Incidentally the pictures of Russia bringing forward random civilian trucks and vehicles speak to the deep logistical hole they find themselves in.
An under-reported fact of ww2 was just how huge the logistical support America gave Russia. Over a third of all aviation fuel was supplied by the US, hundreds of thousands of trucks and astonishing amounts of explosives, copper and aluminium.
There is this myth about the great efficient Soviet/Russian war machine but reality is pretty different.
Russia, good at artillery bombardment, shit at supplying the artillery without help.
the west gave over 300,000 trucks to the USSR in WW2 while the Russians where able to produce about 150,000 of there own. so that's about 2/3 of there trucks.
We also delayed our own advance into Germany to let the Soviets catch up. Bizarre and still unexplained.
what source do you have for that claim about delaying the advance into Germany? My limied belief is Battle of the Bulge, failure of OP MARKET GARDEN, massive flooding around Netherlands and v fierce resistance from Germans was the real cause
I thought it was well-known. And basically was to allow the photo op of the allies all meeting up at a particular geographic location. But that may just be my faulty memory.
Pretty scandalous really. Ending up in tens of thousands more people than necessary living under a communist regime.
The occupation zones had already been decided at Yalta (if not earlier).
BTW, has anyone noticed how so much of the web chatter re: anti-Vax, has now shifted to pro-Putin?
That's what I'm being told in USA. Is that true here, and in UK? IF so, pretty interesting to put it mildly.
I have a fairly bonkers relative who was madly anti-vax and has now segued into being effortlessly pro-Putin. Ditto a friend (less of a friend at the moment)
It is bizarre but definitely a phenomenon. How does it work?
The government and media cannot be trusted on X Therefore the government and media cannot be trusted on 'anything', including Y Anyone saying the opposite of our government and media on Y is therefore truthful Something something Putin is just defending his country's interests
Yes, that sounds about right
My relative has bought the entire Putinist spiel, which really surprises me (he is smart). He rants about Ukraine being dominated by "Nazis" like this is obvious and terrible, yet he has not mentioned Ukraine in his lifetime, AFAIK, until this war. So the evil Nazi regime in Kyiv didn't bother him until Putin decided to "take it out", at which point the destruction of the Nazis became imperative and Putin is being hypocritically opposed by the liars in Washington, London, Paris, etc
I do not respond to his social media and Whatsapp screams because we would have a terrible row and probably never talk again. I just hope he recovers some of his wits
Of all the madness of Putin's war, his lie that it is the other side who are Nazi when he is clearly the greatest Nazi since Spandau was closed to new inmates is just jaw dropping off the scale.
Maybe all that Baudrillard stuff about hyper reality is true.
He isn't a Nazi, he's a Russian ultra-nationalist and imperialist. Unless we're just using the word Nazi to mean very bad person.
Russia is going full fascist. The "Z" in place of the swastika.
I think war is inevitable now, and if (or when) it goes nuclear, that will be the end of it for all of us. Dark times. Unimaginably dark times.
Sweet Jesus that is a terrifying thread, at the top. Russian Fascism, absolutely: that's what this is
I wonder if Putin himself realises what monsters he has unleashed
I too fear we will end up at war with him, at which point we might all die
The west needs to reach out to China, and together we need to kill him. China may be our enemy but we linked up with Stalin to defeat Hitler, who was the greater menace to both
I agree. At least in so far as China is not essential to any way out of this that is not total war.
Chris almighty. Is there no end to the disaster that is social media?
Pro-Russian channels and QAnon conspiracy theorists think Moscow is launching airstrikes on Ukraine to destroy bioweapon-manufacturing labs in order to prevent the American infectious disease expert Anthony Fauci from creating a sequel to the COVID-19 virus.
Incidentally the pictures of Russia bringing forward random civilian trucks and vehicles speak to the deep logistical hole they find themselves in.
An under-reported fact of ww2 was just how huge the logistical support America gave Russia. Over a third of all aviation fuel was supplied by the US, hundreds of thousands of trucks and astonishing amounts of explosives, copper and aluminium.
There is this myth about the great efficient Soviet/Russian war machine but reality is pretty different.
Russia, good at artillery bombardment, shit at supplying the artillery without help.
the west gave over 300,000 trucks to the USSR in WW2 while the Russians where able to produce about 150,000 of there own. so that's about 2/3 of there trucks.
We also delayed our own advance into Germany to let the Soviets catch up. Bizarre and still unexplained.
what source do you have for that claim about delaying the advance into Germany? My limied belief is Battle of the Bulge, failure of OP MARKET GARDEN, massive flooding around Netherlands and v fierce resistance from Germans was the real cause
Chatting to someone who was part of the British occupation. A family friend. Chat was when I was little, with my Dad, who probably remembers the story in more detail than I do. It wasn't a delay into Germany, I think it was at the very end when they were in Berlin. They were ordered to stop.
IIRC the US 9th army was ordered to stop their advance to Berlin when they reached the Elbe.
Given that Berlin was to be in the Soviet zone an attempt to capture it was not deemed worth the inevitable extra casualties it would bring.
I would have thought Stalin's repeated calls for "Second Front now" actually prevented the Soviets from taking over Berlin completely, prevented them from taking over western Germany and western Austria, as well as Denmark, France, Italy and Benelux.
Interesting thread from the former Russian Foreign Minister under Yeltsin:
Lots of discussions about the threat of nuclear war from the Kremlin and whether Putin is rational. I share my thoughts in this thread.
To frame: I do not believe Russia would use nuclear weapons and I believe Putin is a rational actor.
First of all, I want to examine where the questioning of Putin’s rationality started. I think it began because most people, particularly in the West, view his decision to invade Ukraine as utterly irrational. I disagree. It’s horrific, but not irrational.
To understand why the invasion was rational for Putin, we have to step into his shoes. Three beliefs came together at the same time in his calculus: 1. Ukraine’s condition as a country 2. Russian military’s condition 3. The West’s geopolitical condition
1. Ukraine’s condition. Putin spent the last 20 years believing that Ukraine is not a real nation and, at best, should be a satellite state. Maidan ended any hope of keeping Ukraine independent and pro-Kremlin. He thought the West was behind it. If Ukraine’s government cannot be kept independent and pro-Kremlin covertly, as he likely concluded, then he will overtly force it to be. He also started to believe his own propagandists that Ukraine is run by a Nazi-Bandera junta. Perfect pretext to “de-Nazify” Ukraine.
2. Russian military. The Kremlin spent the last 20 years trying to modernize its military. Much of that budget was stolen and spent on mega-yachts in Cyprus. But as a military advisor you cannot report that to the President. So they reported lies to him instead. Potemkin military
3. The West. The Russian ruling elite believed its own propaganda that Pres. Biden is mentally inept. They also thought the EU was weak because of how toothless their sanctions were in 2014. And then the U.S. botched its withdrawal from Afghanistan, solidifying this narrative.
If you believe all three of the above to be true and your goal is to restore the glory of the Russian Empire (whatever that means), then it is perfectly rational to invade Ukraine.
