This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
In an age of instant gratification, the fact that just 16 days in Russian has yet to decisively roll over the Ukraine is somehow being interpreted as Russia having "lost".
Timescales in major wars are not like that.
The historical precedent seems to me to be the timescale of the Soviet Ukraine offensive in the late Summer/Autumn of 1943 in the immediate aftermath of the German defeat in the Battle of Kursk. The Soviet Union bythen had decisive material superiority but it was anything but a cakewalk, with plenty of checks and local reverses. It took the Germans about 3 months between Kursk to advance from a similar starting point as now to a position where they were breaking out from bridgeheads on the other side of the Dnieper.
So, 3 months, not 16 days.
What matters is that Russia has overwhelming military force. The crux of the matter seems to me to hinge on whether, in the longer term, the US and Nato are willing to sanction supplies to the Ukrainians on a scale that can once again halt Russian efforts to renew their offensive and maintain the check in the longer term. Based on the backsliding witnessed over the past week, I am by no means convinced by that.
Needs to be said over and over.
People are too used to 24 news cycles. And then if they have a bit of time to spare, rather fancy themselves as the Clausewitz of our day.
There's a difference between losing politically and losing militarily. You can have overwhelming force, and win every battle, but still lose the war - America in Vietnam is probably the most obvious example of this, but Russia in Afghanistan is a close second. Politically, Russia needs a short war with a decisive victory, which they haven't yet been able to achieve.
I have no idea whether they are losing militarily or politically (which polity). There seems to be some support domestically for the war and of course precious little for it internationally.
I'm not sure why you say Russia needs a short war or indeed what constitutes short. 15 days?
I would define it as a war that lasts months not years. Russia doesn't need another Afghanistan.
I note Tory Unionists are still studiously avoiding any comment on DRossy and the SCons volte face over BJ. How bad are things when the SLDs are accusing you of lacking a spine? Piquant to think that both parties have recently been making noises about working together for the Union.
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
Well, time will tell, but I don't think Russia can sustain a long campaign. I suspect that they will hold the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast, and add a bit to the Donbas, but not gain anything elsewhere.
As noted above what you suspect is of precisely zero value or use. But if it makes you feel better to assess the strategic possibilities of this war with absolutely no basis to do so, nor any credibility whatsoever then go for your life.
You do make yourself look like a complete twat, though.
A bit harsh. 75% of what goes on here on any subject is lightly educated guesswork.
Trigger warning - this has caused great offence in some Nat circles - for an article in a Student rag, no less, for which an apology has been extracted. Principle offence? The author is an English student at St Andrew’s.
Moral of the story, “don’t dish it out if you can’t take it…..”
I like to think of England and Scotland as a middle-aged couple living in the suburbs. The mutual hatred is palpable. They did a pretty good job with the children—the world’s sexiest Empire, modern Industry, and parliamentary democracy—but now the children are gone, and all that’s left is a menopausal Scotland, England (who’s having a midlife crisis), and the family dog, Wales. The cracks are beginning to show: England has just bought a Harley Davidson but no crash helmet (Brexit), and Scotland has turned to pills (Glasgow). Something has got to give—it’s been separate bedrooms since 1997 (or Devolution as they call it). Somebody needs to bite the bullet and move out. Scotland, incidentally, thinks it should be her: she wants to run away and join her French lover, Emmanuel McRon, in the sensual paradise of a Brussels Travelodge. Ideally, Scotland would quite like to fleece England for all he’s worth and leave him paying the mortgage (National Debt). England, meanwhile, is being a bit of a mug and still tries to make an effort once in a while—although Michael Gove in an Aberdeen nightclub didn’t really have the intended aphrodisiac effect.
Better quality analysis than the tripe regularly posted on PB for two decades.
Goodness - congratulations on your 20 years!
I’m one of very, very few left who first posted in 2004. Archives unfortunately long-deleted. It would have been nostalgic to peruse those very early threads.
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
Well, time will tell, but I don't think Russia can sustain a long campaign. I suspect that they will hold the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast, and add a bit to the Donbas, but not gain anything elsewhere.
As noted above what you suspect is of precisely zero value or use. But if it makes you feel better to assess the strategic possibilities of this war with absolutely no basis to do so, nor any credibility whatsoever then go for your life.
You do make yourself look like a complete twat, though.
A bit harsh. 75% of what goes on here on any subject is lightly educated guesswork.
As I said it's the bread and butter of PB. Doesn't mean it's not fucking irritating.
Why on earth would you come to this site, of all sites, if you are so “fucking irritated” by “lightly educated guesswork”?
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
Well, time will tell, but I don't think Russia can sustain a long campaign. I suspect that they will hold the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast, and add a bit to the Donbas, but not gain anything elsewhere.
As noted above what you suspect is of precisely zero value or use. But if it makes you feel better to assess the strategic possibilities of this war with absolutely no basis to do so, nor any credibility whatsoever then go for your life.
You do make yourself look like a complete twat, though.
A bit harsh. 75% of what goes on here on any subject is lightly educated guesswork.
As I said it's the bread and butter of PB. Doesn't mean it's not fucking irritating.
Collar bone mended?
If not, good reason for Saturday morning irritability
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
In 1939, Warsaw resisted the Germans for an entire month, yet that campaign is routinely described as a Polish collapse.
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
Well, time will tell, but I don't think Russia can sustain a long campaign. I suspect that they will hold the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast, and add a bit to the Donbas, but not gain anything elsewhere.
As noted above what you suspect is of precisely zero value or use. But if it makes you feel better to assess the strategic possibilities of this war with absolutely no basis to do so, nor any credibility whatsoever then go for your life.
You do make yourself look like a complete twat, though.
You're not leaving much room to get even more curmudgeonly during the day (I speak as one who likes to leave a bit of slack in that area).
LOL good point I'll keep pushing myself that said.
Academics at leading British universities who push the Kremlin's propaganda are "effectively helping the Russian war effort", @daverich1 from @CST_UK tells @LBC, as we reveal professors at Edinburgh and Leeds have been promoting Putin's lines-to-take on social media.
No worries. There will be mass student protests and they'll be forced out, like Kathleen Stock. No doubt.
(I'm not in favour of academics being forced out for personal views, in general, but this would be more deserved than what happened to Stock)
Edit: I'm completely strict on my Twitter account, as it states my position at a university and I use it for professional purposes to keep the output purely professional - I wouldn't even consider tweeting on the Ukraine situation. The account has undeleted personal/political tweets but from years and years ago before I held a faculty position (student days) so I should be fine unless I decide to stand for a political party. I'd have another account if I wanted to tweet personal stuff/views.
I note Tory Unionists are still studiously avoiding any comment on DRossy and the SCons volte face over BJ. How bad are things when the SLDs are accusing you of lacking a spine? Piquant to think that both parties have recently been making noises about working together for the Union.
No SLab?
I believe Ross has made overtures but even Sarwar aint that stoopid. Bit over delicate of him mind as he seems not to have problem with the Orange Order.
'Anas Sarwar rejects coalitions with SNP or Tories after May’s council elections'
It is simply unacceptable for a senior lawyer such as @Keir_Starmer to so misstate the law on #WomensRights. He needs to take a look at threads from @BluskyeAllison & @legalfeminist & set the record straight.
Some context for the suggestion that Israel is currently a useful mediator in the war. (I’d also note that they supply drone tech to Russia which they refuse, along with any other weapons, to Ukraine.)
I wonder how the US government feels about this? Am I being too cynical in thinking that the America might be encouraging the Israelis?
Probably; if Biden really felt that way, he wouldn’t have supplied so much materiel. The US just voted through Biden’s package of around $13bn of aid to Ukraine. The Netanyahu government got quite cosy with Putin for years, and I doubt the current U.S. administration is particularly happy about that. The previous one, of course….
Ukraine doesn't get $13bn in their PayPal on Monday. It'll be drizzled in as circumstances require.
The best outcome for the US is a European Afghanistan that enervates Russia, both politically and economically, while keeping the EU in a state of constant anxiety which causes them to start taking care of their own security.
And so far, it’s looking as if that’s exactly what they’re going to get.
Some context for the suggestion that Israel is currently a useful mediator in the war. (I’d also note that they supply drone tech to Russia which they refuse, along with any other weapons, to Ukraine.)
I wonder how the US government feels about this? Am I being too cynical in thinking that the America might be encouraging the Israelis?
Probably; if Biden really felt that way, he wouldn’t have supplied so much materiel. The US just voted through Biden’s package of around $13bn of aid to Ukraine. The Netanyahu government got quite cosy with Putin for years, and I doubt the current U.S. administration is particularly happy about that. The previous one, of course….
Ukraine doesn't get $13bn in their PayPal on Monday. It'll be drizzled in as circumstances require.
The best outcome for the US is a European Afghanistan that enervates Russia, both politically and economically, while keeping the EU in a state of constant anxiety which causes them to start taking care of their own security.
Yes, I think this is where things are heading in Ukraine. Terrible for them, but the reinvention of Europe would be no bad thing.
I'm not convinced. The casualties are at WW2 levels but the size of the forces are not. One side or the other will collapse at some point. My guess is this is going badly for the Russians. Sending in foreign fighters is a sign of desperation. And how do they continue to protect Assad? We should be watching Syria closely. I'm sure China will.
The thing that I worry most about is Russia resorting to desperate tactics. Attacking nuclear power stations, chemical weapons etc.
Trigger warning - this has caused great offence in some Nat circles - for an article in a Student rag, no less, for which an apology has been extracted. Principle offence? The author is an English student at St Andrew’s.
Moral of the story, “don’t dish it out if you can’t take it…..”
I like to think of England and Scotland as a middle-aged couple living in the suburbs. The mutual hatred is palpable. They did a pretty good job with the children—the world’s sexiest Empire, modern Industry, and parliamentary democracy—but now the children are gone, and all that’s left is a menopausal Scotland, England (who’s having a midlife crisis), and the family dog, Wales. The cracks are beginning to show: England has just bought a Harley Davidson but no crash helmet (Brexit), and Scotland has turned to pills (Glasgow). Something has got to give—it’s been separate bedrooms since 1997 (or Devolution as they call it). Somebody needs to bite the bullet and move out. Scotland, incidentally, thinks it should be her: she wants to run away and join her French lover, Emmanuel McRon, in the sensual paradise of a Brussels Travelodge. Ideally, Scotland would quite like to fleece England for all he’s worth and leave him paying the mortgage (National Debt). England, meanwhile, is being a bit of a mug and still tries to make an effort once in a while—although Michael Gove in an Aberdeen nightclub didn’t really have the intended aphrodisiac effect.
Better quality analysis than the tripe regularly posted on PB for two decades.
But very sexist too. I see St A hasn't really moved on from the 1970s, at least as regards some of the denizens.
Is it really all that sexist? I’m one of these people that is quite nostalgic for when you were allowed to have a bit of a laugh and poke fun at people. Pretty much verboten these days. Except the Jocks of course.
Some context for the suggestion that Israel is currently a useful mediator in the war. (I’d also note that they supply drone tech to Russia which they refuse, along with any other weapons, to Ukraine.)
I wonder how the US government feels about this? Am I being too cynical in thinking that the America might be encouraging the Israelis?
Probably; if Biden really felt that way, he wouldn’t have supplied so much materiel. The US just voted through Biden’s package of around $13bn of aid to Ukraine. The Netanyahu government got quite cosy with Putin for years, and I doubt the current U.S. administration is particularly happy about that. The previous one, of course….
Ukraine doesn't get $13bn in their PayPal on Monday. It'll be drizzled in as circumstances require.
The best outcome for the US is a European Afghanistan that enervates Russia, both politically and economically, while keeping the EU in a state of constant anxiety which causes them to start taking care of their own security.
And so far, it’s looking as if that’s exactly what they’re going to get.
Some context for the suggestion that Israel is currently a useful mediator in the war. (I’d also note that they supply drone tech to Russia which they refuse, along with any other weapons, to Ukraine.)
I wonder how the US government feels about this? Am I being too cynical in thinking that the America might be encouraging the Israelis?
Probably; if Biden really felt that way, he wouldn’t have supplied so much materiel. The US just voted through Biden’s package of around $13bn of aid to Ukraine. The Netanyahu government got quite cosy with Putin for years, and I doubt the current U.S. administration is particularly happy about that. The previous one, of course….
Ukraine doesn't get $13bn in their PayPal on Monday. It'll be drizzled in as circumstances require.
The best outcome for the US is a European Afghanistan that enervates Russia, both politically and economically, while keeping the EU in a state of constant anxiety which causes them to start taking care of their own security.
Yes, I think this is where things are heading in Ukraine. Terrible for them, but the reinvention of Europe would be no bad thing.
I'm not convinced. The casualties are at WW2 levels but the size of the forces are not. One side or the other will collapse at some point. My guess is this is going badly for the Russians. Sending in foreign fighters is a sign of desperation. And how do they continue to protect Assad? We should be watching Syria closely. I'm sure China will.
The thing that I worry most about is Russia resorting to desperate tactics. Attacking nuclear power stations, chemical weapons etc.
I note Tory Unionists are still studiously avoiding any comment on DRossy and the SCons volte face over BJ. How bad are things when the SLDs are accusing you of lacking a spine? Piquant to think that both parties have recently been making noises about working together for the Union.
Rest of South Con 43% Lab 33% LD 14% Grn 5% Ref 2%
Midlands Con 42% Lab 39% LD 10% Gen 5% Ref 3%
North Lab 55% Con 30% LD 6% Grn 5% Ref 1%
Wales Lab 39% Con 32% PC 13% LD 7% Gen 5% Ref 2%
Scotland SNP 48% Lab 20% Con 17% LD 11% Grn 3% Ref -
(Sample Size: 2,003; Fieldwork: 8- 11 March 2022)
The Red Wall is almost certainly lost for the Tories now.
Looks like it. The opposition parties will have a conundrum in the South, though. On these figures there are a number of Blue Wall seats where the LibDems were second last time but Labour is now second by a fair margin. Unless there's a quiet deal, neither is going to ease off for the other in seats like that.
Yes, I can see that as a dilemma. In my seat it varies from election to election who is the main challenger.
That is one of the fun things in Scottish politics at the moment: it is far from clear which is the principal Unionist party. They are pretty much neck and neck.
It doesn’t really matter much for the May elections, but if one or the other of the main Unionist parties gets a clear lead it will heavily affect media coverage. This is a dangerous period for the Scottish Tories. Douglas Ross has made a total arse of himself and they are in serious danger of sinking back down to their core vote, approx 15-18%. That’ll be cemented if Sarwar’s party have a good 2022.
Who would have thought you could have got a worse leader than Sarwar, him and Ross are dumb and dumber for sure. Both out of their depth.
Shhhh…
Never disturb the enemy while they’re making a mistake.
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
In an age of instant gratification, the fact that just 16 days in Russian has yet to decisively roll over the Ukraine is somehow being interpreted as Russia having "lost".
Timescales in major wars are not like that.
The historical precedent seems to me to be the timescale of the Soviet Ukraine offensive in the late Summer/Autumn of 1943 in the immediate aftermath of the German defeat in the Battle of Kursk. The Soviet Union bythen had decisive material superiority but it was anything but a cakewalk, with plenty of checks and local reverses. It took the Germans about 3 months between Kursk to advance from a similar starting point as now to a position where they were breaking out from bridgeheads on the other side of the Dnieper.
So, 3 months, not 16 days.
