best of these I think is 1) and there have been reasonably big protests, its hard to tell but they don't seem to have gone that much over the last 6 days, perhaps I'm wrong and perhaps they will,
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,551
    I wonder how secure Lukashenko is? He might fall before Putin.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172



    So we end up with East Ukraine being integrated into Russia, while West Ukraine joins the EU and NATO. Quite a contrast in fate.

    Question, I suppose, then is how will the people in the East react? We know that even there they overwhelmingly voted for independence. And what of Belarus? Not a happy population there, either, under the thumb of a dictator.

    Both populations behind a new Iron Curtain.

    You may be right about a re-arrangement of population but it will have to be an enormous one if those two entities are to be kept willingly within the Russian sphere in the longer term. It's not the end of history by any means.

    It is a huge re-arrangement viewed from the here and now.

    But, I wonder if the proper yardstick is perhaps the end of WW2, when there were huge re-arrangements of population.

    Both here are in former Yugoslavia, what is happening has just been delayed from 1945.

    Whatever, if I was a smart 21 year old living in any bit of Ukraine, I'd want to move to the West. :(
  • Roger said:

    The political weather in the UK has definitely changed.

    During 'Partygate' the there was more chance of bumping into the Loch Ness Monster than a Tory on PB......

    But now they're slowly raising their heads above the parapet and even saying nice things about 'Boris'.....

    In fact if it wasn't that so many of them have returned with a different username it would be like old times!

    Interesting times for many Tories. Their jingistic worldview is being swept away by events (dear boy, events!). Witness the disgraceful attempt to block Ukranian forrin coming in and the repeated backsliding as they realised that the public haven't entirely been transformed into the cold-hearted brutes they hoped.

    And witness the EU. Yes they were a bit slower than us in waking up to the issue. But having done so have utterly transformed their position.

    In summary the post Ukraine war world will have far closer alliances and alignment across both NATO and the EU. The Tories previous position of the EUSSR being the Bad People petulantly bullying blighty and needing to be utterly ignored as we replace all their trade with our new NZ trade deal which goes live in 15 years just doesn't look like reality any more.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,851
    Dura_Ace said:

    Russia's soldiers loot food from a supermarket in Kherson. Lavrov would call it a "special liberation operation"

    https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1498969294104891393?s=20

    We used to do that on the reg in Basra. Although the Russians are probably far better provisioned than we were and have less of an excuse.

    If that's all they're doing then they are behaving extraordinarily well by the standards of occupying forces.
    Not such a big deal. Even Richard Madeley was caught doing that
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,342

    dixiedean said:

    Can anyone see a plausible route to a relatively peaceful solution?
    I'm struggling.

    Russia gets Crimea plus referenda in Donbass and Luhansk.
    OK. I appreciate the effort.
    But Putin already has all three. Referenda means he's in danger of losing part of what he has. Non-starter.
  • BigRich said:

    dixiedean said:

    Can anyone see a plausible route to a relatively peaceful solution?
    I'm struggling.

    Putin has a hart attack?

    Other than that, I dont see a peaceful one, but outcomes include:

    1) Russian protests in Russian cities grow and overthrow the government.
    2) Russian solders mutiny or desert in such large numbers that Russia has to retreat
    3) Ukraine agrees cease fire, and ceads a big bit of land.
    4) it goes Nuclear.

    the best of these I think is 1) and there have been reasonably big protests, its hard to tell but they don't seem to have gone that much over the last 6 days, perhaps I'm wrong and perhaps they will,
    To be fair it would be pretty peaceful across large parts of the northern hemisphere if option 4 comes to pass. Wouldn't be much left to make a fuss.
  • Nigelb said:



    But does Putin want one? I do worry that we've driven sanctions to the maximum already, leaving little incentive for Putin not to go the whole hog and simply occupy the country. It'd be quite mad to want to occupy an entire, largely hostile, country, but thinking Putin wasn't mad is what made me think he wouldn't invade at all, so who knows?

    I think Putin is motivated by his historico-philosophical fantasy.

    He wants the lands back that he believes historically belong to Russia, so not the whole of the present-day Ukraine.

    Of course, Western Ukraine was never part of historic Russia. He wants the Black Sea coast and the lands east of the Dneiper.

    The question is whether he could occupy and keep those parts of the country. That depends on how much the rest of Russia shares his vision & are willing to accept the pain.

    I think Putin's view of history is quite common amongst Russians.
    I think this is probably right. Unfortunately not sure what is going to prevent it. He's already annexed Crimea and turned Belarus into a puppet.

    My belief FWIW is that Putin is most interested in his legacy. Sees himself in the tradition of Stalin and the more consequential Tsars.

    He found Mother Russia: weak, diminished, despised.

    He left Mother Russia: strong, enlarged, feared.

    He spent two decades trying to rebuild Russia.
    And undid that in two weeks.
    Russia is a trashed brand, whatever happens next.

    It's finished. It will become a minor player in world affairs. In the end, it won't even be able to afford to service its nukes, and when they go, it will fragment into an inconsequential little nation.

    If they give up the nukes quietly they might be allowed to live comfortably into an untroubled future. If they set them off, they will cause universal havoc, but the world won't end. Russia will.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,077



    So we end up with East Ukraine being integrated into Russia, while West Ukraine joins the EU and NATO. Quite a contrast in fate.