He miscalculated on all three, but that doesn’t make him insane. Simply wrong and immoral.
So, in my opinion, he is rational. Given that he is rational, I strongly believe he will not intentionally use nuclear weapons against the West. I say intentionally because indiscriminate shelling near a nuclear power plant can cause an unintentional nuclear disaster in Ukraine.
I will take it a step further. The threat of nuclear war is another example of his rationality. The Kremlin knows it can try to extract concessions, whether from Ukraine or the West, by saber-rattling its last remaining card in the deck: nuclear weapons.
The ultimate conclusion here is that the West should not agree to any unilateral concessions or limit its support of Ukraine too much for the fear of nuclear war.
BTW, has anyone noticed how so much of the web chatter re: anti-Vax, has now shifted to pro-Putin?
That's what I'm being told in USA. Is that true here, and in UK? IF so, pretty interesting to put it mildly.
I have a fairly bonkers relative who was madly anti-vax and has now segued into being effortlessly pro-Putin. Ditto a friend (less of a friend at the moment)
It is bizarre but definitely a phenomenon. How does it work?
The government and media cannot be trusted on X Therefore the government and media cannot be trusted on 'anything', including Y Anyone saying the opposite of our government and media on Y is therefore truthful Something something Putin is just defending his country's interests
Yes, that sounds about right
My relative has bought the entire Putinist spiel, which really surprises me (he is smart). He rants about Ukraine being dominated by "Nazis" like this is obvious and terrible, yet he has not mentioned Ukraine in his lifetime, AFAIK, until this war. So the evil Nazi regime in Kyiv didn't bother him until Putin decided to "take it out", at which point the destruction of the Nazis became imperative and Putin is being hypocritically opposed by the liars in Washington, London, Paris, etc
I do not respond to his social media and Whatsapp screams because we would have a terrible row and probably never talk again. I just hope he recovers some of his wits
Of all the madness of Putin's war, his lie that it is the other side who are Nazi when he is clearly the greatest Nazi since Spandau was closed to new inmates is just jaw dropping off the scale.
Maybe all that Baudrillard stuff about hyper reality is true.
He isn't a Nazi, he's a Russian ultra-nationalist and imperialist. Unless we're just using the word Nazi to mean very bad person.
Russia is going full fascist. The "Z" in place of the swastika.
BTW, has anyone noticed how so much of the web chatter re: anti-Vax, has now shifted to pro-Putin?
That's what I'm being told in USA. Is that true here, and in UK? IF so, pretty interesting to put it mildly.
I have a fairly bonkers relative who was madly anti-vax and has now segued into being effortlessly pro-Putin. Ditto a friend (less of a friend at the moment)
It is bizarre but definitely a phenomenon. How does it work?
The government and media cannot be trusted on X Therefore the government and media cannot be trusted on 'anything', including Y Anyone saying the opposite of our government and media on Y is therefore truthful Something something Putin is just defending his country's interests
Yes, that sounds about right
My relative has bought the entire Putinist spiel, which really surprises me (he is smart). He rants about Ukraine being dominated by "Nazis" like this is obvious and terrible, yet he has not mentioned Ukraine in his lifetime, AFAIK, until this war. So the evil Nazi regime in Kyiv didn't bother him until Putin decided to "take it out", at which point the destruction of the Nazis became imperative and Putin is being hypocritically opposed by the liars in Washington, London, Paris, etc
I do not respond to his social media and Whatsapp screams because we would have a terrible row and probably never talk again. I just hope he recovers some of his wits
Of all the madness of Putin's war, his lie that it is the other side who are Nazi when he is clearly the greatest Nazi since Spandau was closed to new inmates is just jaw dropping off the scale.
Maybe all that Baudrillard stuff about hyper reality is true.
He isn't a Nazi, he's a Russian ultra-nationalist and imperialist. Unless we're just using the word Nazi to mean very bad person.
Russia is going full fascist. The "Z" in place of the swastika.
I think war is inevitable now, and if (or when) it goes nuclear, that will be the end of it for all of us. Dark times. Unimaginably dark times.
The original explanation I heard about 10 days ago at the start of the war for the "Z" is that it's to distinguish Russian and Ukrainian vehicles from each other because they often use the same military hardware.
Incidentally the pictures of Russia bringing forward random civilian trucks and vehicles speak to the deep logistical hole they find themselves in.
An under-reported fact of ww2 was just how huge the logistical support America gave Russia. Over a third of all aviation fuel was supplied by the US, hundreds of thousands of trucks and astonishing amounts of explosives, copper and aluminium.
There is this myth about the great efficient Soviet/Russian war machine but reality is pretty different.
Russia, good at artillery bombardment, shit at supplying the artillery without help.
the west gave over 300,000 trucks to the USSR in WW2 while the Russians where able to produce about 150,000 of there own. so that's about 2/3 of there trucks.
We also delayed our own advance into Germany to let the Soviets catch up. Bizarre and still unexplained.
what source do you have for that claim about delaying the advance into Germany? My limied belief is Battle of the Bulge, failure of OP MARKET GARDEN, massive flooding around Netherlands and v fierce resistance from Germans was the real cause
I thought it was well-known. And basically was to allow the photo op of the allies all meeting up at a particular geographic location. But that may just be my faulty memory.
Pretty scandalous really. Ending up in tens of thousands more people than necessary living under a communist regime.
Not quite as I remembered it. It was Bradley wanting to limit Western casualties in the dying days of the war:
"After General Omar Bradley warned, however, that capturing a city [Berlin] located in a region that the Soviets had already received at the Yalta Conference might cost 100,000 casualties,[60] by 15 April Eisenhower ordered all armies to halt when they reached the Elbe and Mulde Rivers, thus immobilizing these spearheads while the war continued for three more weeks. 21st Army Group was then instead ordered to move northeast toward Bremen and Hamburg. While the U.S. Ninth and First Armies held their ground from Magdeburg through Leipzig to western Czechoslovakia, Eisenhower ordered three Allied field armies (1st French, and the U.S. Seventh and Third Armies) into southeastern Germany and Austria. Advancing from northern Italy, the British Eighth Army[61] pushed to the borders of Yugoslavia to defeat the remaining Wehrmacht elements there.[59] This later caused some friction with the Yugoslav forces, notably around Trieste."
BTW, has anyone noticed how so much of the web chatter re: anti-Vax, has now shifted to pro-Putin?
That's what I'm being told in USA. Is that true here, and in UK? IF so, pretty interesting to put it mildly.
I have a fairly bonkers relative who was madly anti-vax and has now segued into being effortlessly pro-Putin. Ditto a friend (less of a friend at the moment)
It is bizarre but definitely a phenomenon. How does it work?