What matters is that Russia has overwhelming military force. The crux of the matter seems to me to hinge on whether, in the longer term, the US and Nato are willing to sanction supplies to the Ukrainians on a scale that can once again halt Russian efforts to renew their offensive and maintain the check in the longer term. Based on the backsliding witnessed over the past week, I am by no means convinced by that.
Needs to be said over and over.
People are too used to 24 news cycles. And then if they have a bit of time to spare, rather fancy themselves as the Clausewitz of our day.
There's a difference between losing politically and losing militarily. You can have overwhelming force, and win every battle, but still lose the war - America in Vietnam is probably the most obvious example of this, but Russia in Afghanistan is a close second. Politically, Russia needs a short war with a decisive victory, which they haven't yet been able to achieve.
I have no idea whether they are losing militarily or politically (which polity). There seems to be some support domestically for the war and of course precious little for it internationally.
I'm not sure why you say Russia needs a short war or indeed what constitutes short. 15 days?
I would define it as a war that lasts months not years. Russia doesn't need another Afghanistan.
Or do you think it does?
I really don't know. Both Russia and the West spent years in Afghan for as far as I can see precious little gain but they decided to do it. So I would say probably not.
And months not years still takes us to beyond 16 days.
My only point is and has been we know almost literally nothing about the progress of the war and people posting videos from Twitter showing 40 seconds of something or other and then making a grand pronouncement about how the war is going is asinine in the extreme.
Some context for the suggestion that Israel is currently a useful mediator in the war. (I’d also note that they supply drone tech to Russia which they refuse, along with any other weapons, to Ukraine.)
I wonder how the US government feels about this? Am I being too cynical in thinking that the America might be encouraging the Israelis?
Probably; if Biden really felt that way, he wouldn’t have supplied so much materiel. The US just voted through Biden’s package of around $13bn of aid to Ukraine. The Netanyahu government got quite cosy with Putin for years, and I doubt the current U.S. administration is particularly happy about that. The previous one, of course….
Ukraine doesn't get $13bn in their PayPal on Monday. It'll be drizzled in as circumstances require.
The best outcome for the US is a European Afghanistan that enervates Russia, both politically and economically, while keeping the EU in a state of constant anxiety which causes them to start taking care of their own security.
And so far, it’s looking as if that’s exactly what they’re going to get.
Some context for the suggestion that Israel is currently a useful mediator in the war. (I’d also note that they supply drone tech to Russia which they refuse, along with any other weapons, to Ukraine.)
I wonder how the US government feels about this? Am I being too cynical in thinking that the America might be encouraging the Israelis?
Probably; if Biden really felt that way, he wouldn’t have supplied so much materiel. The US just voted through Biden’s package of around $13bn of aid to Ukraine. The Netanyahu government got quite cosy with Putin for years, and I doubt the current U.S. administration is particularly happy about that. The previous one, of course….
Ukraine doesn't get $13bn in their PayPal on Monday. It'll be drizzled in as circumstances require.
The best outcome for the US is a European Afghanistan that enervates Russia, both politically and economically, while keeping the EU in a state of constant anxiety which causes them to start taking care of their own security.
Yes, I think this is where things are heading in Ukraine. Terrible for them, but the reinvention of Europe would be no bad thing.
I'm not convinced. The casualties are at WW2 levels but the size of the forces are not. One side or the other will collapse at some point. My guess is this is going badly for the Russians. Sending in foreign fighters is a sign of desperation. And how do they continue to protect Assad? We should be watching Syria closely. I'm sure China will.
The thing that I worry most about is Russia resorting to desperate tactics. Attacking nuclear power stations, chemical weapons etc.
'Resorting to?' They already have!
It occurs to me, that in his role as a Greater Russian Nationalist, Putin wanted the the Russia from 80s & 90s Hollywood, where they had cool toys and were awesome bad guys....
Sweden planning to cater for over 210,000 Ukrainian refugees by the summer.
That's in the same ball park as Ireland's planning, relative to their respective populations. On an even basis across the EU it equates to 9 million Ukrainian refugees. If the UK were to take a similar number of refugees we would be looking at 1.3 million.
Very clear that HMG is desperate to avoid taking even one-tenth of that number.
Yes, you need to analyse the contribution of the various states in proportion to their populations. Sweden is only 10 million people.
We have been incredibly generous to refugees from many, many conflicts. Chile, Somalia, Iran, Iraq, former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Syria spring to mind, but hundreds of others too.
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
Well, time will tell, but I don't think Russia can sustain a long campaign. I suspect that they will hold the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast, and add a bit to the Donbas, but not gain anything elsewhere.
As noted above what you suspect is of precisely zero value or use. But if it makes you feel better to assess the strategic possibilities of this war with absolutely no basis to do so, nor any credibility whatsoever then go for your life.
You do make yourself look like a complete twat, though.
You're not leaving much room to get even more curmudgeonly during the day (I speak as one who likes to leave a bit of slack in that area).
LOL good point I'll keep pushing myself that said.
Well, I'd just like to state that - as an epidemiologist based on Yorkshire - I see clear signs of Lib Dem breakthroughs in London and hereby tip them to take over the entire city (well, mayoralty) in 2024. The tweets I'm seeing fromLib Dems on the ground make this very clear.
Some context for the suggestion that Israel is currently a useful mediator in the war. (I’d also note that they supply drone tech to Russia which they refuse, along with any other weapons, to Ukraine.)
I wonder how the US government feels about this? Am I being too cynical in thinking that the America might be encouraging the Israelis?
Probably; if Biden really felt that way, he wouldn’t have supplied so much materiel. The US just voted through Biden’s package of around $13bn of aid to Ukraine. The Netanyahu government got quite cosy with Putin for years, and I doubt the current U.S. administration is particularly happy about that. The previous one, of course….
Ukraine doesn't get $13bn in their PayPal on Monday. It'll be drizzled in as circumstances require.
The best outcome for the US is a European Afghanistan that enervates Russia, both politically and economically, while keeping the EU in a state of constant anxiety which causes them to start taking care of their own security.
And so far, it’s looking as if that’s exactly what they’re going to get.
Some context for the suggestion that Israel is currently a useful mediator in the war. (I’d also note that they supply drone tech to Russia which they refuse, along with any other weapons, to Ukraine.)
I wonder how the US government feels about this? Am I being too cynical in thinking that the America might be encouraging the Israelis?
Probably; if Biden really felt that way, he wouldn’t have supplied so much materiel. The US just voted through Biden’s package of around $13bn of aid to Ukraine. The Netanyahu government got quite cosy with Putin for years, and I doubt the current U.S. administration is particularly happy about that. The previous one, of course….
Ukraine doesn't get $13bn in their PayPal on Monday. It'll be drizzled in as circumstances require.
The best outcome for the US is a European Afghanistan that enervates Russia, both politically and economically, while keeping the EU in a state of constant anxiety which causes them to start taking care of their own security.
Yes, I think this is where things are heading in Ukraine. Terrible for them, but the reinvention of Europe would be no bad thing.
I'm not convinced. The casualties are at WW2 levels but the size of the forces are not. One side or the other will collapse at some point. My guess is this is going badly for the Russians. Sending in foreign fighters is a sign of desperation. And how do they continue to protect Assad? We should be watching Syria closely. I'm sure China will.
The thing that I worry most about is Russia resorting to desperate tactics. Attacking nuclear power stations, chemical weapons etc.
Must say I assumed that the foreign fighters thing is just (fcuked up) PR: Look, our cause is just, these lovely bunch of lads are flocking to it. How quickly could they get those units on the ground with supplies and support?
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
Well, time will tell, but I don't think Russia can sustain a long campaign. I suspect that they will hold the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast, and add a bit to the Donbas, but not gain anything elsewhere.
As noted above what you suspect is of precisely zero value or use. But if it makes you feel better to assess the strategic possibilities of this war with absolutely no basis to do so, nor any credibility whatsoever then go for your life.
You do make yourself look like a complete twat, though.
A bit harsh. 75% of what goes on here on any subject is lightly educated guesswork.
As I said it's the bread and butter of PB. Doesn't mean it's not fucking irritating.
Collar bone mended?
If not, good reason for Saturday morning irritability
Hah yes all good thanks been out a few times since - just an unsightly bump which as you know is not too uncommon amongst our types.
Grumpy also because it's a long time until August...
After rather lacklustre performances in the large invitation agility round, we're now onto the semi-finals of the fun competitions judging the crossbreed entrants. Lots of impressive stories and achievements in the Good Citizen competition.
Tension is building for this evening's crossbreed grand final.
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
In an age of instant gratification, the fact that just 16 days in Russian has yet to decisively roll over the Ukraine is somehow being interpreted as Russia having "lost".
Timescales in major wars are not like that.
The historical precedent seems to me to be the timescale of the Soviet Ukraine offensive in the late Summer/Autumn of 1943 in the immediate aftermath of the German defeat in the Battle of Kursk. The Soviet Union bythen had decisive material superiority but it was anything but a cakewalk, with plenty of checks and local reverses. It took the Germans about 3 months between Kursk to advance from a similar starting point as now to a position where they were breaking out from bridgeheads on the other side of the Dnieper.
So, 3 months, not 16 days.
What matters is that Russia has overwhelming military force. The crux of the matter seems to me to hinge on whether, in the longer term, the US and Nato are willing to sanction supplies to the Ukrainians on a scale that can once again halt Russian efforts to renew their offensive and maintain the check in the longer term. Based on the backsliding witnessed over the past week, I am by no means convinced by that.
Needs to be said over and over.
People are too used to 24 news cycles. And then if they have a bit of time to spare, rather fancy themselves as the Clausewitz of our day.
There's a difference between losing politically and losing militarily. You can have overwhelming force, and win every battle, but still lose the war - America in Vietnam is probably the most obvious example of this, but Russia in Afghanistan is a close second. Politically, Russia needs a short war with a decisive victory, which they haven't yet been able to achieve.
I have no idea whether they are losing militarily or politically (which polity). There seems to be some support domestically for the war and of course precious little for it internationally.
I'm not sure why you say Russia needs a short war or indeed what constitutes short. 15 days?
I would define it as a war that lasts months not years. Russia doesn't need another Afghanistan.
Or do you think it does?
I really don't know. Both Russia and the West spent years in Afghan for as far as I can see precious little gain but they decided to do it. So I would say probably not.
And months not years still takes us to beyond 16 days.
My only point is and has been we know almost literally nothing about the progress of the war and people posting videos from Twitter showing 40 seconds of something or other and then making a grand pronouncement about how the war is going is asinine in the extreme.
We are sadly just passengers at this point.
There are plenty of well sourced bits of analysis too, for example this well resourced US military thinktank:
Rest of South Con 43% Lab 33% LD 14% Grn 5% Ref 2%
Midlands Con 42% Lab 39% LD 10% Gen 5% Ref 3%
North Lab 55% Con 30% LD 6% Grn 5% Ref 1%
Wales Lab 39% Con 32% PC 13% LD 7% Gen 5% Ref 2%
Scotland SNP 48% Lab 20% Con 17% LD 11% Grn 3% Ref -
(Sample Size: 2,003; Fieldwork: 8- 11 March 2022)
The Red Wall is almost certainly lost for the Tories now.
I think you’re right. The North of England has been truly atrocious for the Tories for too long, and too deep, now. But it is the English Midlands that interest me. And here it’s still very tight, across all pollsters.
YouGov are the only one I really put much faith in when it comes to geographical breaks, and their most recent findings are even worse than that Deltapoll for Northern Tory MPs:
London Lab 55% Con 26% LD 11% Grn 6% Ref 1%
Rest of South Con 41% Lab 31% LD 13% Grn 8% Ref 5%
Midlands/Wales Lab 39% Con 35% Grn 7% LD 7% Ref 6% PC 3%
North Lab 49% Con 28% Grn 9% LD 7% Ref 3%
Scotland SNP 44% Con 22% Lab 21% Grn 6% LD 5% Ref 1%
(YG; Sample Size: 1,700; Fieldwork: 8- 9 March 2022)
The Midlands is Labour's toughest challenge by far. What's interesting is that Labour does not seem to have worked this out yet.
Labour can form a government without winning the Midlands if they win London, Wales and the North by more than they did in 2019 and the Midlands is closer.
However they would need SNP confidence and supply to make Starmer PM.
Labour can likely only win a majority if they have a significant lead in the Midlands too
Or if Scotland dons the Union Jack y-fronts again.
Sweden planning to cater for over 210,000 Ukrainian refugees by the summer.
That's in the same ball park as Ireland's planning, relative to their respective populations. On an even basis across the EU it equates to 9 million Ukrainian refugees. If the UK were to take a similar number of refugees we would be looking at 1.3 million.
Very clear that HMG is desperate to avoid taking even one-tenth of that number.
Yes, you need to analyse the contribution of the various states in proportion to their populations. Sweden is only 10 million people.
We have been incredibly generous to refugees from many, many conflicts. Chile, Somalia, Iran, Iraq, former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Syria spring to mind, but hundreds of others too.
Why is Sweden so generous?
To give the right elsewhere an example to point to of how immigration is a Bad Thing?
While overall crime levels in Sweden remain low, and homicide rates have fallen since the 1990s, it is particularly gang-related violence that worries authorities. A police report last year mapped out 36 different "clans" in major Swedish cities, tracking these family-based networks that often have roots in North Africa and the Middle East. These organizations engage in extortion and drug trafficking, fight each other over turf, and often have ties to other criminal outfits such as motorcycle clubs.
Sweden planning to cater for over 210,000 Ukrainian refugees by the summer.
That's in the same ball park as Ireland's planning, relative to their respective populations. On an even basis across the EU it equates to 9 million Ukrainian refugees. If the UK were to take a similar number of refugees we would be looking at 1.3 million.
Very clear that HMG is desperate to avoid taking even one-tenth of that number.
Suspect if HMG could take 1.3m refugees over the next year it would be quietly content, given the circumstances. The challenge is taking 1.3m Ukrainian refugees on top of the steady stream of arrivals from the third world.
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
Well, time will tell, but I don't think Russia can sustain a long campaign. I suspect that they will hold the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast, and add a bit to the Donbas, but not gain anything elsewhere.
As noted above what you suspect is of precisely zero value or use. But if it makes you feel better to assess the strategic possibilities of this war with absolutely no basis to do so, nor any credibility whatsoever then go for your life.
You do make yourself look like a complete twat, though.
A bit harsh. 75% of what goes on here on any subject is lightly educated guesswork.
As I said it's the bread and butter of PB. Doesn't mean it's not fucking irritating.
Collar bone mended?
If not, good reason for Saturday morning irritability
Hah yes all good thanks been out a few times since - just an unsightly bump which as you know is not too uncommon amongst our types.
Grumpy also because it's a long time until August...
Rest of South Con 43% Lab 33% LD 14% Grn 5% Ref 2%
Midlands Con 42% Lab 39% LD 10% Gen 5% Ref 3%
North Lab 55% Con 30% LD 6% Grn 5% Ref 1%
Wales Lab 39% Con 32% PC 13% LD 7% Gen 5% Ref 2%
Scotland SNP 48% Lab 20% Con 17% LD 11% Grn 3% Ref -
(Sample Size: 2,003; Fieldwork: 8- 11 March 2022)
The Red Wall is almost certainly lost for the Tories now.
I think you’re right. The North of England has been truly atrocious for the Tories for too long, and too deep, now. But it is the English Midlands that interest me. And here it’s still very tight, across all pollsters.