    Question, I suppose, then is how will the people in the East react? We know that even there they overwhelmingly voted for independence. And what of Belarus? Not a happy population there, either, under the thumb of a dictator.

    Both populations behind a new Iron Curtain.

    You may be right about a re-arrangement of population but it will have to be an enormous one if those two entities are to be kept willingly within the Russian sphere in the longer term. It's not the end of history by any means.

    It is a huge re-arrangement viewed from the here and now.

    But, I wonder if the proper yardstick is perhaps the end of WW2, when there were huge re-arrangements of population.

    Both here are in former Yugoslavia, what is happening has just been delayed from 1945.

    Whatever, if I was a smart 21 year old living in any bit of Ukraine, I'd want to move to the West. :(
    If I was a smart 21 year old in Russia I would be hoping to take advantage of any chance to get to the west.

  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,342
    BigRich said:

    dixiedean said:

    Can anyone see a plausible route to a relatively peaceful solution?
    I'm struggling.

    Putin has a hart attack?

    Other than that, I dont see a peaceful one, but outcomes include:

    1) Russian protests in Russian cities grow and overthrow the government.
    2) Russian solders mutiny or desert in such large numbers that Russia has to retreat
    3) Ukraine agrees cease fire, and ceads a big bit of land.
    4) it goes Nuclear.

    the best of these I think is 1) and there have been reasonably big protests, its hard to tell but they don't seem to have gone that much over the last 6 days, perhaps I'm wrong and perhaps they will,
    1 or 2 would be good. But they are verging on wishful thinking.
    3 is plausible, but is only a short term solution. And would be a shocking vindication that might is right.
    4. I said "relatively peaceful". :)
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    Europe's largest nuclear power plant ?

    City, where the largest NPP in Europe is located, is preparing for battle. Russian army pushed towards Energodar.–City Mayor, 11pm https://web.telegram.org/z/#-1659159251
    National Guard of Ukraine guards the NPP and city. The battles would be very dangerous there. Locals are blocking the road.

    https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1498969950916165632
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    dixiedean said:

    Can anyone see a plausible route to a relatively peaceful solution?
    I'm struggling.

    Putin's usual way to wind these things up is with a frozen conflict. Occupy and repress a large part of eastern Ukraine with a land bridge to Crimea and ideally Transnistria. Wait for regime change in whatever's left of Ukraine and try to tip it into failed state status. The western powers will lose interest in it soon enough (remember when everyone had plenty of fucks to give about Afghanistan). Try again and grab another slice in 10-15 years.

  • Barnesian said:

    I wonder how secure Lukashenko is? He might fall before Putin.

    He was barely holding on before all this kicked off.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,895
    ...
  • AlistairMAlistairM Posts: 2,005
    Konotop’s mayor: - To fight back or to surrender?
    People: - To fight back!
    Mayor: - Yes, I think we should fight. We should decide all together!
    People: - Fight back!

    https://twitter.com/KSergatskova/status/1498957170079117314

    The idea that Russia will not face an insurgency if they win the war is fanciful. Russia will have turned anyone who was fairly neutral to them against them now after their behaviour.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,401
    Dura_Ace said:

    dixiedean said:

    Can anyone see a plausible route to a relatively peaceful solution?
    I'm struggling.

    Putin's usual way to wind these things up is with a frozen conflict. Occupy and repress a large part of eastern Ukraine with a land bridge to Crimea and ideally Transnistria. Wait for regime change in whatever's left of Ukraine and try to tip it into failed state status. The western powers will lose interest in it soon enough (remember when everyone had plenty of fucks to give about Afghanistan). Try again and grab another slice in 10-15 years.

    He hasn't got ten years.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,774
    Leon said:



    But does Putin want one? I do worry that we've driven sanctions to the maximum already, leaving little incentive for Putin not to go the whole hog and simply occupy the country. It'd be quite mad to want to occupy an entire, largely hostile, country, but thinking Putin wasn't mad is what made me think he wouldn't invade at all, so who knows?

    I think Putin is motivated by his historico-philosophical fantasy.

    He wants the lands back that he believes historically belong to Russia, so not the whole of the present-day Ukraine.

    Of course, Western Ukraine was never part of historic Russia. He wants the Black Sea coast and the lands east of the Dneiper.

    The question is whether he could occupy and keep those parts of the country. That depends on how much the rest of Russia shares his vision & are willing to accept the pain.

    I think Putin's view of history is quite common amongst Russians.
    I think this is probably right. Unfortunately not sure what is going to prevent it. He's already annexed Crimea and turned Belarus into a puppet.

    My belief FWIW is that Putin is most interested in his legacy. Sees himself in the tradition of Stalin and the more consequential Tsars.

    He found Mother Russia: weak, diminished, despised.

    He left Mother Russia: strong, enlarged, feared.

    ...and bankrupted.
    Well, yes. But I really don't think Putin is bothered much by economic pain, or any other form of pain for that matter. Russia will endure. It's not as though Moscow or St Petersburg are being invested, and they survived that a few times.

    The point is that the map has changed. Russia will, quite literally, be bigger. And that is likely to be a keeper.
    Once Ukraine has been divided, then (as in Cyprus) the populations will re-arrange themselves.

    The process will only be accelerated by the accession of rump-Ukraine into the EU (if/when it happens). Because that will lead to still further de-population -- at least if Estonia, Latvia & Lithuania are any guide.