The government and media cannot be trusted on X Therefore the government and media cannot be trusted on 'anything', including Y Anyone saying the opposite of our government and media on Y is therefore truthful Something something Putin is just defending his country's interests
Yes, that sounds about right
My relative has bought the entire Putinist spiel, which really surprises me (he is smart). He rants about Ukraine being dominated by "Nazis" like this is obvious and terrible, yet he has not mentioned Ukraine in his lifetime, AFAIK, until this war. So the evil Nazi regime in Kyiv didn't bother him until Putin decided to "take it out", at which point the destruction of the Nazis became imperative and Putin is being hypocritically opposed by the liars in Washington, London, Paris, etc
I do not respond to his social media and Whatsapp screams because we would have a terrible row and probably never talk again. I just hope he recovers some of his wits
Of all the madness of Putin's war, his lie that it is the other side who are Nazi when he is clearly the greatest Nazi since Spandau was closed to new inmates is just jaw dropping off the scale.
Maybe all that Baudrillard stuff about hyper reality is true.
He isn't a Nazi, he's a Russian ultra-nationalist and imperialist. Unless we're just using the word Nazi to mean very bad person.
Russia is going full fascist. The "Z" in place of the swastika.
I think war is inevitable now, and if (or when) it goes nuclear, that will be the end of it for all of us. Dark times. Unimaginably dark times.
The original explanation I heard about 10 days ago at the start of the war for the "Z" is that it's to distinguish Russian and Ukrainian vehicles from each other because they often use the same military hardware.
Yes, but the Russians seem to be fetishizing it into something more sinister.
BTW, has anyone noticed how so much of the web chatter re: anti-Vax, has now shifted to pro-Putin?
That's what I'm being told in USA. Is that true here, and in UK? IF so, pretty interesting to put it mildly.
I have a fairly bonkers relative who was madly anti-vax and has now segued into being effortlessly pro-Putin. Ditto a friend (less of a friend at the moment)
It is bizarre but definitely a phenomenon. How does it work?
The government and media cannot be trusted on X Therefore the government and media cannot be trusted on 'anything', including Y Anyone saying the opposite of our government and media on Y is therefore truthful Something something Putin is just defending his country's interests
Yes, that sounds about right
My relative has bought the entire Putinist spiel, which really surprises me (he is smart). He rants about Ukraine being dominated by "Nazis" like this is obvious and terrible, yet he has not mentioned Ukraine in his lifetime, AFAIK, until this war. So the evil Nazi regime in Kyiv didn't bother him until Putin decided to "take it out", at which point the destruction of the Nazis became imperative and Putin is being hypocritically opposed by the liars in Washington, London, Paris, etc
I do not respond to his social media and Whatsapp screams because we would have a terrible row and probably never talk again. I just hope he recovers some of his wits
Of all the madness of Putin's war, his lie that it is the other side who are Nazi when he is clearly the greatest Nazi since Spandau was closed to new inmates is just jaw dropping off the scale.
Maybe all that Baudrillard stuff about hyper reality is true.
He isn't a Nazi, he's a Russian ultra-nationalist and imperialist. Unless we're just using the word Nazi to mean very bad person.
Russia is going full fascist. The "Z" in place of the swastika.
Ireland is making plans to be ready to accommodate more than 100,000. (1,349 have entered Ireland so far)
Patel was interviwed today and she said that the scheme only opened yesterday and the home office had received 10,000 applications in the first few hours which were being processed
I do not like Patel but this them against us is tedious especially as we have said we will take 200,000
You said last week the bad money for influence legislation goes after the Chinese too Big G, not just Russians. Do you want to change that position ahead of tomorrow’s shenanigans in Parliament?
Not sure what you mean but listening to Starmer today it does seem the legidlstion has been virtually agreed between Boris and himself for tomorrow and it must identify dirty money from anywhere
What difference do you think this pending legislation will make? Seeing as how Boris Johnson refuses to obey laws that inconvenience him or his government, personally or politically?
These laws actually help his government and I have no doubt they will be enforced if for no other reason public demand and opposition demands
I would just comment in all this cynicism of Boris, Peppa Crerar the mirror journalist most responsible for putting partygate in front of the nation, was very complimentary to Boris this morning saying that he was doing well and leading Britain in a global context
So to ask the question again, if we are doing such a marvellous job why are we refusing Ukrainian refugees? The rest of Europe acts, we refuse but then tell lies about acting.
On one hand we have that traitor Patel saying how marvellous her policy is for refugees. On the other hand we have hard evidence that her Border Force refuse to let almost everyone in. Go away they are told.
If there is evidence than Patel must respond and hopefully it will be raised in the HOC tomorrow
If? It is being reported widely from multiple sources of multiple examples.
They are lying to you when they say the policy is generous.
I understand 200,000 can come to the UK for 3 years
Is that wrong and if so please provide a link
One posted above. Turned away by Border Force. Told to go away, back to Paris or Brussels. We aren't letting people in. You understand the lie they have told. I don;t blame you one bit - it is outrageous that we can't trust the word of the Home Secretary about the treatment of refugees.
But we can't trust her word. It is a lie.
What evidence do you have that we are not processing the 10 000 received yesterday
10,000 what? People? The Home Office said we have so far let in 50.
This one is simple. We have a million people fleeing into Poland alone. Some have relatives here, connections here, sanctuary offered here. Unlike countries across the continent we are turning them away. You can't come here. Go away. Fill in a form. We'll think about it.
Its disgusting, shameful, appalling. That she is lying about it just makes it worse. Let refugees in. Now.
10,000 applied yesterday and are being processed
The Ukrainian Ambassador seemed content with the process just now, but are you saying the UK should welcome 4 million refugees and if not how many above the 200,000
Their forms being processed here. The actual refugees are barred from entry. Should Poland adopt the same policy?
Saying "you can't come here, go fill in a form" is stopping people from coming. In that you stop them from coming. Turn them away. Make them Someone Else's Problem.
"How many above the 200,000". Come on. You know it isn't 200,000. We are BLOCKING people from coming. Is France doing that? Germany? Ireland? Poland? Anyone?
Is there another major country within direct reach of refugees refusing them entry that isn't Britain?
Are you seriously saying that Ukrainians in France trying to get to the UK should be treated exactly the same as Ukrainians in Ukraine trying to get to Poland??
BTW, has anyone noticed how so much of the web chatter re: anti-Vax, has now shifted to pro-Putin?
That's what I'm being told in USA. Is that true here, and in UK? IF so, pretty interesting to put it mildly.
I have a fairly bonkers relative who was madly anti-vax and has now segued into being effortlessly pro-Putin. Ditto a friend (less of a friend at the moment)
It is bizarre but definitely a phenomenon. How does it work?
The government and media cannot be trusted on X Therefore the government and media cannot be trusted on 'anything', including Y Anyone saying the opposite of our government and media on Y is therefore truthful Something something Putin is just defending his country's interests
Yes, that sounds about right
My relative has bought the entire Putinist spiel, which really surprises me (he is smart). He rants about Ukraine being dominated by "Nazis" like this is obvious and terrible, yet he has not mentioned Ukraine in his lifetime, AFAIK, until this war. So the evil Nazi regime in Kyiv didn't bother him until Putin decided to "take it out", at which point the destruction of the Nazis became imperative and Putin is being hypocritically opposed by the liars in Washington, London, Paris, etc
I do not respond to his social media and Whatsapp screams because we would have a terrible row and probably never talk again. I just hope he recovers some of his wits
Of all the madness of Putin's war, his lie that it is the other side who are Nazi when he is clearly the greatest Nazi since Spandau was closed to new inmates is just jaw dropping off the scale.