YouGov are the only one I really put much faith in when it comes to geographical breaks, and their most recent findings are even worse than that Deltapoll for Northern Tory MPs:
London Lab 55% Con 26% LD 11% Grn 6% Ref 1%
Rest of South Con 41% Lab 31% LD 13% Grn 8% Ref 5%
Midlands/Wales Lab 39% Con 35% Grn 7% LD 7% Ref 6% PC 3%
North Lab 49% Con 28% Grn 9% LD 7% Ref 3%
Scotland SNP 44% Con 22% Lab 21% Grn 6% LD 5% Ref 1%
(YG; Sample Size: 1,700; Fieldwork: 8- 9 March 2022)
The Midlands is Labour's toughest challenge by far. What's interesting is that Labour does not seem to have worked this out yet.
Labour can form a government without winning the Midlands if they win London, Wales and the North by more than they did in 2019 and the Midlands is closer.
However they would need SNP confidence and supply to make Starmer PM.
Labour can likely only win a majority if they have a significant lead in the Midlands too
Or if Scotland dons the Union Jack y-fronts again.
Hardly tasteful.
Only if they are Scottish Labour Union Jack Y fronts again though and not Scottish Tory ones can Labour win a majority without clearly winning the Midlands
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
Well, time will tell, but I don't think Russia can sustain a long campaign. I suspect that they will hold the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast, and add a bit to the Donbas, but not gain anything elsewhere.
As noted above what you suspect is of precisely zero value or use. But if it makes you feel better to assess the strategic possibilities of this war with absolutely no basis to do so, nor any credibility whatsoever then go for your life.
You do make yourself look like a complete twat, though.
A bit harsh. 75% of what goes on here on any subject is lightly educated guesswork.
As I said it's the bread and butter of PB. Doesn't mean it's not fucking irritating.
Why on earth would you come to this site, of all sites, if you are so “fucking irritated” by “lightly educated guesswork”?
politicalbetting.com
There’s a clue in the name
I'm not sure anyone has reached the heights of "lightly educated" yet.
Rest of South Con 43% Lab 33% LD 14% Grn 5% Ref 2%
Midlands Con 42% Lab 39% LD 10% Gen 5% Ref 3%
North Lab 55% Con 30% LD 6% Grn 5% Ref 1%
Wales Lab 39% Con 32% PC 13% LD 7% Gen 5% Ref 2%
Scotland SNP 48% Lab 20% Con 17% LD 11% Grn 3% Ref -
(Sample Size: 2,003; Fieldwork: 8- 11 March 2022)
The Red Wall is almost certainly lost for the Tories now.
I think you’re right. The North of England has been truly atrocious for the Tories for too long, and too deep, now. But it is the English Midlands that interest me. And here it’s still very tight, across all pollsters.
YouGov are the only one I really put much faith in when it comes to geographical breaks, and their most recent findings are even worse than that Deltapoll for Northern Tory MPs:
London Lab 55% Con 26% LD 11% Grn 6% Ref 1%
Rest of South Con 41% Lab 31% LD 13% Grn 8% Ref 5%
Midlands/Wales Lab 39% Con 35% Grn 7% LD 7% Ref 6% PC 3%
North Lab 49% Con 28% Grn 9% LD 7% Ref 3%
Scotland SNP 44% Con 22% Lab 21% Grn 6% LD 5% Ref 1%
(YG; Sample Size: 1,700; Fieldwork: 8- 9 March 2022)
The Midlands is Labour's toughest challenge by far. What's interesting is that Labour does not seem to have worked this out yet.
Labour can form a government without winning the Midlands if they win London, Wales and the North by more than they did in 2019 and the Midlands is closer.
However they would need SNP confidence and supply to make Starmer PM.
Labour can likely only win a majority if they have a significant lead in the Midlands too
Well, that may come.
One thing I do notice here in Staffordshire - and I have no idea whether it's typical of the Midlands' former industrial areas, but it strikes me as a curious inversion of the national norm - is that Labour's voters and activists are mostly very elderly ex-union types. The candidate they put up here in 2019 was 77 years old. They couldn't find anyone younger. Watching them leafleting in Cannock town centre was like watching an OAPs' association.
Tory voters are mostly quite a bit younger and work in the lighter industrial firms. They are not bothered about pensions, or savings. Or unions or very often politics in general. What they want is enough money in their pay packets to cover their bills, including nice shiny toys like new iPhones.
So clobbering them with an NI rise is actually a very silly idea, especially as those bills go up substantially.
Does that mean Labour can recover? Not necessarily. See about the hollowed out activist base again. But the Tories shouldn't be in any way complacent.
Don't know if it's typical or just a fluke of Staffs' peculiar circumstances. So treat with caution.
It is simply unacceptable for a senior lawyer such as @Keir_Starmer to so misstate the law on #WomensRights. He needs to take a look at threads from @BluskyeAllison & @legalfeminist & set the record straight.
Starmer is even more stupid than I thought, the clown does not even know what a woman is.
A transwoman *with a gender reassignment certificate* is legally a woman, surely?
The problem is that woman, like many other words, has different definitions depending on context. Stock covers this well in her book Material Girls. Hence so much of the discussion is pointless misunderstanding of others positions.
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
Well, time will tell, but I don't think Russia can sustain a long campaign. I suspect that they will hold the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast, and add a bit to the Donbas, but not gain anything elsewhere.
As noted above what you suspect is of precisely zero value or use. But if it makes you feel better to assess the strategic possibilities of this war with absolutely no basis to do so, nor any credibility whatsoever then go for your life.
You do make yourself look like a complete twat, though.
A bit harsh. 75% of what goes on here on any subject is lightly educated guesswork.
As I said it's the bread and butter of PB. Doesn't mean it's not fucking irritating.
Collar bone mended?
If not, good reason for Saturday morning irritability
Hah yes all good thanks been out a few times since - just an unsightly bump which as you know is not too uncommon amongst our types.
Grumpy also because it's a long time until August...
Just tacking up here...
Make my mood worse why don't you I packed up last week. Have a good day.
Academics at leading British universities who push the Kremlin's propaganda are "effectively helping the Russian war effort", @daverich1 from @CST_UK tells @LBC, as we reveal professors at Edinburgh and Leeds have been promoting Putin's lines-to-take on social media.
No worries. There will be mass student protests and they'll be forced out, like Kathleen Stock. No doubt.
(I'm not in favour of academics being forced out for personal views, in general, but this would be more deserved than what happened to Stock)
All Prof Hayward is doing is questioning the evidence over the bombing of a maternity hospital.
I would have thought that was a perfectly reasonable activity ... and especially for an academic.
Serious allegations deserve a serious investigation in which the evidence is actually scrutinised.
If you just hear the case for the prosecution, you always convict. It seems perfectly reasonable to present the case for the defence .... without a lynch mob organised by LBC, & the media.
Bertrand Russell was sacked by Trinity College Cambridge for opposing the First World War. Cambridge is now very embarrassed to be reminded of this.
It is the job of academics to consider a contrarian view. Prof Hayward is just doing his job .
Given the levels in various storage facilities, if Europe stopped buying gas, it would be an interesting race between the Russian state collapsing and Europe running out.
The money is probably the prime source of hard currency, for Russia, at the moment.
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
What matters is that Russia has overwhelming military force.
What is your actual evidence for this, though? Beyond claims about the theoretical strength of Russian conventional forces?
If you’re talking about their nuclear capability then sure, although quite how relevant that is for taking and holding Ukraine is debatable. But in terms of the practical strength of the conventional forces available to them on Ukraine, why are you convinced?
The siege of Mariupol is rather compelling evidence. If the Ukrainians had the capability they would surely have launched a major attempt to lift the siege.
Similarly, the Russians have been able to advance on Kyiv from two directions, and the advance from the east has been over a considerable distance given reported problems with Russian logistics. Again, given the evidence being presented of poor morale, poor communications, deficient tactics, etc, the only explanation for such an advance is overwhelming strength.
It might be that, over time, Ukraine is able to inflict losses that erode this strength, but it does not do any good to deny the evidence of overall Russian military superiority over the Ukrainians at present.
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
What matters is that Russia has overwhelming military force.
What is....
Given that you saw fit to edit out 90% of my point, I'm not going to bother responding to you.
I note Tory Unionists are still studiously avoiding any comment on DRossy and the SCons volte face over BJ. How bad are things when the SLDs are accusing you of lacking a spine? Piquant to think that both parties have recently been making noises about working together for the Union.
No SLab?
I believe Ross has made overtures but even Sarwar aint that stoopid. Bit over delicate of him mind as he seems not to have problem with the Orange Order.
'Anas Sarwar rejects coalitions with SNP or Tories after May’s council elections'
Rest of South Con 43% Lab 33% LD 14% Grn 5% Ref 2%
Midlands Con 42% Lab 39% LD 10% Gen 5% Ref 3%
North Lab 55% Con 30% LD 6% Grn 5% Ref 1%
Wales Lab 39% Con 32% PC 13% LD 7% Gen 5% Ref 2%
Scotland SNP 48% Lab 20% Con 17% LD 11% Grn 3% Ref -
(Sample Size: 2,003; Fieldwork: 8- 11 March 2022)
The Red Wall is almost certainly lost for the Tories now.
I think you’re right. The North of England has been truly atrocious for the Tories for too long, and too deep, now. But it is the English Midlands that interest me. And here it’s still very tight, across all pollsters.
YouGov are the only one I really put much faith in when it comes to geographical breaks, and their most recent findings are even worse than that Deltapoll for Northern Tory MPs:
London Lab 55% Con 26% LD 11% Grn 6% Ref 1%
Rest of South Con 41% Lab 31% LD 13% Grn 8% Ref 5%
Midlands/Wales Lab 39% Con 35% Grn 7% LD 7% Ref 6% PC 3%
North Lab 49% Con 28% Grn 9% LD 7% Ref 3%
Scotland SNP 44% Con 22% Lab 21% Grn 6% LD 5% Ref 1%
(YG; Sample Size: 1,700; Fieldwork: 8- 9 March 2022)
The Midlands is Labour's toughest challenge by far. What's interesting is that Labour does not seem to have worked this out yet.
Labour can form a government without winning the Midlands if they win London, Wales and the North by more than they did in 2019 and the Midlands is closer.
However they would need SNP confidence and supply to make Starmer PM.
Labour can likely only win a majority if they have a significant lead in the Midlands too
Well, that may come.
One thing I do notice here in Staffordshire - and I have no idea whether it's typical of the Midlands' former industrial areas, but it strikes me as a curious inversion of the national norm - is that Labour's voters and activists are mostly very elderly ex-union types. The candidate they put up here in 2019 was 77 years old. They couldn't find anyone younger. Watching them leafleting in Cannock town centre was like watching an OAPs' association.
Tory voters are mostly quite a bit younger and work in the lighter industrial firms. They are not bothered about pensions, or savings. Or unions or very often politics in general. What they want is enough money in their pay packets to cover their bills, including nice shiny toys like new iPhones.
So clobbering them with an NI rise is actually a very silly idea, especially as those bills go up substantially.
Does that mean Labour can recover? Not necessarily. See about the hollowed out activist base again. But the Tories shouldn't be in any way complacent.
Don't know if it's typical or just a fluke of Staffs' peculiar circumstances. So treat with caution.
Though of course the Midlands also had the biggest Leave vote in the country in 2016 which is also still a factor.
Of course from next year the NI rise will be replaced by the health and social care levy
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
In an age of instant gratification, the fact that just 16 days in Russian has yet to decisively roll over the Ukraine is somehow being interpreted as Russia having "lost".
Timescales in major wars are not like that.
The historical precedent seems to me to be the timescale of the Soviet Ukraine offensive in the late Summer/Autumn of 1943 in the immediate aftermath of the German defeat in the Battle of Kursk. The Soviet Union bythen had decisive material superiority but it was anything but a cakewalk, with plenty of checks and local reverses. It took the Germans about 3 months between Kursk to advance from a similar starting point as now to a position where they were breaking out from bridgeheads on the other side of the Dnieper.
So, 3 months, not 16 days.
What matters is that Russia has overwhelming military force. The crux of the matter seems to me to hinge on whether, in the longer term, the US and Nato are willing to sanction supplies to the Ukrainians on a scale that can once again halt Russian efforts to renew their offensive and maintain the check in the longer term. Based on the backsliding witnessed over the past week, I am by no means convinced by that.
Needs to be said over and over.
People are too used to 24 news cycles. And then if they have a bit of time to spare, rather fancy themselves as the Clausewitz of our day.
There's a difference between losing politically and losing militarily. You can have overwhelming force, and win every battle, but still lose the war - America in Vietnam is probably the most obvious example of this, but Russia in Afghanistan is a close second. Politically, Russia needs a short war with a decisive victory, which they haven't yet been able to achieve.
I have no idea whether they are losing militarily or politically (which polity). There seems to be some support domestically for the war and of course precious little for it internationally.
I'm not sure why you say Russia needs a short war or indeed what constitutes short. 15 days?
I would define it as a war that lasts months not years. Russia doesn't need another Afghanistan.
Or do you think it does?
I really don't know. Both Russia and the West spent years in Afghan for as far as I can see precious little gain but they decided to do it. So I would say probably not.
And months not years still takes us to beyond 16 days.
My only point is and has been we know almost literally nothing about the progress of the war and people posting videos from Twitter showing 40 seconds of something or other and then making a grand pronouncement about how the war is going is asinine in the extreme.
We are sadly just passengers at this point.
This is bollocks. Social media nowadays makes it possible for shrewd amateurs to make accurate guesstimates which would have been impossible pre-internet, when only the professionals saw the intel. This is as true in military matters as it is in politics
The problem these days is an EXCESS of info. From soldiers posting on Telegram to citizens tweeting gory videos to governments adding Fake News on Tik Tok everything you need is out there. But you have to sieve out the disinformation and adjust for bias - in this case the tendency for pro-Ukrainian news to get more publicity, as most social media users are pro Ukraine
Is @foxy right in his analysis? I don’t know, and nor do you, but if he’s carefully looking at a lot of internet info and social media it is quite possible. He’s a doctor. He’s probably more forensic than most. And that’s what you need: a forensic brain. And a screen
I note Tory Unionists are still studiously avoiding any comment on DRossy and the SCons volte face over BJ. How bad are things when the SLDs are accusing you of lacking a spine? Piquant to think that both parties have recently been making noises about working together for the Union.
No SLab?
I believe Ross has made overtures but even Sarwar aint that stoopid. Bit over delicate of him mind as he seems not to have problem with the Orange Order.
'Anas Sarwar rejects coalitions with SNP or Tories after May’s council elections'
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
In 1939, Warsaw resisted the Germans for an entire month, yet that campaign is routinely described as a Polish collapse.
In 1939, the equipment of the German army was nearly all horse drawn. Most of the soldier had to march. Blitzkrieg was a series of dashes by the minority of the motorised forces, with the conventional army behind them catching up.
Interestingly, as a result of re-armament, the BEF in 1940 was the first entirely motorised army, in the world.
The Germans never managed to motorise, completely - even their Panzer divisions had lots of horses, right till the end of the war.
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
Well, time will tell, but I don't think Russia can sustain a long campaign. I suspect that they will hold the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast, and add a bit to the Donbas, but not gain anything elsewhere.
As noted above what you suspect is of precisely zero value or use. But if it makes you feel better to assess the strategic possibilities of this war with absolutely no basis to do so, nor any credibility whatsoever then go for your life.
You do make yourself look like a complete twat, though.