    I think Putin might have wanted to swallow all of Ukraine at outset. The strength of the resistance probably makes that very unlikely now.

    But the parts of Ukraine that Putin is really interested in, I think he will get & probably keep.
    He’s already got the best Russian bit. Crimea. The only remaining chunks that he could sustain and subdue are coalmining dumps that will be a drain on the Russian Treasury.

    I suppose the whole Black Sea/Azov coast to Crimea would help make the geography look more coherently “Russian”

    I can’t see putin ever successfully capturing and pacifying Kharkiv, Kyiv and Lviv, not now. He can either smash them so hard everyone leaves (literally starve and/or erase them), or enforce temporary, ruthless and expensive puppet rule that will fall in months
    The outline of the Russian plan was revealed in that map within the Belorussian presentation. Several of the thrusts. such as the one near Odessa, haven't started on the ground as yet.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,080
    dixiedean said:

    Can anyone see a plausible route to a relatively peaceful solution?
    I'm struggling.

    At the moment both sides believe they can win more by continuing to fight than they can achieve by giving the other side enough to bring the fighting to an end.

    Both sides are probably right.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,342
    Dura_Ace said:

    dixiedean said:

    Can anyone see a plausible route to a relatively peaceful solution?
    I'm struggling.

    Putin's usual way to wind these things up is with a frozen conflict. Occupy and repress a large part of eastern Ukraine with a land bridge to Crimea and ideally Transnistria. Wait for regime change in whatever's left of Ukraine and try to tip it into failed state status. The western powers will lose interest in it soon enough (remember when everyone had plenty of fucks to give about Afghanistan). Try again and grab another slice in 10-15 years.

    Mmm. That's probably the most optimistic and peaceable medium term solution.
    Don't think Putin has 10-15 years, mind.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 54,677

    Nigelb said:



    But does Putin want one? I do worry that we've driven sanctions to the maximum already, leaving little incentive for Putin not to go the whole hog and simply occupy the country. It'd be quite mad to want to occupy an entire, largely hostile, country, but thinking Putin wasn't mad is what made me think he wouldn't invade at all, so who knows?

    I think Putin is motivated by his historico-philosophical fantasy.

    He wants the lands back that he believes historically belong to Russia, so not the whole of the present-day Ukraine.

    Of course, Western Ukraine was never part of historic Russia. He wants the Black Sea coast and the lands east of the Dneiper.

    The question is whether he could occupy and keep those parts of the country. That depends on how much the rest of Russia shares his vision & are willing to accept the pain.

    I think Putin's view of history is quite common amongst Russians.
    I think this is probably right. Unfortunately not sure what is going to prevent it. He's already annexed Crimea and turned Belarus into a puppet.

    My belief FWIW is that Putin is most interested in his legacy. Sees himself in the tradition of Stalin and the more consequential Tsars.

    He found Mother Russia: weak, diminished, despised.

    He left Mother Russia: strong, enlarged, feared.

    He spent two decades trying to rebuild Russia.
    And undid that in two weeks.
    Russia is a trashed brand, whatever happens next.

    It's finished. It will become a minor player in world affairs. In the end, it won't even be able to afford to service its nukes, and when they go, it will fragment into an inconsequential little nation.

    If they give up the nukes quietly they might be allowed to live comfortably into an untroubled future. If they set them off, they will cause universal havoc, but the world won't end. Russia will.
    This is silly. Russia is a great power. By sheer dint of its geographic size and resources - and a still huge population. 145m people

    It has a long, remarkable history. It has waned and waxed as an empire. It’s culture is profound - great literature, music, art, architecture

    The idea it is going to become some trivial Slavic Belgium or an impoverished Denmark is daft. It has survived insane leaders before and it will survive Mad Putin (unless he nukes the world) and it will still be a great power

    Ironically, climate change means Russia’s economic future is probably rather bright. Once they get over this present disaster
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,359
    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    Can anyone see a plausible route to a relatively peaceful solution?
    I'm struggling.

    Russia gets Crimea plus referenda in Donbass and Luhansk.
    OK. I appreciate the effort.
    But Putin already has all three. Referenda means he's in danger of losing part of what he has. Non-starter.
    David Cameron killed off that option.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,736
    edited March 2022



    But does Putin want one? I do worry that we've driven sanctions to the maximum already, leaving little incentive for Putin not to go the whole hog and simply occupy the country. It'd be quite mad to want to occupy an entire, largely hostile, country, but thinking Putin wasn't mad is what made me think he wouldn't invade at all, so who knows?

    I think Putin is motivated by his historico-philosophical fantasy.

    He wants the lands back that he believes historically belong to Russia, so not the whole of the present-day Ukraine.

    Of course, Western Ukraine was never part of historic Russia. He wants the Black Sea coast and the lands east of the Dneiper.

    The question is whether he could occupy and keep those parts of the country. That depends on how much the rest of Russia shares his vision & are willing to accept the pain.

    I think Putin's view of history is quite common amongst Russians.
    I think this is probably right. Unfortunately not sure what is going to prevent it. He's already annexed Crimea and turned Belarus into a puppet.

    My belief FWIW is that Putin is most interested in his legacy. Sees himself in the tradition of Stalin and the more consequential Tsars.