Maybe all that Baudrillard stuff about hyper reality is true.
He isn't a Nazi, he's a Russian ultra-nationalist and imperialist. Unless we're just using the word Nazi to mean very bad person.
Russia is going full fascist. The "Z" in place of the swastika.
I think war is inevitable now, and if (or when) it goes nuclear, that will be the end of it for all of us. Dark times. Unimaginably dark times.
The original explanation I heard about 10 days ago at the start of the war for the "Z" is that it's to distinguish Russian and Ukrainian vehicles from each other because they often use the same military hardware.
Yes, but the Russians seem to be fetishizing it into something more sinister.
My off-the-top-of-my-fool-head theory, is that people were starting to wear "Z" to semi-discretely show support for the Z-man ("It's for my auntie Zynia, officer!") so Putin decided to co-opt it?
Nazis tried something similar when "V for Victory" emerged as pro-Allied code sign across much of occupied Europe during WW2. Without little success.
BTW, has anyone noticed how so much of the web chatter re: anti-Vax, has now shifted to pro-Putin?
That's what I'm being told in USA. Is that true here, and in UK? IF so, pretty interesting to put it mildly.
I have a fairly bonkers relative who was madly anti-vax and has now segued into being effortlessly pro-Putin. Ditto a friend (less of a friend at the moment)
It is bizarre but definitely a phenomenon. How does it work?
The government and media cannot be trusted on X Therefore the government and media cannot be trusted on 'anything', including Y Anyone saying the opposite of our government and media on Y is therefore truthful Something something Putin is just defending his country's interests
Yes, that sounds about right
My relative has bought the entire Putinist spiel, which really surprises me (he is smart). He rants about Ukraine being dominated by "Nazis" like this is obvious and terrible, yet he has not mentioned Ukraine in his lifetime, AFAIK, until this war. So the evil Nazi regime in Kyiv didn't bother him until Putin decided to "take it out", at which point the destruction of the Nazis became imperative and Putin is being hypocritically opposed by the liars in Washington, London, Paris, etc
I do not respond to his social media and Whatsapp screams because we would have a terrible row and probably never talk again. I just hope he recovers some of his wits
Of all the madness of Putin's war, his lie that it is the other side who are Nazi when he is clearly the greatest Nazi since Spandau was closed to new inmates is just jaw dropping off the scale.
Maybe all that Baudrillard stuff about hyper reality is true.
He isn't a Nazi, he's a Russian ultra-nationalist and imperialist. Unless we're just using the word Nazi to mean very bad person.
Russia is going full fascist. The "Z" in place of the swastika.
I think war is inevitable now, and if (or when) it goes nuclear, that will be the end of it for all of us. Dark times. Unimaginably dark times.
The original explanation I heard about 10 days ago at the start of the war for the "Z" is that it's to distinguish Russian and Ukrainian vehicles from each other because they often use the same military hardware.
Yes, but the Russians seem to be fetishizing it into something more sinister.
My off-the-top-of-my-fool-head theory, is that people were starting to wear "Z" to semi-discretely show support for the Z-man ("It's for my auntie Zynia, officer!") so Putin decided to co-opt it?
Nazis tried something similar when "V for Victory" emerged as pro-Allied code sign across much of occupied Europe during WW2. Without little success.
Does anyone know if my theory holds any water?
The Cyrillic character for “Z” is “З”. When we visited St. Petersburg a few years back, the street signs, at least in the city centre, had English translations and there was quite a lot of advertising with English words in it so I guess the average Russian might have a better knowledge of Latin characters than an average Brit or American does of Cyrillic, so I think it might be a stretch.
"With the indiscriminate bombardment of Kharkiv, a mostly Russian-speaking city, Putin's strategy becomes clear: Murder as many people as possible. Then take possession of the ruins.
"Longer-term strategy: move "patriotic" Russians into the ruins. Change the nature of the place. Whether you call it genocide or ethnic cleansing, the KGB know how to do it: Stalin, like Hitler, tried it many times."
Incidentally the pictures of Russia bringing forward random civilian trucks and vehicles speak to the deep logistical hole they find themselves in.
An under-reported fact of ww2 was just how huge the logistical support America gave Russia. Over a third of all aviation fuel was supplied by the US, hundreds of thousands of trucks and astonishing amounts of explosives, copper and aluminium.
There is this myth about the great efficient Soviet/Russian war machine but reality is pretty different.
Russia, good at artillery bombardment, shit at supplying the artillery without help.
the west gave over 300,000 trucks to the USSR in WW2 while the Russians where able to produce about 150,000 of there own. so that's about 2/3 of there trucks.
We also delayed our own advance into Germany to let the Soviets catch up. Bizarre and still unexplained.
what source do you have for that claim about delaying the advance into Germany? My limied belief is Battle of the Bulge, failure of OP MARKET GARDEN, massive flooding around Netherlands and v fierce resistance from Germans was the real cause
I thought it was well-known. And basically was to allow the photo op of the allies all meeting up at a particular geographic location. But that may just be my faulty memory.
Pretty scandalous really. Ending up in tens of thousands more people than necessary living under a communist regime.
Not quite as I remembered it. It was Bradley wanting to limit Western casualties in the dying days of the war:
"After General Omar Bradley warned, however, that capturing a city [Berlin] located in a region that the Soviets had already received at the Yalta Conference might cost 100,000 casualties,[60] by 15 April Eisenhower ordered all armies to halt when they reached the Elbe and Mulde Rivers, thus immobilizing these spearheads while the war continued for three more weeks. 21st Army Group was then instead ordered to move northeast toward Bremen and Hamburg. While the U.S. Ninth and First Armies held their ground from Magdeburg through Leipzig to western Czechoslovakia, Eisenhower ordered three Allied field armies (1st French, and the U.S. Seventh and Third Armies) into southeastern Germany and Austria. Advancing from northern Italy, the British Eighth Army[61] pushed to the borders of Yugoslavia to defeat the remaining Wehrmacht elements there.[59] This later caused some friction with the Yugoslav forces, notably around Trieste."
Think that the key word above is "Yalta".
If US & UK had gone hell-for-leather for Berlin, then tried to keep the Russians out, this would have risked war with the latter, as well as huge political problems in the former.
So the western Allies prioritized the following instead:
1. destroying German capacity to wage war, via mass encirclement of German forces & resources, such as Battle of Ruhr Pocket.
2. eliminating German resistance in Germany, Austria & Bohemia, esp. supposed Southern Redoubt" in Alpine Bavariia, with US taking the lead; and
3. keeping Russians out of Denmark at Lübeck, and Italy at Trieste (versus Yugoslavs), UK taking lead.