A bit harsh. 75% of what goes on here on any subject is lightly educated guesswork.
As I said it's the bread and butter of PB. Doesn't mean it's not fucking irritating.
Why on earth would you come to this site, of all sites, if you are so “fucking irritated” by “lightly educated guesswork”?
politicalbetting.com
There’s a clue in the name
I'm not sure anyone has reached the heights of "lightly educated" yet.
Rest of South Con 43% Lab 33% LD 14% Grn 5% Ref 2%
Midlands Con 42% Lab 39% LD 10% Gen 5% Ref 3%
North Lab 55% Con 30% LD 6% Grn 5% Ref 1%
Wales Lab 39% Con 32% PC 13% LD 7% Gen 5% Ref 2%
Scotland SNP 48% Lab 20% Con 17% LD 11% Grn 3% Ref -
(Sample Size: 2,003; Fieldwork: 8- 11 March 2022)
The Red Wall is almost certainly lost for the Tories now.
I think you’re right. The North of England has been truly atrocious for the Tories for too long, and too deep, now. But it is the English Midlands that interest me. And here it’s still very tight, across all pollsters.
YouGov are the only one I really put much faith in when it comes to geographical breaks, and their most recent findings are even worse than that Deltapoll for Northern Tory MPs:
London Lab 55% Con 26% LD 11% Grn 6% Ref 1%
Rest of South Con 41% Lab 31% LD 13% Grn 8% Ref 5%
Midlands/Wales Lab 39% Con 35% Grn 7% LD 7% Ref 6% PC 3%
North Lab 49% Con 28% Grn 9% LD 7% Ref 3%
Scotland SNP 44% Con 22% Lab 21% Grn 6% LD 5% Ref 1%
(YG; Sample Size: 1,700; Fieldwork: 8- 9 March 2022)
The Midlands is Labour's toughest challenge by far. What's interesting is that Labour does not seem to have worked this out yet.
Labour can form a government without winning the Midlands if they win London, Wales and the North by more than they did in 2019 and the Midlands is closer.
However they would need SNP confidence and supply to make Starmer PM.
Labour can likely only win a majority if they have a significant lead in the Midlands too
Or if Scotland dons the Union Jack y-fronts again.
Hardly tasteful.
Only if they are Scottish Labour Union Jack Y fronts again though and not Scottish Tory ones can Labour win a majority without clearly winning the Midlands
Union Jack y-fronts are Union Jack y-fronts.
The SCons have already maxed-out. SLab has nowhere to go but up.
Trigger warning - this has caused great offence in some Nat circles - for an article in a Student rag, no less, for which an apology has been extracted. Principle offence? The author is an English student at St Andrew’s.
Moral of the story, “don’t dish it out if you can’t take it…..”
I like to think of England and Scotland as a middle-aged couple living in the suburbs. The mutual hatred is palpable. They did a pretty good job with the children—the world’s sexiest Empire, modern Industry, and parliamentary democracy—but now the children are gone, and all that’s left is a menopausal Scotland, England (who’s having a midlife crisis), and the family dog, Wales. The cracks are beginning to show: England has just bought a Harley Davidson but no crash helmet (Brexit), and Scotland has turned to pills (Glasgow). Something has got to give—it’s been separate bedrooms since 1997 (or Devolution as they call it). Somebody needs to bite the bullet and move out. Scotland, incidentally, thinks it should be her: she wants to run away and join her French lover, Emmanuel McRon, in the sensual paradise of a Brussels Travelodge. Ideally, Scotland would quite like to fleece England for all he’s worth and leave him paying the mortgage (National Debt). England, meanwhile, is being a bit of a mug and still tries to make an effort once in a while—although Michael Gove in an Aberdeen nightclub didn’t really have the intended aphrodisiac effect.
It is simply unacceptable for a senior lawyer such as @Keir_Starmer to so misstate the law on #WomensRights. He needs to take a look at threads from @BluskyeAllison & @legalfeminist & set the record straight.
Starmer is even more stupid than I thought, the clown does not even know what a woman is.
A transwoman *with a gender reassignment certificate* is legally a woman, surely?
I believe you are the sex you were born myself. If you have had all your bits and bobs removed a have a certificate I could just about accept it , otherwise never.
I note Tory Unionists are still studiously avoiding any comment on DRossy and the SCons volte face over BJ. How bad are things when the SLDs are accusing you of lacking a spine? Piquant to think that both parties have recently been making noises about working together for the Union.
No SLab?
I believe Ross has made overtures but even Sarwar aint that stoopid. Bit over delicate of him mind as he seems not to have problem with the Orange Order.
'Anas Sarwar rejects coalitions with SNP or Tories after May’s council elections'
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
Well, time will tell, but I don't think Russia can sustain a long campaign. I suspect that they will hold the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast, and add a bit to the Donbas, but not gain anything elsewhere.
As noted above what you suspect is of precisely zero value or use. But if it makes you feel better to assess the strategic possibilities of this war with absolutely no basis to do so, nor any credibility whatsoever then go for your life.
You do make yourself look like a complete twat, though.
A bit harsh. 75% of what goes on here on any subject is lightly educated guesswork.
As I said it's the bread and butter of PB. Doesn't mean it's not fucking irritating.
Why on earth would you come to this site, of all sites, if you are so “fucking irritated” by “lightly educated guesswork”?
politicalbetting.com
There’s a clue in the name
I'm not sure anyone has reached the heights of "lightly educated" yet.
Rest of South Con 43% Lab 33% LD 14% Grn 5% Ref 2%
Midlands Con 42% Lab 39% LD 10% Gen 5% Ref 3%
North Lab 55% Con 30% LD 6% Grn 5% Ref 1%
Wales Lab 39% Con 32% PC 13% LD 7% Gen 5% Ref 2%
Scotland SNP 48% Lab 20% Con 17% LD 11% Grn 3% Ref -
(Sample Size: 2,003; Fieldwork: 8- 11 March 2022)
The Red Wall is almost certainly lost for the Tories now.
I think you’re right. The North of England has been truly atrocious for the Tories for too long, and too deep, now. But it is the English Midlands that interest me. And here it’s still very tight, across all pollsters.
YouGov are the only one I really put much faith in when it comes to geographical breaks, and their most recent findings are even worse than that Deltapoll for Northern Tory MPs:
London Lab 55% Con 26% LD 11% Grn 6% Ref 1%
Rest of South Con 41% Lab 31% LD 13% Grn 8% Ref 5%
Midlands/Wales Lab 39% Con 35% Grn 7% LD 7% Ref 6% PC 3%
North Lab 49% Con 28% Grn 9% LD 7% Ref 3%
Scotland SNP 44% Con 22% Lab 21% Grn 6% LD 5% Ref 1%
(YG; Sample Size: 1,700; Fieldwork: 8- 9 March 2022)
The Midlands is Labour's toughest challenge by far. What's interesting is that Labour does not seem to have worked this out yet.
Labour can form a government without winning the Midlands if they win London, Wales and the North by more than they did in 2019 and the Midlands is closer.
However they would need SNP confidence and supply to make Starmer PM.
Labour can likely only win a majority if they have a significant lead in the Midlands too
Or if Scotland dons the Union Jack y-fronts again.
Hardly tasteful.
Only if they are Scottish Labour Union Jack Y fronts again though and not Scottish Tory ones can Labour win a majority without clearly winning the Midlands
Union Jack y-fronts are Union Jack y-fronts.
The SCons have already maxed-out. SLab has nowhere to go but up.
That has to be at the SNP's expense for a majority.
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
There were about two weeks of aerial bombardment before the ground invasion in the first Gulf War. I was assuming something similar here. I think part of the initial shock I felt at the invasion was that this didn't happen, and the helicopter assault on Hostomel airport opened up the possibility of a very rapid defeat for Ukraine.
My nags for today , once again follow at your own peril. One in tribute to our own flint expert as well. Trixie Destiny Is All 14:10 Ayr Hermes Boy 13:56 Hereford Prince Escalus 15:41 Hereford
Double & Singles Knappers Hill 1:50 Sandown Milan Bridge 2:31 Hereford
I thought Saturday morning dogs meant Romford, Crayford or in former times Hackney and Harringay but @IanB2 reminds me it can, for one weekend, mean Cruft's.
Not sure about the track at Crufts and whether it favours wide runners or not so I'll stick to different animals running on an artificial surface. The weekend before Cheltenham is one of the poorest of the year in quality terms as all the good horses are heading to Prestbury Park but for Flat racing fans it's the first sign of the coming of spring - the Lincoln is just a fortnight away.
A very good all-weather card at Wolverhampton and a fair card at Lingfield and the Stodge Saturday Patent (1 winner and a near miss last weekend) returns to annoy and irritate. My three with less chance of winning than an SWP candidate in the City of London Corporation election are:
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
In 1939, Warsaw resisted the Germans for an entire month, yet that campaign is routinely described as a Polish collapse.
AIUI they resisted the Germans for a couple of weeks, and then two fronts against the Germans and Soviets for another couple of weeks? The Russian attack basically destroying the defensive plan they had against the Germans. In addition, the allies (France and UK) had no time to send them many supplies before it was all over.
So yes, it was a collapse: but it was also a very different conflict. I really hope 85% of Kiev is not destroyed...
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
In an age of instant gratification, the fact that just 16 days in Russian has yet to decisively roll over the Ukraine is somehow being interpreted as Russia having "lost".
Timescales in major wars are not like that.
The historical precedent seems to me to be the timescale of the Soviet Ukraine offensive in the late Summer/Autumn of 1943 in the immediate aftermath of the German defeat in the Battle of Kursk. The Soviet Union bythen had decisive material superiority but it was anything but a cakewalk, with plenty of checks and local reverses. It took the Germans about 3 months between Kursk to advance from a similar starting point as now to a position where they were breaking out from bridgeheads on the other side of the Dnieper.
So, 3 months, not 16 days.
What matters is that Russia has overwhelming military force. The crux of the matter seems to me to hinge on whether, in the longer term, the US and Nato are willing to sanction supplies to the Ukrainians on a scale that can once again halt Russian efforts to renew their offensive and maintain the check in the longer term. Based on the backsliding witnessed over the past week, I am by no means convinced by that.
Needs to be said over and over.
People are too used to 24 news cycles. And then if they have a bit of time to spare, rather fancy themselves as the Clausewitz of our day.
There's a difference between losing politically and losing militarily. You can have overwhelming force, and win every battle, but still lose the war - America in Vietnam is probably the most obvious example of this, but Russia in Afghanistan is a close second. Politically, Russia needs a short war with a decisive victory, which they haven't yet been able to achieve.
I have no idea whether they are losing militarily or politically (which polity). There seems to be some support domestically for the war and of course precious little for it internationally.
I'm not sure why you say Russia needs a short war or indeed what constitutes short. 15 days?
I would define it as a war that lasts months not years. Russia doesn't need another Afghanistan.
Or do you think it does?
I really don't know. Both Russia and the West spent years in Afghan for as far as I can see precious little gain but they decided to do it. So I would say probably not.
And months not years still takes us to beyond 16 days.
My only point is and has been we know almost literally nothing about the progress of the war and people posting videos from Twitter showing 40 seconds of something or other and then making a grand pronouncement about how the war is going is asinine in the extreme.
We are sadly just passengers at this point.
There are plenty of well sourced bits of analysis too, for example this well resourced US military thinktank:
And I hope you enjoy reading them. But those pieces are also suppositional. They themselves leave enough caveats and uncertainties in their analysis but at least they have been doing this stuff for longer than you or me.
Take as an example oh I don't know, political betting. When political events loom we look at the markets and say ah yes, this means ABC. But if there's one thing we do here on PB it is political analysis. All day every day (plus pizzas and Netflix series). And we have no idea and fight like cats in a sack about potential political outcomes. If we don't know then how come "the markets" do.
And this is a war. Hugely unpredictable and no clear picture of anything. Of course "experts" can make assessments but none of us know what happens next and barely know what has happened already.
After rather lacklustre performances in the large invitation agility round, we're now onto the semi-finals of the fun competitions judging the crossbreed entrants. Lots of impressive stories and achievements in the Good Citizen competition.
Tension is building for this evening's crossbreed grand final.
I’ve checked the non runners and the going stick. All crammed into an hour because we are going out to watch the rugby 🏴
13:50 - Sandown - Thunder Rock A specialist at this distance. Will compete on any ground. Hasn’t raced for a month.
14:05 - Wolverhampton - Scottish Summit An each way bet.
14:25 - Sandown - Hystery Bere Has form, track, distance and going on its side, shouldn’t let down each way bet.
14:40 - Wolverhampton - Amlicar I don’t think I have ever backed a winner in a race this short, but I have given it serious consideration because I would like to.
Cheltenham week. Festival starts Tuesday. 😍 is anyone going?
I always struggle for winners at the festival. I went to Cheltenham in October and had 3 winners. I will likely be on most the races in some form, just chasing a winner, but each morning I will post the four I most fancy just because sharing is caring.
Did you say you were going to give Mike Smithson Cheltenham headers @stodge ?
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
In an age of instant gratification, the fact that just 16 days in Russian has yet to decisively roll over the Ukraine is somehow being interpreted as Russia having "lost".
Timescales in major wars are not like that.
The historical precedent seems to me to be the timescale of the Soviet Ukraine offensive in the late Summer/Autumn of 1943 in the immediate aftermath of the German defeat in the Battle of Kursk. The Soviet Union bythen had decisive material superiority but it was anything but a cakewalk, with plenty of checks and local reverses. It took the Germans about 3 months between Kursk to advance from a similar starting point as now to a position where they were breaking out from bridgeheads on the other side of the Dnieper.
So, 3 months, not 16 days.
What matters is that Russia has overwhelming military force. The crux of the matter seems to me to hinge on whether, in the longer term, the US and Nato are willing to sanction supplies to the Ukrainians on a scale that can once again halt Russian efforts to renew their offensive and maintain the check in the longer term. Based on the backsliding witnessed over the past week, I am by no means convinced by that.
Needs to be said over and over.
People are too used to 24 news cycles. And then if they have a bit of time to spare, rather fancy themselves as the Clausewitz of our day.
There's a difference between losing politically and losing militarily. You can have overwhelming force, and win every battle, but still lose the war - America in Vietnam is probably the most obvious example of this, but Russia in Afghanistan is a close second. Politically, Russia needs a short war with a decisive victory, which they haven't yet been able to achieve.
I have no idea whether they are losing militarily or politically (which polity). There seems to be some support domestically for the war and of course precious little for it internationally.
I'm not sure why you say Russia needs a short war or indeed what constitutes short. 15 days?
I would define it as a war that lasts months not years. Russia doesn't need another Afghanistan.
Or do you think it does?
I really don't know. Both Russia and the West spent years in Afghan for as far as I can see precious little gain but they decided to do it. So I would say probably not.
And months not years still takes us to beyond 16 days.
My only point is and has been we know almost literally nothing about the progress of the war and people posting videos from Twitter showing 40 seconds of something or other and then making a grand pronouncement about how the war is going is asinine in the extreme.
We are sadly just passengers at this point.