    He found Mother Russia: weak, diminished, despised.

    He left Mother Russia: strong, enlarged, feared.

    ...and bankrupted.
    Well, yes. But I really don't think Putin is bothered much by economic pain, or any other form of pain for that matter. Russia will endure. It's not as though Moscow or St Petersburg are being invested, and they survived that a few times.

    The point is that the map has changed. Russia will, quite literally, be bigger. And that is likely to be a keeper.
    Once Ukraine has been divided, then (as in Cyprus) the populations will re-arrange themselves.

    The process will only be accelerated by the accession of rump-Ukraine into the EU (if/when it happens). Because that will lead to still further de-population -- at least if Estonia, Latvia & Lithuania are any guide.

    I think Putin might have wanted to swallow all of Ukraine at outset. The strength of the resistance probably makes that very unlikely now.

    But the parts of Ukraine that Putin is really interested in, I think he will get & probably keep.
    Difficult to see Ukraine agreeing to cede an inch after this, isn't it? If Russia does get and keep parts, I doubt their possession of them will have much international recognition. Will it have been worth the degree to which he will have damaged the Russian economy and solidified hostility to and distrust of Russia throughout the world?
  • Scott_xP said:

    ...

    Not bad for Christian Adams.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,690
    Barnesian said:

    I wonder how secure Lukashenko is? He might fall before Putin.

    If I was him I’d be very reluctant about sending the army out the country in any numbers.
  • Dura_Ace said:

    dixiedean said:

    Can anyone see a plausible route to a relatively peaceful solution?
    I'm struggling.

    Putin's usual way to wind these things up is with a frozen conflict. Occupy and repress a large part of eastern Ukraine with a land bridge to Crimea and ideally Transnistria. Wait for regime change in whatever's left of Ukraine and try to tip it into failed state status. The western powers will lose interest in it soon enough (remember when everyone had plenty of fucks to give about Afghanistan). Try again and grab another slice in 10-15 years.

    He hasn't got ten years.
    Has he got ten weeks?

    He's royally screwed up, hasn't he? Every day that passes he's burning through his reserves.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,401

    Illia Ponomarenko
    @IAPonomarenko
    ·
    1h
    Yanykovych?
    Back as Ukraine’s “president” as a result of Russia’s war?
    Them in the Kremlin are just plain fucking stupid.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,491
    If Putin 'Wins' and does get a bit of Ukraine as his puppet state, and the would hates him. Then one of his next obstacles will be the 17 March 2024 presidential election. If he is still alive.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Russian_presidential_election

    If he does not stand, then there is a risk the next president arrests him and hands him to the war crimes court. if he doe stand he will be able to 'Rig' the election, but after 2 years of sanctions and lots of Zink Lined body bags, will he be revelation?

    I don't know, just a thought I had.
  • Does anyone know how much damage we are collectively doing to the Russian economy and how long Putin will put up with it before he acts / is ousted?

    Wondering if the economic position is more of a threat to him than the growing military failure / escalation.

    Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising had a conventional WWIII triggered when economic catastrophe inside the Soviet Union forced them to attack to try and secure more resources - 'do it now whilst we still can'. I wonder if our successful trashing of Russian economic capabilities might not drive a similar lunatic decision.

    Not that I think we should stop doing so. I'm just curious.
  • Leon said:

    Nigelb said:



    But does Putin want one? I do worry that we've driven sanctions to the maximum already, leaving little incentive for Putin not to go the whole hog and simply occupy the country. It'd be quite mad to want to occupy an entire, largely hostile, country, but thinking Putin wasn't mad is what made me think he wouldn't invade at all, so who knows?

    I think Putin is motivated by his historico-philosophical fantasy.

    He wants the lands back that he believes historically belong to Russia, so not the whole of the present-day Ukraine.

    Of course, Western Ukraine was never part of historic Russia. He wants the Black Sea coast and the lands east of the Dneiper.

    The question is whether he could occupy and keep those parts of the country. That depends on how much the rest of Russia shares his vision & are willing to accept the pain.

    I think Putin's view of history is quite common amongst Russians.
    I think this is probably right. Unfortunately not sure what is going to prevent it. He's already annexed Crimea and turned Belarus into a puppet.

    My belief FWIW is that Putin is most interested in his legacy. Sees himself in the tradition of Stalin and the more consequential Tsars.

    He found Mother Russia: weak, diminished, despised.

    He left Mother Russia: strong, enlarged, feared.

    He spent two decades trying to rebuild Russia.
    And undid that in two weeks.
    Russia is a trashed brand, whatever happens next.

    It's finished. It will become a minor player in world affairs. In the end, it won't even be able to afford to service its nukes, and when they go, it will fragment into an inconsequential little nation.

    If they give up the nukes quietly they might be allowed to live comfortably into an untroubled future. If they set them off, they will cause universal havoc, but the world won't end. Russia will.
    This is silly. Russia is a great power. By sheer dint of its geographic size and resources - and a still huge population. 145m people

    It has a long, remarkable history. It has waned and waxed as an empire. It’s culture is profound - great literature, music, art, architecture

    The idea it is going to become some trivial Slavic Belgium or an impoverished Denmark is daft. It has survived insane leaders before and it will survive Mad Putin (unless he nukes the world) and it will still be a great power

    Ironically, climate change means Russia’s economic future is probably rather bright. Once they get over this present disaster
    Russia is not a great power.