Gymnast Ivan Kuliak caused outrage on Saturday by wearing a Russian war symbol on his shirt while sharing a podium with a Ukrainian rival.
Former Russian junior champion Kuliak had just finished third behind winner Ukraine's Illia Kovtun in the parallel bars at a World Cup event in Doha.
And as the gymnasts were pictured standing shoulder to shoulder to collect their medals, clearly visible was a letter 'Z' taped across the middle of Kuliak's shirt.
Incidentally the pictures of Russia bringing forward random civilian trucks and vehicles speak to the deep logistical hole they find themselves in.
An under-reported fact of ww2 was just how huge the logistical support America gave Russia. Over a third of all aviation fuel was supplied by the US, hundreds of thousands of trucks and astonishing amounts of explosives, copper and aluminium.
There is this myth about the great efficient Soviet/Russian war machine but reality is pretty different.
Russia, good at artillery bombardment, shit at supplying the artillery without help.
the west gave over 300,000 trucks to the USSR in WW2 while the Russians where able to produce about 150,000 of there own. so that's about 2/3 of there trucks.
We also delayed our own advance into Germany to let the Soviets catch up. Bizarre and still unexplained.
what source do you have for that claim about delaying the advance into Germany? My limied belief is Battle of the Bulge, failure of OP MARKET GARDEN, massive flooding around Netherlands and v fierce resistance from Germans was the real cause
I thought it was well-known. And basically was to allow the photo op of the allies all meeting up at a particular geographic location. But that may just be my faulty memory.
Pretty scandalous really. Ending up in tens of thousands more people than necessary living under a communist regime.
Not quite as I remembered it. It was Bradley wanting to limit Western casualties in the dying days of the war:
"After General Omar Bradley warned, however, that capturing a city [Berlin] located in a region that the Soviets had already received at the Yalta Conference might cost 100,000 casualties,[60] by 15 April Eisenhower ordered all armies to halt when they reached the Elbe and Mulde Rivers, thus immobilizing these spearheads while the war continued for three more weeks. 21st Army Group was then instead ordered to move northeast toward Bremen and Hamburg. While the U.S. Ninth and First Armies held their ground from Magdeburg through Leipzig to western Czechoslovakia, Eisenhower ordered three Allied field armies (1st French, and the U.S. Seventh and Third Armies) into southeastern Germany and Austria. Advancing from northern Italy, the British Eighth Army[61] pushed to the borders of Yugoslavia to defeat the remaining Wehrmacht elements there.[59] This later caused some friction with the Yugoslav forces, notably around Trieste."
Think that the key word above is "Yalta".
If US & UK had gone hell-for-leather for Berlin, then tried to keep the Russians out, this would have risked war with the latter, as well as huge political problems in the former.
So the western Allies prioritized the following instead:
1. destroying German capacity to wage war, via mass encirclement of German forces & resources, such as Battle of Ruhr Pocket.
2. eliminating German resistance in Germany, Austria & Bohemia, esp. supposed Southern Redoubt" in Alpine Bavariia, with US taking the lead; and
3. keeping Russians out of Denmark at Lübeck, and Italy at Trieste (versus Yugoslavs), UK taking lead.
Yeah. You are right. It is a long time (1971-ish) since I read up on this stuff. But I do remember reading that Patton and Monty wanted to push deeper into Germany.
"With the indiscriminate bombardment of Kharkiv, a mostly Russian-speaking city, Putin's strategy becomes clear: Murder as many people as possible. Then take possession of the ruins.
"Longer-term strategy: move "patriotic" Russians into the ruins. Change the nature of the place. Whether you call it genocide or ethnic cleansing, the KGB know how to do it: Stalin, like Hitler, tried it many times."
"I've translated a fascinating report by the very well-sourced Russian journalist @faridaily_ about what senior Russian officials think of the invasion. Haven't seen this kind of information anywhere else."
Incidentally the pictures of Russia bringing forward random civilian trucks and vehicles speak to the deep logistical hole they find themselves in.
An under-reported fact of ww2 was just how huge the logistical support America gave Russia. Over a third of all aviation fuel was supplied by the US, hundreds of thousands of trucks and astonishing amounts of explosives, copper and aluminium.
There is this myth about the great efficient Soviet/Russian war machine but reality is pretty different.
Russia, good at artillery bombardment, shit at supplying the artillery without help.
the west gave over 300,000 trucks to the USSR in WW2 while the Russians where able to produce about 150,000 of there own. so that's about 2/3 of there trucks.
We also delayed our own advance into Germany to let the Soviets catch up. Bizarre and still unexplained.
what source do you have for that claim about delaying the advance into Germany? My limied belief is Battle of the Bulge, failure of OP MARKET GARDEN, massive flooding around Netherlands and v fierce resistance from Germans was the real cause
Chatting to someone who was part of the British occupation. A family friend. Chat was when I was little, with my Dad, who probably remembers the story in more detail than I do. It wasn't a delay into Germany, I think it was at the very end when they were in Berlin. They were ordered to stop.
IIRC the US 9th army was ordered to stop their advance to Berlin when they reached the Elbe.
Given that Berlin was to be in the Soviet zone an attempt to capture it was not deemed worth the inevitable extra casualties it would bring.
I would have thought Stalin's repeated calls for "Second Front now" actually prevented the Soviets from taking over Berlin completely, prevented them from taking over western Germany and western Austria, as well as Denmark, France, Italy and Benelux.
You're probably right. But a lot of the discussion now is miles away from the psychology in 1942-45. The "Second Front Now" campaign was initially because the Soviets thought they might lose, and certainly because it made winning the war easier, which mattered more to the Russians than thinking about occupying Belgium. By 1945 the victorious alliance was extremely popular in all the participating countries, and starting a conflict with each other would have been politically unthinkable. Neither the West nor the Soviets were especially prioritising occupying minor countries - we gave up on Yugoslavia and Poland, they gave up on Greece and in due course Austria too. Berlin was divided into 4 parts even though it had been entirely captured by the Russians.
It all went sour pretty quickly - Iron Curtain speech, Berlin blockade, and all the rest of it. But in 1945 it seems to hasve been amicable enough, and everyone wss exhausted.
BTW, has anyone noticed how so much of the web chatter re: anti-Vax, has now shifted to pro-Putin?
That's what I'm being told in USA. Is that true here, and in UK? IF so, pretty interesting to put it mildly.
I have a fairly bonkers relative who was madly anti-vax and has now segued into being effortlessly pro-Putin. Ditto a friend (less of a friend at the moment)
It is bizarre but definitely a phenomenon. How does it work?
The government and media cannot be trusted on X Therefore the government and media cannot be trusted on 'anything', including Y Anyone saying the opposite of our government and media on Y is therefore truthful Something something Putin is just defending his country's interests
I think maybe the missing link in the middle that turns skepticism into credulity is that since you have to listen to *someone* to believe anything, if you're skeptical about the government/media, you end up trusting other people who are skeptical of the government/media. So when there's a media/government storyline you feel distrustful of, you end up believing the most coherently promoted counter storyline.