This is bollocks. Social media nowadays makes it possible for shrewd amateurs to make accurate guesstimates which would have been impossible pre-internet, when only the professionals saw the intel. This is as true in military matters as it is in politics
The problem these days is an EXCESS of info. From soldiers posting on Telegram to citizens tweeting gory videos to governments adding Fake News on Tik Tok everything you need is out there. But you have to sieve out the disinformation and adjust for bias - in this case the tendency for pro-Ukrainian news to get more publicity, as most social media users are pro Ukraine
Is @foxy right in his analysis? I don’t know, and nor do you, but if he’s carefully looking at a lot of internet info and social media it is quite possible. He’s a doctor. He’s probably more forensic than most. And that’s what you need: a forensic brain. And a screen
"Asked about the capabilities of Russia's air defense systems, Air Force Gen. Mark D. Kelly said, “They’re operating pretty well when they’re operated by Ukrainians."
Some context for the suggestion that Israel is currently a useful mediator in the war. (I’d also note that they supply drone tech to Russia which they refuse, along with any other weapons, to Ukraine.)
I wonder how the US government feels about this? Am I being too cynical in thinking that the America might be encouraging the Israelis?
Probably; if Biden really felt that way, he wouldn’t have supplied so much materiel. The US just voted through Biden’s package of around $13bn of aid to Ukraine. The Netanyahu government got quite cosy with Putin for years, and I doubt the current U.S. administration is particularly happy about that. The previous one, of course….
Ukraine doesn't get $13bn in their PayPal on Monday. It'll be drizzled in as circumstances require.
The best outcome for the US is a European Afghanistan that enervates Russia, both politically and economically, while keeping the EU in a state of constant anxiety which causes them to start taking care of their own security.
And so far, it’s looking as if that’s exactly what they’re going to get.
Some context for the suggestion that Israel is currently a useful mediator in the war. (I’d also note that they supply drone tech to Russia which they refuse, along with any other weapons, to Ukraine.)
I wonder how the US government feels about this? Am I being too cynical in thinking that the America might be encouraging the Israelis?
Probably; if Biden really felt that way, he wouldn’t have supplied so much materiel. The US just voted through Biden’s package of around $13bn of aid to Ukraine. The Netanyahu government got quite cosy with Putin for years, and I doubt the current U.S. administration is particularly happy about that. The previous one, of course….
Ukraine doesn't get $13bn in their PayPal on Monday. It'll be drizzled in as circumstances require.
The best outcome for the US is a European Afghanistan that enervates Russia, both politically and economically, while keeping the EU in a state of constant anxiety which causes them to start taking care of their own security.
Yes, I think this is where things are heading in Ukraine. Terrible for them, but the reinvention of Europe would be no bad thing.
I'm not convinced. The casualties are at WW2 levels but the size of the forces are not. One side or the other will collapse at some point. My guess is this is going badly for the Russians. Sending in foreign fighters is a sign of desperation. And how do they continue to protect Assad? We should be watching Syria closely. I'm sure China will.
The thing that I worry most about is Russia resorting to desperate tactics. Attacking nuclear power stations, chemical weapons etc.
Must say I assumed that the foreign fighters thing is just (fcuked up) PR: Look, our cause is just, these lovely bunch of lads are flocking to it. How quickly could they get those units on the ground with supplies and support?
With no particular reference to either side:
I have boatloads of brave, fresh-faced overseas conscripts whose conscience has been pricked by my cause. You have desperately press ganged a bunch of foreign thugs because your losses are so great and your regular troops are incompetent drunks.
I am progressing toward a stunning military victory. You are committing genocide.
I am doing research into disease prevention and biological weapons security. You are developing biological weapons and storing nasty diseases ready to unleash on the world.
Sweden planning to cater for over 210,000 Ukrainian refugees by the summer.
That's in the same ball park as Ireland's planning, relative to their respective populations. On an even basis across the EU it equates to 9 million Ukrainian refugees. If the UK were to take a similar number of refugees we would be looking at 1.3 million.
Very clear that HMG is desperate to avoid taking even one-tenth of that number.
Suspect if HMG could take 1.3m refugees over the next year it would be quietly content, given the circumstances. The challenge is taking 1.3m Ukrainian refugees on top of the steady stream of arrivals from the third world.
There were just 37,562 applications for asylum in the UK for the last 12 months that there are figures, higher than at the peak of the European migration crisis.
The numbers are completely irrelevant compared to the scale of the Ukrainian crisis, and clearly much lower than most people assume given the disproportionate attention arrivals of refugees typically receives in the right-wing press.
After rather lacklustre performances in the large invitation agility round, we're now onto the semi-finals of the fun competitions judging the crossbreed entrants. Lots of impressive stories and achievements in the Good Citizen competition.
Tension is building for this evening's crossbreed grand final.
After rather lacklustre performances in the large invitation agility round, we're now onto the semi-finals of the fun competitions judging the crossbreed entrants. Lots of impressive stories and achievements in the Good Citizen competition.
Tension is building for this evening's crossbreed grand final.
After rather lacklustre performances in the large invitation agility round, we're now onto the semi-finals of the fun competitions judging the crossbreed entrants. Lots of impressive stories and achievements in the Good Citizen competition.
Tension is building for this evening's crossbreed grand final.
Another day of dogging on PB...
Keep Sean’s private life out of it
A friend's aunt used to enter her dogs in various competitions, and used to refer with gusto to her and her spouse going 'dogging' in their winnebago. She was mortified when someone told her the modern meaning.
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
There were about two weeks of aerial bombardment before the ground invasion in the first Gulf War. I was assuming something similar here. I think part of the initial shock I felt at the invasion was that this didn't happen, and the helicopter assault on Hostomel airport opened up the possibility of a very rapid defeat for Ukraine.
One of the things we can say about this war, with some certainty, is that Putin expected a rapid victory.
The helicopter assaults, the amount of forces for the campaign, the logistics and now Putin arresting people for not telling him that the Ukrainians would resist.
I can't see how that could possibly make sense, other than a very quick, complete victory was expected.
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
There were about two weeks of aerial bombardment before the ground invasion in the first Gulf War. I was assuming something similar here. I think part of the initial shock I felt at the invasion was that this didn't happen, and the helicopter assault on Hostomel airport opened up the possibility of a very rapid defeat for Ukraine.
Yes there certainly was (in Gulf One). And again we are looking at a conventional campaign but one which is opposed, which Granby wasn't really, which in turn takes us into no man's land.
Rest of South Con 43% Lab 33% LD 14% Grn 5% Ref 2%
Midlands Con 42% Lab 39% LD 10% Gen 5% Ref 3%
North Lab 55% Con 30% LD 6% Grn 5% Ref 1%
Wales Lab 39% Con 32% PC 13% LD 7% Gen 5% Ref 2%
Scotland SNP 48% Lab 20% Con 17% LD 11% Grn 3% Ref -
(Sample Size: 2,003; Fieldwork: 8- 11 March 2022)
The Red Wall is almost certainly lost for the Tories now.
I think you’re right. The North of England has been truly atrocious for the Tories for too long, and too deep, now. But it is the English Midlands that interest me. And here it’s still very tight, across all pollsters.
YouGov are the only one I really put much faith in when it comes to geographical breaks, and their most recent findings are even worse than that Deltapoll for Northern Tory MPs:
London Lab 55% Con 26% LD 11% Grn 6% Ref 1%
Rest of South Con 41% Lab 31% LD 13% Grn 8% Ref 5%
Midlands/Wales Lab 39% Con 35% Grn 7% LD 7% Ref 6% PC 3%
North Lab 49% Con 28% Grn 9% LD 7% Ref 3%
Scotland SNP 44% Con 22% Lab 21% Grn 6% LD 5% Ref 1%
(YG; Sample Size: 1,700; Fieldwork: 8- 9 March 2022)
The Midlands is Labour's toughest challenge by far. What's interesting is that Labour does not seem to have worked this out yet.
Labour can form a government without winning the Midlands if they win London, Wales and the North by more than they did in 2019 and the Midlands is closer.
However they would need SNP confidence and supply to make Starmer PM.
Labour can likely only win a majority if they have a significant lead in the Midlands too
Well, that may come.
One thing I do notice here in Staffordshire - and I have no idea whether it's typical of the Midlands' former industrial areas, but it strikes me as a curious inversion of the national norm - is that Labour's voters and activists are mostly very elderly ex-union types. The candidate they put up here in 2019 was 77 years old. They couldn't find anyone younger. Watching them leafleting in Cannock town centre was like watching an OAPs' association.
Tory voters are mostly quite a bit younger and work in the lighter industrial firms. They are not bothered about pensions, or savings. Or unions or very often politics in general. What they want is enough money in their pay packets to cover their bills, including nice shiny toys like new iPhones.
So clobbering them with an NI rise is actually a very silly idea, especially as those bills go up substantially.
Does that mean Labour can recover? Not necessarily. See about the hollowed out activist base again. But the Tories shouldn't be in any way complacent.
Don't know if it's typical or just a fluke of Staffs' peculiar circumstances. So treat with caution.
Though of course the Midlands also had the biggest Leave vote in the country in 2016 which is also still a factor.
Of course from next year the NI rise will be replaced by the health and social care levy
Is rebadging the charge really going to make much difference? It will still be money that Mr, Mrs, Miss and Mx Voter won't have in their pockets to spend.
Some context for the suggestion that Israel is currently a useful mediator in the war. (I’d also note that they supply drone tech to Russia which they refuse, along with any other weapons, to Ukraine.)
I wonder how the US government feels about this? Am I being too cynical in thinking that the America might be encouraging the Israelis?
Probably; if Biden really felt that way, he wouldn’t have supplied so much materiel. The US just voted through Biden’s package of around $13bn of aid to Ukraine. The Netanyahu government got quite cosy with Putin for years, and I doubt the current U.S. administration is particularly happy about that. The previous one, of course….
Ukraine doesn't get $13bn in their PayPal on Monday. It'll be drizzled in as circumstances require.
The best outcome for the US is a European Afghanistan that enervates Russia, both politically and economically, while keeping the EU in a state of constant anxiety which causes them to start taking care of their own security.
And so far, it’s looking as if that’s exactly what they’re going to get.
Some context for the suggestion that Israel is currently a useful mediator in the war. (I’d also note that they supply drone tech to Russia which they refuse, along with any other weapons, to Ukraine.)
I wonder how the US government feels about this? Am I being too cynical in thinking that the America might be encouraging the Israelis?
Probably; if Biden really felt that way, he wouldn’t have supplied so much materiel. The US just voted through Biden’s package of around $13bn of aid to Ukraine. The Netanyahu government got quite cosy with Putin for years, and I doubt the current U.S. administration is particularly happy about that. The previous one, of course….
Ukraine doesn't get $13bn in their PayPal on Monday. It'll be drizzled in as circumstances require.
The best outcome for the US is a European Afghanistan that enervates Russia, both politically and economically, while keeping the EU in a state of constant anxiety which causes them to start taking care of their own security.
Yes, I think this is where things are heading in Ukraine. Terrible for them, but the reinvention of Europe would be no bad thing.
I'm not convinced. The casualties are at WW2 levels but the size of the forces are not. One side or the other will collapse at some point. My guess is this is going badly for the Russians. Sending in foreign fighters is a sign of desperation. And how do they continue to protect Assad? We should be watching Syria closely. I'm sure China will.
The thing that I worry most about is Russia resorting to desperate tactics. Attacking nuclear power stations, chemical weapons etc.
Must say I assumed that the foreign fighters thing is just (fcuked up) PR: Look, our cause is just, these lovely bunch of lads are flocking to it. How quickly could they get those units on the ground with supplies and support?
With no particular reference to either side:
I have boatloads of brave, fresh-faced overseas conscripts whose conscience has been pricked by my cause. You have desperately press ganged a bunch of foreign thugs because your losses are so great and your regular troops are incompetent drunks.
I am progressing toward a stunning military victory. You are committing genocide.
I am doing research into disease prevention and biological weapons security. You are developing biological weapons and storing nasty diseases ready to unleash on the world.
Etc.
May I ask you a question? Eight or so years after the event, do you believe the official story about the shootdown of MH17 is broadly correct?
I’m definitely not the military expert in the family but I do have a longstanding interest in prediction and forecasting. Phillip Tetlock and team have shown that, while most pundits’ predictions are no better than random guesses, some people do make consistently better forecasts than others. These “superforecasters” tend to be open-minded, good at seeing a wide range of perspectives, not closely tied to an ideological worldview, and relatively immune to cognitive biases.
My nags for today , once again follow at your own peril. One in tribute to our own flint expert as well. Trixie Destiny Is All 14:10 Ayr Hermes Boy 13:56 Hereford Prince Escalus 15:41 Hereford
Double & Singles Knappers Hill 1:50 Sandown Milan Bridge 2:31 Hereford
You head a convoy of tips Malc. 🙂
Lurkers waiting all morning for a horse racing post and three came at once!
Rest of South Con 43% Lab 33% LD 14% Grn 5% Ref 2%
Midlands Con 42% Lab 39% LD 10% Gen 5% Ref 3%
North Lab 55% Con 30% LD 6% Grn 5% Ref 1%
Wales Lab 39% Con 32% PC 13% LD 7% Gen 5% Ref 2%
Scotland SNP 48% Lab 20% Con 17% LD 11% Grn 3% Ref -
(Sample Size: 2,003; Fieldwork: 8- 11 March 2022)
The Red Wall is almost certainly lost for the Tories now.
I think you’re right. The North of England has been truly atrocious for the Tories for too long, and too deep, now. But it is the English Midlands that interest me. And here it’s still very tight, across all pollsters.
YouGov are the only one I really put much faith in when it comes to geographical breaks, and their most recent findings are even worse than that Deltapoll for Northern Tory MPs:
London Lab 55% Con 26% LD 11% Grn 6% Ref 1%
Rest of South Con 41% Lab 31% LD 13% Grn 8% Ref 5%
Midlands/Wales Lab 39% Con 35% Grn 7% LD 7% Ref 6% PC 3%
North Lab 49% Con 28% Grn 9% LD 7% Ref 3%
Scotland SNP 44% Con 22% Lab 21% Grn 6% LD 5% Ref 1%
(YG; Sample Size: 1,700; Fieldwork: 8- 9 March 2022)
The Midlands is Labour's toughest challenge by far. What's interesting is that Labour does not seem to have worked this out yet.
Labour can form a government without winning the Midlands if they win London, Wales and the North by more than they did in 2019 and the Midlands is closer.
However they would need SNP confidence and supply to make Starmer PM.
Labour can likely only win a majority if they have a significant lead in the Midlands too
Well, that may come.
One thing I do notice here in Staffordshire - and I have no idea whether it's typical of the Midlands' former industrial areas, but it strikes me as a curious inversion of the national norm - is that Labour's voters and activists are mostly very elderly ex-union types. The candidate they put up here in 2019 was 77 years old. They couldn't find anyone younger. Watching them leafleting in Cannock town centre was like watching an OAPs' association.
Tory voters are mostly quite a bit younger and work in the lighter industrial firms. They are not bothered about pensions, or savings. Or unions or very often politics in general. What they want is enough money in their pay packets to cover their bills, including nice shiny toys like new iPhones.
So clobbering them with an NI rise is actually a very silly idea, especially as those bills go up substantially.
Does that mean Labour can recover? Not necessarily. See about the hollowed out activist base again. But the Tories shouldn't be in any way complacent.
Don't know if it's typical or just a fluke of Staffs' peculiar circumstances. So treat with caution.
Though of course the Midlands also had the biggest Leave vote in the country in 2016 which is also still a factor.
Of course from next year the NI rise will be replaced by the health and social care levy
Is rebadging the charge really going to make much difference? It will still be money that Mr, Mrs, Miss and Mx Voter won't have in their pockets to spend.