    It has an economy poorer than Italy's, is Italy a great power?
    It has a population smaller than Nigeria's, is Nigeria a great power?

    It was a great power, once. That's in its history now, and Putin has shown that to the world. The days of Russia as a great power to be feared are over now.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    Chris said:



    But does Putin want one? I do worry that we've driven sanctions to the maximum already, leaving little incentive for Putin not to go the whole hog and simply occupy the country. It'd be quite mad to want to occupy an entire, largely hostile, country, but thinking Putin wasn't mad is what made me think he wouldn't invade at all, so who knows?

    I think Putin is motivated by his historico-philosophical fantasy.

    He wants the lands back that he believes historically belong to Russia, so not the whole of the present-day Ukraine.

    Of course, Western Ukraine was never part of historic Russia. He wants the Black Sea coast and the lands east of the Dneiper.

    The question is whether he could occupy and keep those parts of the country. That depends on how much the rest of Russia shares his vision & are willing to accept the pain.

    I think Putin's view of history is quite common amongst Russians.
    I think this is probably right. Unfortunately not sure what is going to prevent it. He's already annexed Crimea and turned Belarus into a puppet.

    My belief FWIW is that Putin is most interested in his legacy. Sees himself in the tradition of Stalin and the more consequential Tsars.

    He found Mother Russia: weak, diminished, despised.

    He left Mother Russia: strong, enlarged, feared.

    ...and bankrupted.
    Well, yes. But I really don't think Putin is bothered much by economic pain, or any other form of pain for that matter. Russia will endure. It's not as though Moscow or St Petersburg are being invested, and they survived that a few times.

    The point is that the map has changed. Russia will, quite literally, be bigger. And that is likely to be a keeper.
    Once Ukraine has been divided, then (as in Cyprus) the populations will re-arrange themselves.

    The process will only be accelerated by the accession of rump-Ukraine into the EU (if/when it happens). Because that will lead to still further de-population -- at least if Estonia, Latvia & Lithuania are any guide.

    I think Putin might have wanted to swallow all of Ukraine at outset. The strength of the resistance probably makes that very unlikely now.

    But the parts of Ukraine that Putin is really interested in, I think he will get & probably keep.
    Difficult to see Ukraine agreeing to cede an inch after this, isn't it? If Russia does get and keep parts, I doubt their possession of them will have much international recognition. Will it have been worth the degree to which he will have damaged the Russian economy and solidified hostility to and distrust of Russia throughout the world?
    I did not say it was worth it.

    The Republic of Northern Cyprus has endured all my lifetime. I suspect a de facto partition of Ukraine will endure.

    Eventually, everyone moves on.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,123
    Oh dear...

    https://order-order.com/2022/03/02/labour-by-election-candidate-weighed-up-pros-and-cons-of-violent-uprising/

    Ahead of tomorrow’s Birmingham Erdington by-election to replace the late Jack Dromey, GB News has unearthed footage of Labour candidate Paulette Hamilton appearing to question the value of democracy and considering “an uprising” to “get what we want“.

    According to GB News, a Labour Party spokesperson this morning said:

    “Paulette Hamilton is arguing for better representation for the black community in public life and as she is campaigning to become Birmingham’s first black MP she has a point.”
  • Leon said:

    Nigelb said:



    But does Putin want one? I do worry that we've driven sanctions to the maximum already, leaving little incentive for Putin not to go the whole hog and simply occupy the country. It'd be quite mad to want to occupy an entire, largely hostile, country, but thinking Putin wasn't mad is what made me think he wouldn't invade at all, so who knows?

    I think Putin is motivated by his historico-philosophical fantasy.

    He wants the lands back that he believes historically belong to Russia, so not the whole of the present-day Ukraine.

    Of course, Western Ukraine was never part of historic Russia. He wants the Black Sea coast and the lands east of the Dneiper.

    The question is whether he could occupy and keep those parts of the country. That depends on how much the rest of Russia shares his vision & are willing to accept the pain.

    I think Putin's view of history is quite common amongst Russians.
    I think this is probably right. Unfortunately not sure what is going to prevent it. He's already annexed Crimea and turned Belarus into a puppet.

    My belief FWIW is that Putin is most interested in his legacy. Sees himself in the tradition of Stalin and the more consequential Tsars.

    He found Mother Russia: weak, diminished, despised.

    He left Mother Russia: strong, enlarged, feared.

    He spent two decades trying to rebuild Russia.
    And undid that in two weeks.
    Russia is a trashed brand, whatever happens next.

    It's finished. It will become a minor player in world affairs. In the end, it won't even be able to afford to service its nukes, and when they go, it will fragment into an inconsequential little nation.

    If they give up the nukes quietly they might be allowed to live comfortably into an untroubled future. If they set them off, they will cause universal havoc, but the world won't end. Russia will.
    This is silly. Russia is a great power. By sheer dint of its geographic size and resources - and a still huge population. 145m people

    It has a long, remarkable history. It has waned and waxed as an empire. It’s culture is profound - great literature, music, art, architecture

    The idea it is going to become some trivial Slavic Belgium or an impoverished Denmark is daft. It has survived insane leaders before and it will survive Mad Putin (unless he nukes the world) and it will still be a great power

    Ironically, climate change means Russia’s economic future is probably rather bright. Once they get over this present disaster
    You need to use the past rather than the present tense there, Leon.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,491
    Scott_xP said:

    ...