Sort of related, this is a really good piece by Scott Alexander about trying to figure out what's true from the media. Conclusion:
The savvy people need to realize that the clueless people aren’t always paranoid, just less experienced than they are at dealing with a hostile environment that lies to them all the time.
And the clueless people need to realize that the savvy people aren’t always gullible, just more optimistic about their ability to extract signal from same.
"I've translated a fascinating report by the very well-sourced Russian journalist @faridaily_ about what senior Russian officials think of the invasion. Haven't seen this kind of information anywhere else."
Story told by this fascinating report, is somewhat reminiscent of informed opinion in governing circles in Berlin just before and after the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, as reported by US journalist William Shirer in his Berlin Diaries.
Much though hardly all of this feeling was assuaged by Hitler's blitzkreig victories.
BTW, has anyone noticed how so much of the web chatter re: anti-Vax, has now shifted to pro-Putin?
That's what I'm being told in USA. Is that true here, and in UK? IF so, pretty interesting to put it mildly.
I have a fairly bonkers relative who was madly anti-vax and has now segued into being effortlessly pro-Putin. Ditto a friend (less of a friend at the moment)
It is bizarre but definitely a phenomenon. How does it work?
The government and media cannot be trusted on X Therefore the government and media cannot be trusted on 'anything', including Y Anyone saying the opposite of our government and media on Y is therefore truthful Something something Putin is just defending his country's interests
I think maybe the missing link in the middle that turns skepticism into credulity is that since you have to listen to *someone* to believe anything, if you're skeptical about the government/media, you end up trusting other people who are skeptical of the government/media. So when there's a media/government storyline you feel distrustful of, you end up believing the most coherently promoted counter storyline.
Sort of related, this is a really good piece by Scott Alexander about trying to figure out what's true from the media. Conclusion:
The savvy people need to realize that the clueless people aren’t always paranoid, just less experienced than they are at dealing with a hostile environment that lies to them all the time.
And the clueless people need to realize that the savvy people aren’t always gullible, just more optimistic about their ability to extract signal from same.
Wall Street Journal: Syrians may be sent to fight in Ukraine
Russia recruiting Syrians who can fight in urban warfare to send them to Ukraine, WSJ has reported citing four US officials. The US officials did not specify the number of Syrian mercenaries were planned to be sent.
⚡️Russian forces restrict access to external communication, block access to mobile networks and internet at Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, the International Atomic Energy Agency said on March 6.
All operations of the plant’s staff require approval by Russian commander.‘
‘A major topic on #RTRPlaneta's propaganda show #60minutes was today: Use of #tacticalnuclearweapons within #Ukraine - for the self-defense of #Russiantroops from "#Nazis" and NATO in Ukraine.’
BTW, has anyone noticed how so much of the web chatter re: anti-Vax, has now shifted to pro-Putin?
That's what I'm being told in USA. Is that true here, and in UK? IF so, pretty interesting to put it mildly.
I have a fairly bonkers relative who was madly anti-vax and has now segued into being effortlessly pro-Putin. Ditto a friend (less of a friend at the moment)
It is bizarre but definitely a phenomenon. How does it work?
The government and media cannot be trusted on X Therefore the government and media cannot be trusted on 'anything', including Y Anyone saying the opposite of our government and media on Y is therefore truthful Something something Putin is just defending his country's interests
Yes, that sounds about right
My relative has bought the entire Putinist spiel, which really surprises me (he is smart). He rants about Ukraine being dominated by "Nazis" like this is obvious and terrible, yet he has not mentioned Ukraine in his lifetime, AFAIK, until this war. So the evil Nazi regime in Kyiv didn't bother him until Putin decided to "take it out", at which point the destruction of the Nazis became imperative and Putin is being hypocritically opposed by the liars in Washington, London, Paris, etc
I do not respond to his social media and Whatsapp screams because we would have a terrible row and probably never talk again. I just hope he recovers some of his wits
Of all the madness of Putin's war, his lie that it is the other side who are Nazi when he is clearly the greatest Nazi since Spandau was closed to new inmates is just jaw dropping off the scale.
Maybe all that Baudrillard stuff about hyper reality is true.
He isn't a Nazi, he's a Russian ultra-nationalist and imperialist. Unless we're just using the word Nazi to mean very bad person.
Russia is going full fascist. The "Z" in place of the swastika.
I think war is inevitable now, and if (or when) it goes nuclear, that will be the end of it for all of us. Dark times. Unimaginably dark times.
The original explanation I heard about 10 days ago at the start of the war for the "Z" is that it's to distinguish Russian and Ukrainian vehicles from each other because they often use the same military hardware.
Yes, but the Russians seem to be fetishizing it into something more sinister.
My off-the-top-of-my-fool-head theory, is that people were starting to wear "Z" to semi-discretely show support for the Z-man ("It's for my auntie Zynia, officer!") so Putin decided to co-opt it?
Nazis tried something similar when "V for Victory" emerged as pro-Allied code sign across much of occupied Europe during WW2. Without little success.
Does anyone know if my theory holds any water?
No, since the thrusts not heading for Kyiv are using other identifying letters.
Wall Street Journal: Syrians may be sent to fight in Ukraine
Russia recruiting Syrians who can fight in urban warfare to send them to Ukraine, WSJ has reported citing four US officials. The US officials did not specify the number of Syrian mercenaries were planned to be sent.
If true, (its still tbc) the Azerbaijanis used this method in their short war with Armenia - pick up a load of young unemployed Syrian men who have some experience of fighting (and are possibly brutalised), promise them a wad of USD and set them loose on an enemy (keeps your own casualties down).. the BBC ran a short radio piece on it.
Incidentally the pictures of Russia bringing forward random civilian trucks and vehicles speak to the deep logistical hole they find themselves in.
An under-reported fact of ww2 was just how huge the logistical support America gave Russia. Over a third of all aviation fuel was supplied by the US, hundreds of thousands of trucks and astonishing amounts of explosives, copper and aluminium.
There is this myth about the great efficient Soviet/Russian war machine but reality is pretty different.
Russia, good at artillery bombardment, shit at supplying the artillery without help.
the west gave over 300,000 trucks to the USSR in WW2 while the Russians where able to produce about 150,000 of there own. so that's about 2/3 of there trucks.
We also delayed our own advance into Germany to let the Soviets catch up. Bizarre and still unexplained.
what source do you have for that claim about delaying the advance into Germany? My limied belief is Battle of the Bulge, failure of OP MARKET GARDEN, massive flooding around Netherlands and v fierce resistance from Germans was the real cause
I thought it was well-known. And basically was to allow the photo op of the allies all meeting up at a particular geographic location. But that may just be my faulty memory.
Pretty scandalous really. Ending up in tens of thousands more people than necessary living under a communist regime.