HMRC are desperately trying to get text written on payslips to justify the increase in tax. It isn’t going down well with the people who do payroll software.
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
In 1939, Warsaw resisted the Germans for an entire month, yet that campaign is routinely described as a Polish collapse.
In 1939, the equipment of the German army was nearly all horse drawn. Most of the soldier had to march. Blitzkrieg was a series of dashes by the minority of the motorised forces, with the conventional army behind them catching up.
Interestingly, as a result of re-armament, the BEF in 1940 was the first entirely motorised army, in the world.
The Germans never managed to motorise, completely - even their Panzer divisions had lots of horses, right till the end of the war.
Indeed. For the bulk of the German army who invaded Russia in 1941 the experience was little different to napoleons soldiers. They walked nearly to Moscow, and some of them walked all the way back to Berlin. Those that didn’t die in Russia. The myth of the blitzkrieg and the motorised Wehrmacht has a powerful grip, but it is very much an illussion.
After rather lacklustre performances in the large invitation agility round, we're now onto the semi-finals of the fun competitions judging the crossbreed entrants. Lots of impressive stories and achievements in the Good Citizen competition.
Tension is building for this evening's crossbreed grand final.
Another day of dogging on PB...
Keep Sean’s private life out of it
A friend's aunt used to enter her dogs in various competitions, and used to refer with gusto to her and her spouse going 'dogging' in their winnebago. She was mortified when someone told her the modern meaning.
Anyhow, I'm taking mine to the park in this lovely sunshine; we wouldn't want to miss the International dog dancing competition finals this lunchtime. Later...
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
In an age of instant gratification, the fact that just 16 days in Russian has yet to decisively roll over the Ukraine is somehow being interpreted as Russia having "lost".
Timescales in major wars are not like that.
The historical precedent seems to me to be the timescale of the Soviet Ukraine offensive in the late Summer/Autumn of 1943 in the immediate aftermath of the German defeat in the Battle of Kursk. The Soviet Union bythen had decisive material superiority but it was anything but a cakewalk, with plenty of checks and local reverses. It took the Germans about 3 months between Kursk to advance from a similar starting point as now to a position where they were breaking out from bridgeheads on the other side of the Dnieper.
So, 3 months, not 16 days.
What matters is that Russia has overwhelming military force. The crux of the matter seems to me to hinge on whether, in the longer term, the US and Nato are willing to sanction supplies to the Ukrainians on a scale that can once again halt Russian efforts to renew their offensive and maintain the check in the longer term. Based on the backsliding witnessed over the past week, I am by no means convinced by that.
Needs to be said over and over.
People are too used to 24 news cycles. And then if they have a bit of time to spare, rather fancy themselves as the Clausewitz of our day.
There's a difference between losing politically and losing militarily. You can have overwhelming force, and win every battle, but still lose the war - America in Vietnam is probably the most obvious example of this, but Russia in Afghanistan is a close second. Politically, Russia needs a short war with a decisive victory, which they haven't yet been able to achieve.
I have no idea whether they are losing militarily or politically (which polity). There seems to be some support domestically for the war and of course precious little for it internationally.
I'm not sure why you say Russia needs a short war or indeed what constitutes short. 15 days?
I would define it as a war that lasts months not years. Russia doesn't need another Afghanistan.
Or do you think it does?
I really don't know. Both Russia and the West spent years in Afghan for as far as I can see precious little gain but they decided to do it. So I would say probably not.
And months not years still takes us to beyond 16 days.
My only point is and has been we know almost literally nothing about the progress of the war and people posting videos from Twitter showing 40 seconds of something or other and then making a grand pronouncement about how the war is going is asinine in the extreme.
We are sadly just passengers at this point.
I agree with Leon that as amateur spectators we have the problem of too much information of doubtful value. As I said upthread, a lot of the coverage is anecdotal and generally designed to be Ukrainian morale-boosters as that's what most people want to see - a farmer towing away a captured tank, a wrecked Russian fuel tanker, people holding a demo. Some of it, e.g. the enemy losses reported by each side, is clearly both self-serving and possibly self-deluding. Much of the Russian propaganda is both perfunctory and ludicrious ("The Ukranians bombed their own hospital, or maybe they made it an artillery base"), a hallmark of a war conducted entirely by military minds. Much of the Ukrainian propaganda is much more stylish but not that informative either.
The most reliable information is simply the maps. And here it's fairly clear that Russia is inching forward on most fronts. 17 days isn't very long, and we should expect to see encirclements of several cities complete over the next weeks. The fundamental Russian problem is that they can't take the cities by direct assault except by surprise (worked in Kherson, failed in Kharkiv, unlikely to be repeated), house-to-house fighting (horrendous in terms of losses) or long-range bombardment and siege (horrible for civilians). They have form for that in Syria, they're doing it in Mariupol and sadly it seems the most likely. At some point, they reckon, Zelensky will feel it's not worth putting up with that merely to retain a theoretical chance of joining NATO and the theoretical chance of regaining Crimea and Donbas one day.
Could Western sanctions change that? It's doubtful, as we've already unleashed most of them. Our most useful role is probably a Zelensky bargaining chip - "settle for less than you want and I'll bring in Scholz and Macron and get them to loosen the sanctions". I think Putin needs Zelensky for that.
I thought Saturday morning dogs meant Romford, Crayford or in former times Hackney and Harringay but @IanB2 reminds me it can, for one weekend, mean Cruft's.
Not sure about the track at Crufts and whether it favours wide runners or not so I'll stick to different animals running on an artificial surface. The weekend before Cheltenham is one of the poorest of the year in quality terms as all the good horses are heading to Prestbury Park but for Flat racing fans it's the first sign of the coming of spring - the Lincoln is just a fortnight away.
A very good all-weather card at Wolverhampton and a fair card at Lingfield and the Stodge Saturday Patent (1 winner and a near miss last weekend) returns to annoy and irritate. My three with less chance of winning than an SWP candidate in the City of London Corporation election are:
Stick a 1-point win patent on those or find something better to do with your cash, whether hard-earned or otherwise (I don't judge).
I am really not so good when it comes into the flat season Stodge, I will have to defer to you and likely not tip as often. I think it’s because I haven’t followed the horses enough to know the quality in the field, and there is good and bad Lane draws like they have in Olympic finals too (though that’s normally based on semi final). It’s a whole different thing I think of that makes sense.
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
In 1939, Warsaw resisted the Germans for an entire month, yet that campaign is routinely described as a Polish collapse.
In 1939, the equipment of the German army was nearly all horse drawn. Most of the soldier had to march. Blitzkrieg was a series of dashes by the minority of the motorised forces, with the conventional army behind them catching up.
Interestingly, as a result of re-armament, the BEF in 1940 was the first entirely motorised army, in the world.
The Germans never managed to motorise, completely - even their Panzer divisions had lots of horses, right till the end of the war.
Indeed. For the bulk of the German army who invaded Russia in 1941 the experience was little different to napoleons soldiers. They walked nearly to Moscow, and some of them walked all the way back to Berlin. Those that didn’t die in Russia. The myth of the blitzkrieg and the motorised Wehrmacht has a powerful grip, but it is very much an illussion.
The rapid collapse of the French, in the face of the mythical German blitzkrieg, must rank as a very impressive use of illusion to defeat an enemy.
Rest of South Con 43% Lab 33% LD 14% Grn 5% Ref 2%
Midlands Con 42% Lab 39% LD 10% Gen 5% Ref 3%
North Lab 55% Con 30% LD 6% Grn 5% Ref 1%
Wales Lab 39% Con 32% PC 13% LD 7% Gen 5% Ref 2%
Scotland SNP 48% Lab 20% Con 17% LD 11% Grn 3% Ref -
(Sample Size: 2,003; Fieldwork: 8- 11 March 2022)
The Red Wall is almost certainly lost for the Tories now.
I think you’re right. The North of England has been truly atrocious for the Tories for too long, and too deep, now. But it is the English Midlands that interest me. And here it’s still very tight, across all pollsters.
YouGov are the only one I really put much faith in when it comes to geographical breaks, and their most recent findings are even worse than that Deltapoll for Northern Tory MPs:
London Lab 55% Con 26% LD 11% Grn 6% Ref 1%
Rest of South Con 41% Lab 31% LD 13% Grn 8% Ref 5%
Midlands/Wales Lab 39% Con 35% Grn 7% LD 7% Ref 6% PC 3%
North Lab 49% Con 28% Grn 9% LD 7% Ref 3%
Scotland SNP 44% Con 22% Lab 21% Grn 6% LD 5% Ref 1%
(YG; Sample Size: 1,700; Fieldwork: 8- 9 March 2022)
The Midlands is Labour's toughest challenge by far. What's interesting is that Labour does not seem to have worked this out yet.
Labour can form a government without winning the Midlands if they win London, Wales and the North by more than they did in 2019 and the Midlands is closer.
However they would need SNP confidence and supply to make Starmer PM.
Labour can likely only win a majority if they have a significant lead in the Midlands too
Well, that may come.
One thing I do notice here in Staffordshire - and I have no idea whether it's typical of the Midlands' former industrial areas, but it strikes me as a curious inversion of the national norm - is that Labour's voters and activists are mostly very elderly ex-union types. The candidate they put up here in 2019 was 77 years old. They couldn't find anyone younger. Watching them leafleting in Cannock town centre was like watching an OAPs' association.
Tory voters are mostly quite a bit younger and work in the lighter industrial firms. They are not bothered about pensions, or savings. Or unions or very often politics in general. What they want is enough money in their pay packets to cover their bills, including nice shiny toys like new iPhones.
So clobbering them with an NI rise is actually a very silly idea, especially as those bills go up substantially.
Does that mean Labour can recover? Not necessarily. See about the hollowed out activist base again. But the Tories shouldn't be in any way complacent.
Don't know if it's typical or just a fluke of Staffs' peculiar circumstances. So treat with caution.
Though of course the Midlands also had the biggest Leave vote in the country in 2016 which is also still a factor.
Of course from next year the NI rise will be replaced by the health and social care levy
Is rebadging the charge really going to make much difference? It will still be money that Mr, Mrs, Miss and Mx Voter won't have in their pockets to spend.
HMRC are desperately trying to get text written on payslips to justify the increase in tax. It isn’t going down well with the people who do payroll software.
I'm sure they are. But I bet many people don't drive that far into the small print. And besides, "if you're explaining, you're losing", as Ronnie Regan is meant to have said
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
In an age of instant gratification, the fact that just 16 days in Russian has yet to decisively roll over the Ukraine is somehow being interpreted as Russia having "lost".
Timescales in major wars are not like that.
The historical precedent seems to me to be the timescale of the Soviet Ukraine offensive in the late Summer/Autumn of 1943 in the immediate aftermath of the German defeat in the Battle of Kursk. The Soviet Union bythen had decisive material superiority but it was anything but a cakewalk, with plenty of checks and local reverses. It took the Germans about 3 months between Kursk to advance from a similar starting point as now to a position where they were breaking out from bridgeheads on the other side of the Dnieper.
So, 3 months, not 16 days.
What matters is that Russia has overwhelming military force. The crux of the matter seems to me to hinge on whether, in the longer term, the US and Nato are willing to sanction supplies to the Ukrainians on a scale that can once again halt Russian efforts to renew their offensive and maintain the check in the longer term. Based on the backsliding witnessed over the past week, I am by no means convinced by that.
Sure, 16 days is not a long campaign but the difference to 1943 is that Russia does not have the reserves, logistics nor war economy to sustain a prolonged offensive. Resorting to shelling cities from a distance is a sign of military weakness, not strength.
One really striking thing about this war is how poor Russian command and control is. The initial days were scripted up to a year in advance, but the piecemeal and uncoordinated attacks since that plan stumbled suggest that there is no strategic plan left.
Remember though that for Putin this is not now about avoiding huge damage to Russia, it's about his own prospects of survival and in my view he cares little about what price the Russian people will ultimately pay to secure that.
I think that Russia does have enough to sustain a prolonged offensive if the Ukrainians are not getting the support to replenish at least what they started with. While Russia may have committed just about all the forces it initially earmarked for this war, this is still a relatively small proportion of its overall armed forces. So the Russians have plenty of reserves to draw on whereas the Ukranians don't. I don't think Russian logistical difficulties can be relied upon to hold them back in the long term, as opposed to just slowing them down - they will no doubt be capable of learning from their mistakes rather than just repeating them. By contrast, the Ukranians are dependent upon adequate resupply from the US and Nato and I am not convinced that they are getting what they need, beyond light weapons.
To draw on another historical parallel, in 1944-45 the German Army was very well supplied with what was by far the most effective infantry anti-tank weapon, the Panzerfaust. Streets ahead of the Bazooka and PIAT, such that the allies reused any they could capture. The Panzerfaust did restrict the use of Allied armour without close infantry support, but it wasn't decisive. Ultimately the material imbalance in heavy equipment and air power was such that the Allies prevailed. So in putting a lot of faith in the Ukranians' use of NLAWs, we're hoping that things have moved on and such that an assumption that this war will be like the last European one on this scale will be a mistake.
That is, obviously, a pessimistic perspective and I dearly hope that it's too pessimistic. Assuming that the next war will be like the last is often mistaken, so it is not cut and dried. What worries me most at this stage is the lack of US resolve, with the half measures at every stage coming too late and just encouraging Putin to double down.
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
In 1939, Warsaw resisted the Germans for an entire month, yet that campaign is routinely described as a Polish collapse.
In 1939, the equipment of the German army was nearly all horse drawn. Most of the soldier had to march. Blitzkrieg was a series of dashes by the minority of the motorised forces, with the conventional army behind them catching up.
Interestingly, as a result of re-armament, the BEF in 1940 was the first entirely motorised army, in the world.
The Germans never managed to motorise, completely - even their Panzer divisions had lots of horses, right till the end of the war.
Indeed. For the bulk of the German army who invaded Russia in 1941 the experience was little different to napoleons soldiers. They walked nearly to Moscow, and some of them walked all the way back to Berlin. Those that didn’t die in Russia. The myth of the blitzkrieg and the motorised Wehrmacht has a powerful grip, but it is very much an illussion.
Blitzkrieg itself wasn't a myth, as an offensive strategy it worked. The BEF being fully motorized didn't help it much in 1940 aside from getting it to the coast a bit quicker, where it left lots of transport for the grateful Heer of course.
Covid provides a striking example of how clever, diligent amateurs can use the Net/social media to make analyses and discoveries apparently beyond the wit (or willingness) of professionals
The professionals told us a lab leak was impossible. “A racist conspiracy theory”. The *professionals* actually prohibited us from even talking about a potential lab leak explanation for a year. But a bunch of amateurs got online and dug out the uncomfortable facts until the professionals were forced to admit Yes, OK, it could be true
“For most of last year, the idea that the coronavirus pandemic could have been triggered by a laboratory accident in Wuhan, China, was largely dismissed as a racist conspiracy theory of the alt-right. The Washington Post in early 2020 accused Senator Tom Cotton of "fanning the embers of a conspiracy theory that has been repeatedly debunked by experts." CNN jumped in with "How to debunk coronavirus conspiracy theories and misinformation from friends and family." Most other mainstream outlets, from The New York Times ("fringe theory") to NPR ("Scientists debunk lab accident theory"), were equally dismissive.”