    As far as I know Putin has been publicly backed by:

    Modora in Venezwala
    Lukasento in Belarus
    Assad in Syria

    (haven't checked the spelling of there names because they are all bad people and I don't feel like doing them that curtesy)

    Has anybody else backed then? North Korea?
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,736
    Dura_Ace said:

    dixiedean said:

    Can anyone see a plausible route to a relatively peaceful solution?
    I'm struggling.

    Putin's usual way to wind these things up is with a frozen conflict. Occupy and repress a large part of eastern Ukraine with a land bridge to Crimea and ideally Transnistria. Wait for regime change in whatever's left of Ukraine and try to tip it into failed state status. The western powers will lose interest in it soon enough (remember when everyone had plenty of fucks to give about Afghanistan). Try again and grab another slice in 10-15 years.

    Given that the Soviets were out of Afghanistan 10 years later and out of power in Moscow 12 years later, maybe not the best example.
  • AlistairMAlistairM Posts: 2,005
    When I saw this yesterday I refused to believe it was real. But now confirmed by (Nobel Prize-winning) @novaya_gazeta: primary school children arrested by police in Moscow for laying flowers at Ukrainian embassy holding signs saying “No To War”.
    https://twitter.com/ggatehouse/status/1498973917817548803

    Wow. Just wow.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586

    Does anyone know how much damage we are collectively doing to the Russian economy and how long Putin will put up with it before he acts / is ousted?

    Wondering if the economic position is more of a threat to him than the growing military failure / escalation.

    Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising had a conventional WWIII triggered when economic catastrophe inside the Soviet Union forced them to attack to try and secure more resources - 'do it now whilst we still can'. I wonder if our successful trashing of Russian economic capabilities might not drive a similar lunatic decision.

    Not that I think we should stop doing so. I'm just curious.

    No, we don't know. The effects of sanctions will be a surprise to everyone, I suspect. The existing ones will thoroughly trash the Russian economy. The big question is what happens when the Central Bank runs out of reserves.

    Yes, it is economic warfare vs Russian warfare in Ukraine.

    I suspect that when the sanctions start to hit things that Putin cares about - military capabilities, for example - he will lash out.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,736

    Chris said:



    But does Putin want one? I do worry that we've driven sanctions to the maximum already, leaving little incentive for Putin not to go the whole hog and simply occupy the country. It'd be quite mad to want to occupy an entire, largely hostile, country, but thinking Putin wasn't mad is what made me think he wouldn't invade at all, so who knows?

    I think Putin is motivated by his historico-philosophical fantasy.

    He wants the lands back that he believes historically belong to Russia, so not the whole of the present-day Ukraine.

    Of course, Western Ukraine was never part of historic Russia. He wants the Black Sea coast and the lands east of the Dneiper.

    The question is whether he could occupy and keep those parts of the country. That depends on how much the rest of Russia shares his vision & are willing to accept the pain.

    I think Putin's view of history is quite common amongst Russians.
    I think this is probably right. Unfortunately not sure what is going to prevent it. He's already annexed Crimea and turned Belarus into a puppet.

    My belief FWIW is that Putin is most interested in his legacy. Sees himself in the tradition of Stalin and the more consequential Tsars.

    He found Mother Russia: weak, diminished, despised.

    He left Mother Russia: strong, enlarged, feared.

    ...and bankrupted.
    Well, yes. But I really don't think Putin is bothered much by economic pain, or any other form of pain for that matter. Russia will endure. It's not as though Moscow or St Petersburg are being invested, and they survived that a few times.

    The point is that the map has changed. Russia will, quite literally, be bigger. And that is likely to be a keeper.
    Once Ukraine has been divided, then (as in Cyprus) the populations will re-arrange themselves.

    The process will only be accelerated by the accession of rump-Ukraine into the EU (if/when it happens). Because that will lead to still further de-population -- at least if Estonia, Latvia & Lithuania are any guide.

    I think Putin might have wanted to swallow all of Ukraine at outset. The strength of the resistance probably makes that very unlikely now.

    But the parts of Ukraine that Putin is really interested in, I think he will get & probably keep.
    Difficult to see Ukraine agreeing to cede an inch after this, isn't it? If Russia does get and keep parts, I doubt their possession of them will have much international recognition. Will it have been worth the degree to which he will have damaged the Russian economy and solidified hostility to and distrust of Russia throughout the world?
    I did not say it was worth it.
    I did not say you did.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,774
    edited March 2022

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:



    But does Putin want one? I do worry that we've driven sanctions to the maximum already, leaving little incentive for Putin not to go the whole hog and simply occupy the country. It'd be quite mad to want to occupy an entire, largely hostile, country, but thinking Putin wasn't mad is what made me think he wouldn't invade at all, so who knows?

    I think Putin is motivated by his historico-philosophical fantasy.

    He wants the lands back that he believes historically belong to Russia, so not the whole of the present-day Ukraine.

    Of course, Western Ukraine was never part of historic Russia. He wants the Black Sea coast and the lands east of the Dneiper.

    The question is whether he could occupy and keep those parts of the country. That depends on how much the rest of Russia shares his vision & are willing to accept the pain.