Not quite as I remembered it. It was Bradley wanting to limit Western casualties in the dying days of the war:
"After General Omar Bradley warned, however, that capturing a city [Berlin] located in a region that the Soviets had already received at the Yalta Conference might cost 100,000 casualties,[60] by 15 April Eisenhower ordered all armies to halt when they reached the Elbe and Mulde Rivers, thus immobilizing these spearheads while the war continued for three more weeks. 21st Army Group was then instead ordered to move northeast toward Bremen and Hamburg. While the U.S. Ninth and First Armies held their ground from Magdeburg through Leipzig to western Czechoslovakia, Eisenhower ordered three Allied field armies (1st French, and the U.S. Seventh and Third Armies) into southeastern Germany and Austria. Advancing from northern Italy, the British Eighth Army[61] pushed to the borders of Yugoslavia to defeat the remaining Wehrmacht elements there.[59] This later caused some friction with the Yugoslav forces, notably around Trieste."
Think that the key word above is "Yalta".
If US & UK had gone hell-for-leather for Berlin, then tried to keep the Russians out, this would have risked war with the latter, as well as huge political problems in the former.
So the western Allies prioritized the following instead:
1. destroying German capacity to wage war, via mass encirclement of German forces & resources, such as Battle of Ruhr Pocket.
2. eliminating German resistance in Germany, Austria & Bohemia, esp. supposed Southern Redoubt" in Alpine Bavariia, with US taking the lead; and
3. keeping Russians out of Denmark at Lübeck, and Italy at Trieste (versus Yugoslavs), UK taking lead.
Yeah. You are right. It is a long time (1971-ish) since I read up on this stuff. But I do remember reading that Patton and Monty wanted to push deeper into Germany.
Also remember that significant resistance was expected in Bavaria, the political home of Naziism and where many Germans had planned to make their last stand. With Hitler’s suicide in Berlin most of this melted away, but had (for example) Hitler relocated there to continue the struggle, the end of the war would have played out very differently. That Hitler decided to remain in Berlin until the end and the timing of its fall saved a lot of pretty Bavarian towns and villages.
"The Kyiv Independent@KyivIndependent⚡️Russia has fired 600 missiles and deployed 95% of its amassed troops into Ukraine, according to a senior US defense official, CNN reports."
Remarkable thread, explaining how many Russians remain in total denial of what their country is doing, even when their own relatives in Ukraine send photos and videos. A brainwashed nation.
"Across Ukraine, I have been meeting people w close relatives in Russia who refuse to believe the extent of the violence their state is perpetrating. Cities suffer missile attacks, mothers fear for sons, but fathers, sisters, brothers respond w denial. 🧵"
Sadly true. Outside of the top few percent, who are internationally mobile and have access to global news sources, most Russians get their news from the TV and from Russian websites, which have been painting a somewhat sanitised view of the peacekeeping operation in the Donbass, which is routing out Ukranian terrorists.
The average Russian genuinely has no idea that Russia has invaded Ukraine, is shelling cities and killing civilians. Although surely they must think something is going on, when there’s long queues at banks and Western goods have disappeared from the shops.
Wall Street Journal: Syrians may be sent to fight in Ukraine
Russia recruiting Syrians who can fight in urban warfare to send them to Ukraine, WSJ has reported citing four US officials. The US officials did not specify the number of Syrian mercenaries were planned to be sent.
If true, (its still tbc) the Azerbaijanis used this method in their short war with Armenia - pick up a load of young unemployed Syrian men who have some experience of fighting (and are possibly brutalised), promise them a wad of USD and set them loose on an enemy (keeps your own casualties down).. the BBC ran a short radio piece on it.
Maybe the Ukranians should send a team to, oh I dunno, maybe a quiet British town like Hereford, see if they can find a few men there who would be up for a fight against the bear?
Wall Street Journal: Syrians may be sent to fight in Ukraine
Russia recruiting Syrians who can fight in urban warfare to send them to Ukraine, WSJ has reported citing four US officials. The US officials did not specify the number of Syrian mercenaries were planned to be sent.
If true, (its still tbc) the Azerbaijanis used this method in their short war with Armenia - pick up a load of young unemployed Syrian men who have some experience of fighting (and are possibly brutalised), promise them a wad of USD and set them loose on an enemy (keeps your own casualties down).. the BBC ran a short radio piece on it.
If you want to ensure that the Ukrainian people hate you forever, this is probably a good start.
Remarkable thread, explaining how many Russians remain in total denial of what their country is doing, even when their own relatives in Ukraine send photos and videos. A brainwashed nation.
"Across Ukraine, I have been meeting people w close relatives in Russia who refuse to believe the extent of the violence their state is perpetrating. Cities suffer missile attacks, mothers fear for sons, but fathers, sisters, brothers respond w denial. 🧵"
Sadly true. Outside of the top few percent, who are internationally mobile and have access to global news sources, most Russians get their news from the TV and from Russian websites, which have been painting a somewhat sanitised view of the peacekeeping operation in the Donbass, which is routing out Ukranian terrorists.
The average Russian genuinely has no idea that Russia has invaded Ukraine, is shelling cities and killing civilians. Although surely they must think something is going on, when there’s long queues at banks and Western goods have disappeared from the shops.
That is very scary. It’s not at all untypical of how the Russians have announced in advance their own operations, blaming them on the victims.
Sadly, it now looks as if Putin is trying to goad the West into getting involved, just so he can use it as some thin pretense to escalate the situation.
If he deliberately bombs a nuclear power station, that’s likely to be treated as the use of a nuclear weapon by other nuclear countries, with a response to match. Hopefully, the response can be aggressive but non-nuclear - but there would have to be a response.
Really wouldn’t want to be Biden, Johnson or Macron at the moment.
The predictions has proved remarkably prescient, and if the analysis is correct then Putin is at the end of his planned actions (the last resort levelling of cities on the Syrian model). If his armies fail to make progress, then he is off the map, improvising. What he does next is worryingly unpredictable.
Wall Street Journal: Syrians may be sent to fight in Ukraine
Russia recruiting Syrians who can fight in urban warfare to send them to Ukraine, WSJ has reported citing four US officials. The US officials did not specify the number of Syrian mercenaries were planned to be sent.
If true, (its still tbc) the Azerbaijanis used this method in their short war with Armenia - pick up a load of young unemployed Syrian men who have some experience of fighting (and are possibly brutalised), promise them a wad of USD and set them loose on an enemy (keeps your own casualties down).. the BBC ran a short radio piece on it.
Maybe the Ukranians should send a team to, oh I dunno, maybe a quiet British town like Hereford, see if they can find a few men there who would be up for a fight against the bear?
Trouble is, they’d have sobered up time they got there.
It worked in the old days because they found the themselves at sea.
Comments
And war is bad for business.
Lots of discussions about the threat of nuclear war from the Kremlin and whether Putin is rational. I share my thoughts in this thread.
To frame: I do not believe Russia would use nuclear weapons and I believe Putin is a rational actor.
First of all, I want to examine where the questioning of Putin’s rationality started. I think it began because most people, particularly in the West, view his decision to invade Ukraine as utterly irrational. I disagree. It’s horrific, but not irrational.