But then that all changed, because of
“A group of amateur sleuths, with few resources except curiosity and a willingness to spend days combing the internet for clues. Throughout the pandemic, about two dozen or so correspondents, many anonymous, working independently from many different countries, have uncovered obscure documents, pieced together the information, and explained it all in long threads on Twitter—in a kind of open-source, collective brainstorming session that was part forensic science, part citizen journalism, and entirely new. They call themselves DRASTIC, for Decentralized Radical Autonomous Search Team Investigating COVID-19.”
The point remains, without amateurs and their “lightly educated guesswork” we wouldn’t even be having this vital discussion. We’d still be in 2020 and literally prevented from talking about it on Facebook
Rest of South Con 43% Lab 33% LD 14% Grn 5% Ref 2%
Midlands Con 42% Lab 39% LD 10% Gen 5% Ref 3%
North Lab 55% Con 30% LD 6% Grn 5% Ref 1%
Wales Lab 39% Con 32% PC 13% LD 7% Gen 5% Ref 2%
Scotland SNP 48% Lab 20% Con 17% LD 11% Grn 3% Ref -
(Sample Size: 2,003; Fieldwork: 8- 11 March 2022)
The Red Wall is almost certainly lost for the Tories now.
I think you’re right. The North of England has been truly atrocious for the Tories for too long, and too deep, now. But it is the English Midlands that interest me. And here it’s still very tight, across all pollsters.
YouGov are the only one I really put much faith in when it comes to geographical breaks, and their most recent findings are even worse than that Deltapoll for Northern Tory MPs:
London Lab 55% Con 26% LD 11% Grn 6% Ref 1%
Rest of South Con 41% Lab 31% LD 13% Grn 8% Ref 5%
Midlands/Wales Lab 39% Con 35% Grn 7% LD 7% Ref 6% PC 3%
North Lab 49% Con 28% Grn 9% LD 7% Ref 3%
Scotland SNP 44% Con 22% Lab 21% Grn 6% LD 5% Ref 1%
(YG; Sample Size: 1,700; Fieldwork: 8- 9 March 2022)
The Midlands is Labour's toughest challenge by far. What's interesting is that Labour does not seem to have worked this out yet.
Labour can form a government without winning the Midlands if they win London, Wales and the North by more than they did in 2019 and the Midlands is closer.
However they would need SNP confidence and supply to make Starmer PM.
Labour can likely only win a majority if they have a significant lead in the Midlands too
Well, that may come.
One thing I do notice here in Staffordshire - and I have no idea whether it's typical of the Midlands' former industrial areas, but it strikes me as a curious inversion of the national norm - is that Labour's voters and activists are mostly very elderly ex-union types. The candidate they put up here in 2019 was 77 years old. They couldn't find anyone younger. Watching them leafleting in Cannock town centre was like watching an OAPs' association.
Tory voters are mostly quite a bit younger and work in the lighter industrial firms. They are not bothered about pensions, or savings. Or unions or very often politics in general. What they want is enough money in their pay packets to cover their bills, including nice shiny toys like new iPhones.
So clobbering them with an NI rise is actually a very silly idea, especially as those bills go up substantially.
Does that mean Labour can recover? Not necessarily. See about the hollowed out activist base again. But the Tories shouldn't be in any way complacent.
Don't know if it's typical or just a fluke of Staffs' peculiar circumstances. So treat with caution.
Though of course the Midlands also had the biggest Leave vote in the country in 2016 which is also still a factor.
Of course from next year the NI rise will be replaced by the health and social care levy
Is rebadging the charge really going to make much difference? It will still be money that Mr, Mrs, Miss and Mx Voter won't have in their pockets to spend.
Talking of money in pockets, inflation was over 25% during the oil crisis of the mid 1970s. The 9.5% on the front page of the Express yesterday will have some demographics extremely worried. It may turn out to have been a conservative estimate.
"Kamala Harris has been criticised for giggling when asked if the US should take more Ukrainian refugees. The vice-president, who is on a three-day trip to Poland and Romania, laughed when asked the question at a press conference in Warsaw alongside Andrzej Duda, the president of Poland. She looked at Mr Duda as if he should respond first, then smirked: “A friend in need is a friend indeed.” Victoria Spartz, a Ukrainian-born Republican politician, criticised Ms Harris, saying it was “a very serious situation requiring action” and is “not a laughing matter”. George Papadopoulos, Donald Trump’s former campaign aide, added: “Discussing refugees is no laughing matter. Why she laughs at this is deranged.” Ms Harris has previously been criticised for laughing at odd moments during press conferences on serious issues."
It is, I think, a nervous laugh. - I don’t blame her for it. It certainly isn’t ‘deranged’. The optics are utterly awful, though.
I really don’t think she’s good enough a leader to be the Democrat’s presidential candidate, and gives them a real problem whether or not Biden runs again.
I had such high hopes and excitement for her.
“ she’s not good enough a leader to be the Democrat’s presidential candidate “
You are right Nigel, she would be loser if gets the nomination. 😕
Rest of South Con 43% Lab 33% LD 14% Grn 5% Ref 2%
Midlands Con 42% Lab 39% LD 10% Gen 5% Ref 3%
North Lab 55% Con 30% LD 6% Grn 5% Ref 1%
Wales Lab 39% Con 32% PC 13% LD 7% Gen 5% Ref 2%
Scotland SNP 48% Lab 20% Con 17% LD 11% Grn 3% Ref -
(Sample Size: 2,003; Fieldwork: 8- 11 March 2022)
The Red Wall is almost certainly lost for the Tories now.
I think you’re right. The North of England has been truly atrocious for the Tories for too long, and too deep, now. But it is the English Midlands that interest me. And here it’s still very tight, across all pollsters.
YouGov are the only one I really put much faith in when it comes to geographical breaks, and their most recent findings are even worse than that Deltapoll for Northern Tory MPs:
London Lab 55% Con 26% LD 11% Grn 6% Ref 1%
Rest of South Con 41% Lab 31% LD 13% Grn 8% Ref 5%
Midlands/Wales Lab 39% Con 35% Grn 7% LD 7% Ref 6% PC 3%
North Lab 49% Con 28% Grn 9% LD 7% Ref 3%
Scotland SNP 44% Con 22% Lab 21% Grn 6% LD 5% Ref 1%
(YG; Sample Size: 1,700; Fieldwork: 8- 9 March 2022)
The Midlands is Labour's toughest challenge by far. What's interesting is that Labour does not seem to have worked this out yet.
Labour can form a government without winning the Midlands if they win London, Wales and the North by more than they did in 2019 and the Midlands is closer.
However they would need SNP confidence and supply to make Starmer PM.
Labour can likely only win a majority if they have a significant lead in the Midlands too
Well, that may come.
One thing I do notice here in Staffordshire - and I have no idea whether it's typical of the Midlands' former industrial areas, but it strikes me as a curious inversion of the national norm - is that Labour's voters and activists are mostly very elderly ex-union types. The candidate they put up here in 2019 was 77 years old. They couldn't find anyone younger. Watching them leafleting in Cannock town centre was like watching an OAPs' association.
Tory voters are mostly quite a bit younger and work in the lighter industrial firms. They are not bothered about pensions, or savings. Or unions or very often politics in general. What they want is enough money in their pay packets to cover their bills, including nice shiny toys like new iPhones.
So clobbering them with an NI rise is actually a very silly idea, especially as those bills go up substantially.
Does that mean Labour can recover? Not necessarily. See about the hollowed out activist base again. But the Tories shouldn't be in any way complacent.
Don't know if it's typical or just a fluke of Staffs' peculiar circumstances. So treat with caution.
Though of course the Midlands also had the biggest Leave vote in the country in 2016 which is also still a factor.
Of course from next year the NI rise will be replaced by the health and social care levy
Is rebadging the charge really going to make much difference? It will still be money that Mr, Mrs, Miss and Mx Voter won't have in their pockets to spend.
HMRC are desperately trying to get text written on payslips to justify the increase in tax. It isn’t going down well with the people who do payroll software.
Employers' payslips shouldn't be used for essentially political messaging, in any case.
Rest of South Con 43% Lab 33% LD 14% Grn 5% Ref 2%
Midlands Con 42% Lab 39% LD 10% Gen 5% Ref 3%
North Lab 55% Con 30% LD 6% Grn 5% Ref 1%
Wales Lab 39% Con 32% PC 13% LD 7% Gen 5% Ref 2%
Scotland SNP 48% Lab 20% Con 17% LD 11% Grn 3% Ref -
(Sample Size: 2,003; Fieldwork: 8- 11 March 2022)
The Red Wall is almost certainly lost for the Tories now.
I think you’re right. The North of England has been truly atrocious for the Tories for too long, and too deep, now. But it is the English Midlands that interest me. And here it’s still very tight, across all pollsters.
YouGov are the only one I really put much faith in when it comes to geographical breaks, and their most recent findings are even worse than that Deltapoll for Northern Tory MPs:
London Lab 55% Con 26% LD 11% Grn 6% Ref 1%
Rest of South Con 41% Lab 31% LD 13% Grn 8% Ref 5%
Midlands/Wales Lab 39% Con 35% Grn 7% LD 7% Ref 6% PC 3%
North Lab 49% Con 28% Grn 9% LD 7% Ref 3%
Scotland SNP 44% Con 22% Lab 21% Grn 6% LD 5% Ref 1%
(YG; Sample Size: 1,700; Fieldwork: 8- 9 March 2022)
The Midlands is Labour's toughest challenge by far. What's interesting is that Labour does not seem to have worked this out yet.
Labour can form a government without winning the Midlands if they win London, Wales and the North by more than they did in 2019 and the Midlands is closer.
However they would need SNP confidence and supply to make Starmer PM.
Labour can likely only win a majority if they have a significant lead in the Midlands too
Well, that may come.
One thing I do notice here in Staffordshire - and I have no idea whether it's typical of the Midlands' former industrial areas, but it strikes me as a curious inversion of the national norm - is that Labour's voters and activists are mostly very elderly ex-union types. The candidate they put up here in 2019 was 77 years old. They couldn't find anyone younger. Watching them leafleting in Cannock town centre was like watching an OAPs' association.
Tory voters are mostly quite a bit younger and work in the lighter industrial firms. They are not bothered about pensions, or savings. Or unions or very often politics in general. What they want is enough money in their pay packets to cover their bills, including nice shiny toys like new iPhones.
So clobbering them with an NI rise is actually a very silly idea, especially as those bills go up substantially.
Does that mean Labour can recover? Not necessarily. See about the hollowed out activist base again. But the Tories shouldn't be in any way complacent.
Don't know if it's typical or just a fluke of Staffs' peculiar circumstances. So treat with caution.
Though of course the Midlands also had the biggest Leave vote in the country in 2016 which is also still a factor.
Of course from next year the NI rise will be replaced by the health and social care levy
Is rebadging the charge really going to make much difference? It will still be money that Mr, Mrs, Miss and Mx Voter won't have in their pockets to spend.
HMRC are desperately trying to get text written on payslips to justify the increase in tax. It isn’t going down well with the people who do payroll software.
Employers' payslips shouldn't be used for essentially political messaging, in any case.
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
In 1939, Warsaw resisted the Germans for an entire month, yet that campaign is routinely described as a Polish collapse.
In 1939, the equipment of the German army was nearly all horse drawn. Most of the soldier had to march. Blitzkrieg was a series of dashes by the minority of the motorised forces, with the conventional army behind them catching up.
Interestingly, as a result of re-armament, the BEF in 1940 was the first entirely motorised army, in the world.
The Germans never managed to motorise, completely - even their Panzer divisions had lots of horses, right till the end of the war.
Indeed. For the bulk of the German army who invaded Russia in 1941 the experience was little different to napoleons soldiers. They walked nearly to Moscow, and some of them walked all the way back to Berlin. Those that didn’t die in Russia. The myth of the blitzkrieg and the motorised Wehrmacht has a powerful grip, but it is very much an illussion.
The rapid collapse of the French, in the face of the mythical German blitzkrieg, must rank as a very impressive use of illusion to defeat an enemy.
The myth being the all powerful motorised German army. Bltzkreig relied on very mobile armoured brigades happy to operate without infantry support. By dislocating the enemy and ranging at will in the rear, causing the collapse. For France there was no where to retreat to. France is a small country and Paris not that far from the start line. In Russia the paneers surged ahead and encircled vast numbers of Russian troops, but then had to wait for the rest of the army to walk to meet them to finish the job. The myth is that the german army was all this motorised force, when the reality is completely opposite, and as @Malmesbury says the British were the first to be fully motorised. In addition the German had very few cars, lorries and drivers in 1939, compared to say America were car ownership was widespread. This had huge implications for having drivers and indeed mechanics available to maintain armoured forces.
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
In 1939, Warsaw resisted the Germans for an entire month, yet that campaign is routinely described as a Polish collapse.
In 1939, the equipment of the German army was nearly all horse drawn. Most of the soldier had to march. Blitzkrieg was a series of dashes by the minority of the motorised forces, with the conventional army behind them catching up.
Interestingly, as a result of re-armament, the BEF in 1940 was the first entirely motorised army, in the world.
The Germans never managed to motorise, completely - even their Panzer divisions had lots of horses, right till the end of the war.
Indeed. For the bulk of the German army who invaded Russia in 1941 the experience was little different to napoleons soldiers. They walked nearly to Moscow, and some of them walked all the way back to Berlin. Those that didn’t die in Russia. The myth of the blitzkrieg and the motorised Wehrmacht has a powerful grip, but it is very much an illussion.
Blitzkrieg itself wasn't a myth, as an offensive strategy it worked. The BEF being fully motorized didn't help it much in 1940 aside from getting it to the coast a bit quicker, where it left lots of transport for the grateful Heer of course.
I’m not calling blitzkrieg a myth, rather the idea of the state of the German army being modern and motorised, which is widespread.
Rest of South Con 43% Lab 33% LD 14% Grn 5% Ref 2%
Midlands Con 42% Lab 39% LD 10% Gen 5% Ref 3%
North Lab 55% Con 30% LD 6% Grn 5% Ref 1%
Wales Lab 39% Con 32% PC 13% LD 7% Gen 5% Ref 2%
Scotland SNP 48% Lab 20% Con 17% LD 11% Grn 3% Ref -
(Sample Size: 2,003; Fieldwork: 8- 11 March 2022)
The Red Wall is almost certainly lost for the Tories now.
I think you’re right. The North of England has been truly atrocious for the Tories for too long, and too deep, now. But it is the English Midlands that interest me. And here it’s still very tight, across all pollsters.
YouGov are the only one I really put much faith in when it comes to geographical breaks, and their most recent findings are even worse than that Deltapoll for Northern Tory MPs:
London Lab 55% Con 26% LD 11% Grn 6% Ref 1%
Rest of South Con 41% Lab 31% LD 13% Grn 8% Ref 5%
Midlands/Wales Lab 39% Con 35% Grn 7% LD 7% Ref 6% PC 3%
North Lab 49% Con 28% Grn 9% LD 7% Ref 3%
Scotland SNP 44% Con 22% Lab 21% Grn 6% LD 5% Ref 1%
(YG; Sample Size: 1,700; Fieldwork: 8- 9 March 2022)
The Midlands is Labour's toughest challenge by far. What's interesting is that Labour does not seem to have worked this out yet.
Labour can form a government without winning the Midlands if they win London, Wales and the North by more than they did in 2019 and the Midlands is closer.
However they would need SNP confidence and supply to make Starmer PM.
Labour can likely only win a majority if they have a significant lead in the Midlands too
Well, that may come.