    I think Putin's view of history is quite common amongst Russians.
    I think this is probably right. Unfortunately not sure what is going to prevent it. He's already annexed Crimea and turned Belarus into a puppet.

    My belief FWIW is that Putin is most interested in his legacy. Sees himself in the tradition of Stalin and the more consequential Tsars.

    He found Mother Russia: weak, diminished, despised.

    He left Mother Russia: strong, enlarged, feared.

    He spent two decades trying to rebuild Russia.
    And undid that in two weeks.
    Russia is a trashed brand, whatever happens next.

    It's finished. It will become a minor player in world affairs. In the end, it won't even be able to afford to service its nukes, and when they go, it will fragment into an inconsequential little nation.

    If they give up the nukes quietly they might be allowed to live comfortably into an untroubled future. If they set them off, they will cause universal havoc, but the world won't end. Russia will.
    This is silly. Russia is a great power. By sheer dint of its geographic size and resources - and a still huge population. 145m people

    It has a long, remarkable history. It has waned and waxed as an empire. It’s culture is profound - great literature, music, art, architecture

    The idea it is going to become some trivial Slavic Belgium or an impoverished Denmark is daft. It has survived insane leaders before and it will survive Mad Putin (unless he nukes the world) and it will still be a great power

    Ironically, climate change means Russia’s economic future is probably rather bright. Once they get over this present disaster
    Russia is not a great power.

    It has an economy poorer than Italy's, is Italy a great power?
    It has a population smaller than Nigeria's, is Nigeria a great power?

    It was a great power, once. That's in its history now, and Putin has shown that to the world. The days of Russia as a great power to be feared are over now.
    Except that they have a lot of resources under Siberia, and in terms of the balance between powers, in the medium to long term, climate change is to their advantage.

    But I agree, in terms of immediate power both hard and soft, Putin's miscalculation has hobbled themselves considerably for the foreseeable.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,690
    Sberbank, largest bank in Russia, has essentially collapsed. It’s exiting Europe because it has insufficient liquidity to meet its obligations. It’s equity trades on the LSE via ADRs but is now trading at one cent.

    Meanwhile banks that trade the RUB are facing chaos. Margin calls out to clients that can’t / won’t be paid, no realistic ability to hedge any long RUB positions of any size and insufficient liquidity for trades to even settle. As for anyone daft enough to have agreed to finance Russian securities through reverse repos…

    On the commodities side, there was a pre-invasion assumption that Urals crude would be diverted to China. About 5mm bbls a day. But something is going wrong. Whether that’s a shipping issue or a trade finance issue I’m not sure. But Urals crude is suddenly toxic waste. Reportedly Trafigura marketed a cargo at an $18 discount to Brent and didn’t receive a single bid.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,342
    edited March 2022
    Apparently Ben Wallace, in response to Sweden's asylum offer, has said Russian deserters should go back to Russia and tell everyone what a disaster the War is.
    He's done OK, but I fear I have spotted a tiny flaw in that idea...
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586
    moonshine said:

    Sberbank, largest bank in Russia, has essentially collapsed. It’s exiting Europe because it has insufficient liquidity to meet its obligations. It’s equity trades on the LSE via ADRs but is now trading at one cent.

    Meanwhile banks that trade the RUB are facing chaos. Margin calls out to clients that can’t / won’t be paid, no realistic ability to hedge any long RUB positions of any size and insufficient liquidity for trades to even settle. As for anyone daft enough to have agreed to finance Russian securities through reverse repos…

    On the commodities side, there was a pre-invasion assumption that Urals crude would be diverted to China. About 5mm bbls a day. But something is going wrong. Whether that’s a shipping issue or a trade finance issue I’m not sure. But Urals crude is suddenly toxic waste. Reportedly Trafigura marketed a cargo at an $18 discount to Brent and didn’t receive a single bid.

    When *Trafigura* can't make a profit of your shit.....
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,364
    Mr P the P,

    I think Putin did a Ratner on the brand with his speech a couple of days before the invasion. The actual invasion proved he meant it. Difficult to see how the brand can recover with him in charge.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,774
    Breaking: Russia/Belo-R paralympic athletes to be allowed to compete as neutrals under the olympic flag
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,575
    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    eek said:

    Are some people terminally stupid when it comes to point scoring

    Alix Culbertson
    @alixculbertson
    OneWeb was saved from bankruptcy by the British taxpayer. It is set to launch 36 satellites from a Russian-owned launchpad in Kazakhstan this week, on Russian-owned rockets.

    It’s believed to already have been paid for.

    Should it still go ahead?

    If it's been paid for then it needs to go ahead - what you can't do is use it for future launches.

    It's an interesting one. Alix Cuthbertson is a Sky political reporter.

    Based in London, but UK Gov stake now down to 20-25%, based in London, plus a golden share and whatever else is built into the agreement. The service can reach N of 50 degrees North. With far larger shares being held by the Indian interest - and India has (if I am up to date) stood back from such thorough sanctions as used elsewhere.

    Do we even have the power to stop it?

    There are another 5 launches planned for 2022, currently from Russia.

    But it would not surprise me if Russia postponed the launch themselves.

    The other 5 launches of Gen 1 satellites can't now go ahead - the countries building/operating them are participating in the sanctions. So, if nothing else, you can't send the satellites to Russia for launch.