To understand why the invasion was rational for Putin, we have to step into his shoes. Three beliefs came together at the same time in his calculus:
1. Ukraine’s condition as a country
2. Russian military’s condition
3. The West’s geopolitical condition
1. Ukraine’s condition. Putin spent the last 20 years believing that Ukraine is not a real nation and, at best, should be a satellite state. Maidan ended any hope of keeping Ukraine independent and pro-Kremlin. He thought the West was behind it. If Ukraine’s government cannot be kept independent and pro-Kremlin covertly, as he likely concluded, then he will overtly force it to be. He also started to believe his own propagandists that Ukraine is run by a Nazi-Bandera junta. Perfect pretext to “de-Nazify” Ukraine.
2. Russian military. The Kremlin spent the last 20 years trying to modernize its military. Much of that budget was stolen and spent on mega-yachts in Cyprus. But as a military advisor you cannot report that to the President. So they reported lies to him instead. Potemkin military
3. The West. The Russian ruling elite believed its own propaganda that Pres. Biden is mentally inept. They also thought the EU was weak because of how toothless their sanctions were in 2014. And then the U.S. botched its withdrawal from Afghanistan, solidifying this narrative.
If you believe all three of the above to be true and your goal is to restore the glory of the Russian Empire (whatever that means), then it is perfectly rational to invade Ukraine.
He miscalculated on all three, but that doesn’t make him insane. Simply wrong and immoral.
So, in my opinion, he is rational. Given that he is rational, I strongly believe he will not intentionally use nuclear weapons against the West. I say intentionally because indiscriminate shelling near a nuclear power plant can cause an unintentional nuclear disaster in Ukraine.
I will take it a step further. The threat of nuclear war is another example of his rationality. The Kremlin knows it can try to extract concessions, whether from Ukraine or the West, by saber-rattling its last remaining card in the deck: nuclear weapons.
The ultimate conclusion here is that the West should not agree to any unilateral concessions or limit its support of Ukraine too much for the fear of nuclear war.
https://twitter.com/andreivkozyrev/status/1500610676926005251
Let's hope he is right.
But either way, we will be at war with weeks, if not days imho.
Bleak, beyond bleak.
Easily the darkest days since the War.
"After General Omar Bradley warned, however, that capturing a city [Berlin] located in a region that the Soviets had already received at the Yalta Conference might cost 100,000 casualties,[60] by 15 April Eisenhower ordered all armies to halt when they reached the Elbe and Mulde Rivers, thus immobilizing these spearheads while the war continued for three more weeks. 21st Army Group was then instead ordered to move northeast toward Bremen and Hamburg. While the U.S. Ninth and First Armies held their ground from Magdeburg through Leipzig to western Czechoslovakia, Eisenhower ordered three Allied field armies (1st French, and the U.S. Seventh and Third Armies) into southeastern Germany and Austria. Advancing from northern Italy, the British Eighth Army[61] pushed to the borders of Yugoslavia to defeat the remaining Wehrmacht elements there.[59] This later caused some friction with the Yugoslav forces, notably around Trieste."
https://mobile.twitter.com/kamilkazani/status/1500495309595725831
Serbia seems the obvious place. Sorry, Belgrade, but you've got to go
Nazis tried something similar when "V for Victory" emerged as pro-Allied code sign across much of occupied Europe during WW2. Without little success.
Does anyone know if my theory holds any water?
If US & UK had gone hell-for-leather for Berlin, then tried to keep the Russians out, this would have risked war with the latter, as well as huge political problems in the former.
So the western Allies prioritized the following instead:
1. destroying German capacity to wage war, via mass encirclement of German forces & resources, such as Battle of Ruhr Pocket.
2. eliminating German resistance in Germany, Austria & Bohemia, esp. supposed Southern Redoubt" in Alpine Bavariia, with US taking the lead; and
3. keeping Russians out of Denmark at Lübeck, and Italy at Trieste (versus Yugoslavs), UK taking lead.
Former Russian junior champion Kuliak had just finished third behind winner Ukraine's Illia Kovtun in the parallel bars at a World Cup event in Doha.
And as the gymnasts were pictured standing shoulder to shoulder to collect their medals, clearly visible was a letter 'Z' taped across the middle of Kuliak's shirt.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-10581663/Russian-gymnast-causes-outrage-wearing-national-WAR-symbol-shirt.html
"I've translated a fascinating report by the very well-sourced Russian journalist
@faridaily_
about what senior Russian officials think of the invasion. Haven't seen this kind of information anywhere else."
https://twitter.com/ichbinilya/status/1500422683846225924?s=20&t=xI4mdo2-Gn24-WqNpL4TXQ
It all went sour pretty quickly - Iron Curtain speech, Berlin blockade, and all the rest of it. But in 1945 it seems to hasve been amicable enough, and everyone wss exhausted.
Sort of related, this is a really good piece by Scott Alexander about trying to figure out what's true from the media. Conclusion:
Much though hardly all of this feeling was assuaged by Hitler's blitzkreig victories.
For once most people forsake their old gods, they tend to seek new ones as opposed to embracing atheism.
Russia recruiting Syrians who can fight in urban warfare to send them to Ukraine, WSJ has reported citing four US officials. The US officials did not specify the number of Syrian mercenaries were planned to be sent.
All operations of the plant’s staff require approval by Russian commander.‘
https://twitter.com/kyivindependent/status/1500660873114832896?s=21
‘A major topic on #RTRPlaneta's propaganda show #60minutes was today: Use of #tacticalnuclearweapons within #Ukraine - for the self-defense of #Russiantroops from "#Nazis" and NATO in Ukraine.’
https://twitter.com/umlandandreas/status/1500611490369445895?s=21
I fear something really bad is unfolding
https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1500637456126906371
That 95% figure is interesting.
‘RUSSIAN MINISTRY OF DEFENSE SAYS UKRAINE'S SBU PLANNING TO BLOW UP THE REACTOR FOR RADIOACTIVE CONTAMINATION AT KHARKOV AND ACCUSE RUSSIA’
https://twitter.com/firstsquawk/status/1500656987553427458?s=21
The average Russian genuinely has no idea that Russia has invaded Ukraine, is shelling cities and killing civilians. Although surely they must think something is going on, when there’s long queues at banks and Western goods have disappeared from the shops.
It’s not at all untypical of how the Russians have announced in advance their own operations, blaming them on the victims.
If he deliberately bombs a nuclear power station, that’s likely to be treated as the use of a nuclear weapon by other nuclear countries, with a response to match. Hopefully, the response can be aggressive but non-nuclear - but there would have to be a response.
Really wouldn’t want to be Biden, Johnson or Macron at the moment.
https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/status/1498002786876805124
The predictions has proved remarkably prescient, and if the analysis is correct then Putin is at the end of his planned actions (the last resort levelling of cities on the Syrian model). If his armies fail to make progress, then he is off the map, improvising.
What he does next is worryingly unpredictable.
It worked in the old days because they found the themselves at sea.