    The suggestion is that the best thing is to go ahead with the launch, since it gets the satellites out of Russia.

    The Gen 2 satellites already needed to go to a non-Russian launcher because of technology/ITAR issues.
    Hmmm. Russian Space Agency statement (but their own website is unreachable so unsure of source):

    Russian Space Agency: “If before 21.30 Friday Russia does not receive guarantees that British OneWeb satellites will not be used for military purposes, the launch vehicle will be removed from the launch. Any attempts to hack Russian satellites are casus belli.
    https://www.airlive.net/breaking-russian-space-agency-if-before-21-30-friday-russia-does-not-receive-guarantees-that-oneweb-satellites-will-not-be-used-for-military-purposes-soyuz-rocked-will-be-removed-from-the-launch/

    This could turn into the next episode of political mudslinging imo.
    Anon to cause ww3 by hacking Russian satellites?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,344
    edited March 2022



    But does Putin want one? I do worry that we've driven sanctions to the maximum already, leaving little incentive for Putin not to go the whole hog and simply occupy the country. It'd be quite mad to want to occupy an entire, largely hostile, country, but thinking Putin wasn't mad is what made me think he wouldn't invade at all, so who knows?

    I think Putin is motivated by his historico-philosophical fantasy.

    He wants the lands back that he believes historically belong to Russia, so not the whole of the present-day Ukraine.

    Of course, Western Ukraine was never part of historic Russia. He wants the Black Sea coast and the lands east of the Dneiper.

    The question is whether he could occupy and keep those parts of the country. That depends on how much the rest of Russia shares his vision & are willing to accept the pain.

    I think Putin's view of history is quite common amongst Russians.
    I think this is probably right. Unfortunately not sure what is going to prevent it. He's already annexed Crimea and turned Belarus into a puppet.

    My belief FWIW is that Putin is most interested in his legacy. Sees himself in the tradition of Stalin and the more consequential Tsars.

    He found Mother Russia: weak, diminished, despised.

    He left Mother Russia: strong, enlarged, feared.

    ...and bankrupted.
    Well, yes. But I really don't think Putin is bothered much by economic pain, or any other form of pain for that matter. Russia will endure. It's not as though Moscow or St Petersburg are being invested, and they survived that a few times.

    The point is that the map has changed. Russia will, quite literally, be bigger. And that is likely to be a keeper.
    Once Ukraine has been divided, then (as in Cyprus) the populations will re-arrange themselves.

    The process will only be accelerated by the accession of rump-Ukraine into the EU (if/when it happens). Because that will lead to still further de-population -- at least if Estonia, Latvia & Lithuania are any guide.

    I think Putin might have wanted to swallow all of Ukraine at outset. The strength of the resistance probably makes that very unlikely now.

    But the parts of Ukraine that Putin is really interested in, I think he will get & probably keep.
    Been having a bit of a refresher on population movements in Eastern Europe and South Russia post 1939, and especially post 1944. Absolutely massive; complete depopulation of areas and repopulation with people moved from elsewhere.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,895
    The International Paralympic Committee has announced that Russian and Belarusian athletes will be able to compete at the Paralympic Games in Beijing as neutral athletes

    For more on this and other news visit http://trib.al/Rx0iR33
  • Gary_BurtonGary_Burton Posts: 737
    HYUFD said:

    For laughs I just had a quick check on my 1 Jan 2022 predictions:

    1. Boris to still be PM on 31 December 2022.
    2. Labour to end the year ahead in the polls.
    3. Valérie Pécresse to win the French Presidential election.
    4. Dems to lose control of the Senate but narrowly retain the House in November.
    5. Donald Trump indicted for at least one offence.
    6. Two more covid ‘variants of significance’ to sweep the world.
    7. Official number of UK covid deaths to reach 210k by year end.
    8. Russia-Ukraine stand-off to continue.
    9. Bitcoin to collapse.
    10. FTSE 100 to peak above 8,000 before falling back by the end of the year.


    Number 8 is obviously a fail now. 3, 9, and 10 look decidedly unlikely.

    It's quite possible I could achieve 0/10 by the end of the year! :)

    I wouldn't rule out 9 yet.

    Bitcoin had been falling for months and while the past week has seen a recovery of sorts, led reportedly by Russians trying to get their money out of Russia, its even now still lower than it was at the start of the year.

    Russian buying of bitcoin can only continue for so long and eventually people are going to want to convert it to dollars or something else which could lead to it collapsing again.

    4 I don't understand, my understanding is they're far more likely to lose the House than the Senate? Seems odd to propose the opposite.
    Might be my bad, but I was thinking the Dems only need to lose one Senate seat to lose control. Whereas the House may be more promising:

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/

    ...but what do I know.
    My understanding is the 2022 Senate races are more favourable to the Democrats. Of the 34 races being ran, 20 are already GOP so there's only 14 Democrats. Of those 14, most are very safe, there's only one Democrat Senator not seeking re-election this term too.

    However the entire House has to be re-elected in the midterms and the GOP are likely to get enough there, even if they fail in the Senate.
    Indeed, plus the last 2 midterms in a President's first term, 2010 and 2018, the House saw a change of party in control, the Senate did not
    I can see the Democrats narrowly retaining the Senate. I would be surprised if Mark Kelly lost in Arizona for example.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,895
    Does TeamGB boycott now?
This discussion has been closed.