One thing I do notice here in Staffordshire - and I have no idea whether it's typical of the Midlands' former industrial areas, but it strikes me as a curious inversion of the national norm - is that Labour's voters and activists are mostly very elderly ex-union types. The candidate they put up here in 2019 was 77 years old. They couldn't find anyone younger. Watching them leafleting in Cannock town centre was like watching an OAPs' association.
Tory voters are mostly quite a bit younger and work in the lighter industrial firms. They are not bothered about pensions, or savings. Or unions or very often politics in general. What they want is enough money in their pay packets to cover their bills, including nice shiny toys like new iPhones.
So clobbering them with an NI rise is actually a very silly idea, especially as those bills go up substantially.
Does that mean Labour can recover? Not necessarily. See about the hollowed out activist base again. But the Tories shouldn't be in any way complacent.
Don't know if it's typical or just a fluke of Staffs' peculiar circumstances. So treat with caution.
Though of course the Midlands also had the biggest Leave vote in the country in 2016 which is also still a factor.
Of course from next year the NI rise will be replaced by the health and social care levy
Is rebadging the charge really going to make much difference? It will still be money that Mr, Mrs, Miss and Mx Voter won't have in their pockets to spend.
HMRC are desperately trying to get text written on payslips to justify the increase in tax. It isn’t going down well with the people who do payroll software.
Employers' payslips shouldn't be used for essentially political messaging, in any case.
Update from my old Russian mate on the run in Ukraine...
Saw several punch ups while trying to get money out of the bank and buying stuff in the supermarket. Took the train to the Polish border via Lviv. 20 hour wait at the border. The Ukrainian border guard didn't give a fuck that he was Russian after he gave him 500 €. (Pricey!) Any Ukrainian men who couldn't bribe their way out of it were not allowed to cross to Poland, slung on a KrAZ 7 tonner and told they were going "East". My mate's comments to the reluctant conscripts in the truck: "No sadness! You'll get a Javelin! XAXAXAXA!' He's now in Berlin trying to work out how to get back to SPb. Possibly via Doha. His last comment on WhatsApp to me, "Lace up your boots, old man! You're going to war! XAXAXAXA!"
Don't judge. As a younger man he was a nav on Blinders and has probably given himself brain damage from drinking the avionics coolant.
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
In an age of instant gratification, the fact that just 16 days in Russian has yet to decisively roll over the Ukraine is somehow being interpreted as Russia having "lost".
Timescales in major wars are not like that.
The historical precedent seems to me to be the timescale of the Soviet Ukraine offensive in the late Summer/Autumn of 1943 in the immediate aftermath of the German defeat in the Battle of Kursk. The Soviet Union bythen had decisive material superiority but it was anything but a cakewalk, with plenty of checks and local reverses. It took the Germans about 3 months between Kursk to advance from a similar starting point as now to a position where they were breaking out from bridgeheads on the other side of the Dnieper.
So, 3 months, not 16 days.
What matters is that Russia has overwhelming military force. The crux of the matter seems to me to hinge on whether, in the longer term, the US and Nato are willing to sanction supplies to the Ukrainians on a scale that can once again halt Russian efforts to renew their offensive and maintain the check in the longer term. Based on the backsliding witnessed over the past week, I am by no means convinced by that.
Needs to be said over and over.
People are too used to 24 news cycles. And then if they have a bit of time to spare, rather fancy themselves as the Clausewitz of our day.
There's a difference between losing politically and losing militarily. You can have overwhelming force, and win every battle, but still lose the war - America in Vietnam is probably the most obvious example of this, but Russia in Afghanistan is a close second. Politically, Russia needs a short war with a decisive victory, which they haven't yet been able to achieve.
I have no idea whether they are losing militarily or politically (which polity). There seems to be some support domestically for the war and of course precious little for it internationally.
I'm not sure why you say Russia needs a short war or indeed what constitutes short. 15 days?
I would define it as a war that lasts months not years. Russia doesn't need another Afghanistan.
Or do you think it does?
I really don't know. Both Russia and the West spent years in Afghan for as far as I can see precious little gain but they decided to do it. So I would say probably not.
And months not years still takes us to beyond 16 days.
My only point is and has been we know almost literally nothing about the progress of the war and people posting videos from Twitter showing 40 seconds of something or other and then making a grand pronouncement about how the war is going is asinine in the extreme.
We are sadly just passengers at this point.
I agree with Leon that as amateur spectators we have the problem of too much information of doubtful value. As I said upthread, a lot of the coverage is anecdotal and generally designed to be Ukrainian morale-boosters as that's what most people want to see - a farmer towing away a captured tank, a wrecked Russian fuel tanker, people holding a demo. Some of it, e.g. the enemy losses reported by each side, is clearly both self-serving and possibly self-deluding. Much of the Russian propaganda is both perfunctory and ludicrious ("The Ukranians bombed their own hospital, or maybe they made it an artillery base"), a hallmark of a war conducted entirely by military minds. Much of the Ukrainian propaganda is much more stylish but not that informative either.
The most reliable information is simply the maps. And here it's fairly clear that Russia is inching forward on most fronts. 17 days isn't very long, and we should expect to see encirclements of several cities complete over the next weeks. The fundamental Russian problem is that they can't take the cities by direct assault except by surprise (worked in Kherson, failed in Kharkiv, unlikely to be repeated), house-to-house fighting (horrendous in terms of losses) or long-range bombardment and siege (horrible for civilians). They have form for that in Syria, they're doing it in Mariupol and sadly it seems the most likely. At some point, they reckon, Zelensky will feel it's not worth putting up with that merely to retain a theoretical chance of joining NATO and the theoretical chance of regaining Crimea and Donbas one day.
Could Western sanctions change that? It's doubtful, as we've already unleashed most of them. Our most useful role is probably a Zelensky bargaining chip - "settle for less than you want and I'll bring in Scholz and Macron and get them to loosen the sanctions". I think Putin needs Zelensky for that.
Nick. Do you think there is any possible future for Ukraine as an independent country, a functioning democracy, and a growing western-oriented economy without the military defeat of Russia and the manifest failure of Putin?
The war is not about the borders of Ukraine. It is not about Crimea and the Donbas. It's not even about Ukrainian membership of NATO. It is about the existence of a democratic Ukraine that is free of a dependency on Russia. All the rest is mere pretext.
There may come a point when Ukraine is sufficiently brutalised by war that they choose a future as a Russian vassal state as a least-worst option compared to continued resistance. Given what is happening in Kharkiv, Mariupol and elsewhere it would be an understandable choice. But that is what is at stake.
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
In 1939, Warsaw resisted the Germans for an entire month, yet that campaign is routinely described as a Polish collapse.
In 1939, the equipment of the German army was nearly all horse drawn. Most of the soldier had to march. Blitzkrieg was a series of dashes by the minority of the motorised forces, with the conventional army behind them catching up.
Interestingly, as a result of re-armament, the BEF in 1940 was the first entirely motorised army, in the world.
The Germans never managed to motorise, completely - even their Panzer divisions had lots of horses, right till the end of the war.
Indeed. For the bulk of the German army who invaded Russia in 1941 the experience was little different to napoleons soldiers. They walked nearly to Moscow, and some of them walked all the way back to Berlin. Those that didn’t die in Russia. The myth of the blitzkrieg and the motorised Wehrmacht has a powerful grip, but it is very much an illussion.
Blitzkrieg itself wasn't a myth, as an offensive strategy it worked. The BEF being fully motorized didn't help it much in 1940 aside from getting it to the coast a bit quicker, where it left lots of transport for the grateful Heer of course.
I’m not calling blitzkrieg a myth, rather the idea of the state of the German army being modern and motorised, which is widespread.
Not a myth but a meth. Correct me where wrong but a lot of blitzkrieg is conducted on crystal meth? 💎 🔌
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
What matters is that Russia has overwhelming military force.
What is your actual evidence for this, though? Beyond claims about the theoretical strength of Russian conventional forces?
If you’re talking about their nuclear capability then sure, although quite how relevant that is for taking and holding Ukraine is debatable. But in terms of the practical strength of the conventional forces available to them on Ukraine, why are you convinced?
The siege of Mariupol is rather compelling evidence. If the Ukrainians had the capability they would surely have launched a major attempt to lift the siege.
Similarly, the Russians have been able to advance on Kyiv from two directions, and the advance from the east has been over a considerable distance given reported problems with Russian logistics. Again, given the evidence being presented of poor morale, poor communications, deficient tactics, etc, the only explanation for such an advance is overwhelming strength.
It might be that, over time, Ukraine is able to inflict losses that erode this strength, but it does not do any good to deny the evidence of overall Russian military superiority over the Ukrainians at present.
Certainly the Russians have the advantage in heavy weaponry, which is why the Ukranians are avoiding set piece battles and waging partisan type attritional warfare, and dug in positions around cities.
The decisive question is how long each side can sustain the fight. For the Ukranians it is existential, so like the Soviets in 1941 they will fight on. The Russians meanwhile have limited capacity to replace losses and are being economically strangled so need a shorter war.
A lot of Ukrainian cities will be a wasteland afterwards, but it likely will become stalemate in the months ahead, and ultimately Russian defeat.
This is interesting given they likely had some sort of authorisation ?
Just watched Russia’s main political talk show with notorious propagandist Soloviev (Mar 9). Couldn’t believe my ears. Two hardcore pro-Putin guests - Shaknazarov and Bagdasarov - acknowledged the impact of sanctions, military failures, and called for an end to the invasion. https://twitter.com/MaximAlyukov/status/1502337993012658177
The thread seems like it's laying the groundwork for a Russian climbdown. I suspect that we'll go back to the status quo ante bellum minus some of the Russian reserves being diverted to rebuilding Ukraine. Putin is realising how badly he miscalculated.
Yes, they don't appear to be calling for withdrawal, but for declaring victory by solidifying the grip on the Donbas, and settling for Ukrainian neutrality without further advances. Which is pretty much what most of us have been suggesting is the outline of a plausible settlement, and they could probably have got without a war, so it'd certainly count as a deserved disaster for Putin.
At the same time, though, the military do seem to be making some progress now, and the air strikes are reaching out further into the west. The Ukrainian successes have an anecdotal flavour, while they're losing ground a few km a day. It's hard to read.
This guy publishes quite a good situation map each day. Quite good level of detail too, down to individual units being identified:
In summary it looks as if the Russian encirclement of Kyiv has stalled, and even been reversed in places, with significant Ukranian counterattacks to the east of the city. The Russians don't seem to have made progress on other bits of the northern front.
On the Southern front there are seems more Russian gains on the Donbas area, and an attempt to consolidate south of the Dneiper, with Mariopol being besieged rather than assaulted. The attack from land and sea on Odesa still hasn't materialised. Clearly logistics remain a major problem everywhere. Food is running out in Kherson for civilians as well as occupation troops.
I think the Russian war aims have been reduced to expanding in the Donbas and controlling the Kherson Oblast and Azov Coast. That is something they could paint as victory, but a ceasefire on that basis is not likely to be acceptable to Ukraine.
I’m not sure where Nick is getting his view from that the Russians are slowly winning this. You highlighted the piece from Jomini whose analysis is that the Russians are not really getting anywhere and that seems to be backed up by most other views. Russian equipment losses are running at over 3x Ukrainian according to Oryx.
Who honestly knows. @viewcode alerted us a while ago to this guys youtube commentry, which at face value seems very convincing.
Also there is Konstantin Kisin of Triggernometry. He concluded on Wednesday that the situation is basically hopeless and Ukraine should pretty much stop fighting; as Russia will just resort to using increasingly powerful bombs to pulverise Ukraine, in the face of difficulties with the ground war.
Of course these are just youtube talking heads. But the overriding analysis is that Russia is gradually moving towards an encirclement of and siege of Kiev by way of brutal, heavy bombardment.
Remember Ukraine is a big country and we are only 16 days in.
On the contrary, I think there is a major lack of progress for the Russian forces at Kyiv, and Ukraine seems to have prevented encirclement from west and south. The counter attacks to the east of Kyiv in the direction of Chernihiv start to make the Russian forces look very exposed, particularly as their supply lines are very insecure.*
I think a disorderly Russian retreat from Kyiv could well be forced over the next 2 weeks, releasing a lot of Ukranian forces for the southern front. Retaking that will be difficult against Russian forces, as the Ukranian forces lack heavy weapons.
* this looks quite damning of Russian fighting capacity. Lightly armed Ukranian volunteer TDF capture a Russian SPG and two tanks.
And you get this searing analysis from Twitter. Or do you have a Tac HQ set up in one of your several spare rooms.
You have absolutely no idea what is happening in Ukraine. You don't know how the overall campaign is going for either side. You post a video of a (supposedly) Russian platoon in a contact and make wild claims about how this shows how the war is going.
You are not alone on PB of course but you should know better. Or perhaps not.
Yes, I am a doctor in the East Midlands with no military background.
However the core facts are out there. After 16 days the Russians have only captured one city (Kherson) while others, even those close to the border and apparently early objectives are still in Ukranian hands, albeit Mariopol is besieged.
The ubiquity of Social Media (though of course one needs to be aware of biases and sources) in this war gives anyone access to knowledge of what is happening at the fronts unprecedented in history.
"After 16 days..."
Fucking hell how long do you think the opposed invasion of a seemingly well-armed country usually takes.
In 1939, Warsaw resisted the Germans for an entire month, yet that campaign is routinely described as a Polish collapse.
In 1939, the equipment of the German army was nearly all horse drawn. Most of the soldier had to march. Blitzkrieg was a series of dashes by the minority of the motorised forces, with the conventional army behind them catching up.
Interestingly, as a result of re-armament, the BEF in 1940 was the first entirely motorised army, in the world.
The Germans never managed to motorise, completely - even their Panzer divisions had lots of horses, right till the end of the war.
Indeed. For the bulk of the German army who invaded Russia in 1941 the experience was little different to napoleons soldiers. They walked nearly to Moscow, and some of them walked all the way back to Berlin. Those that didn’t die in Russia. The myth of the blitzkrieg and the motorised Wehrmacht has a powerful grip, but it is very much an illussion.
Blitzkrieg itself wasn't a myth, as an offensive strategy it worked. The BEF being fully motorized didn't help it much in 1940 aside from getting it to the coast a bit quicker, where it left lots of transport for the grateful Heer of course.
I’m not calling blitzkrieg a myth, rather the idea of the state of the German army being modern and motorised, which is widespread.
Not that widespread to anyone paying attention. Over 40 years ago one of my Higher History Qs was could Germany have successfully invaded the UK, I quoted the Wermacht being 2/3 horse drawn as a factor against. If a pimply 17 year old knew..
Comments
Or do you think it does?
politicalbetting.com
There’s a clue in the name
If not, good reason for Saturday morning irritability
(I'm not in favour of academics being forced out for personal views, in general, but this would be more deserved than what happened to Stock)
Edit: I'm completely strict on my Twitter account, as it states my position at a university and I use it for professional purposes to keep the output purely professional - I wouldn't even consider tweeting on the Ukraine situation. The account has undeleted personal/political tweets but from years and years ago before I held a faculty position (student days) so I should be fine unless I decide to stand for a political party. I'd have another account if I wanted to tweet personal stuff/views.
'Anas Sarwar rejects coalitions with SNP or Tories after May’s council elections'
https://tinyurl.com/3bkjknv8
The thing that I worry most about is Russia resorting to desperate tactics. Attacking nuclear power stations, chemical weapons etc.
@AS7404542949
47m
Сказали что на границе Украины останавливаться не надо, и стоит идти дальше на Европу.
Они армию свою видели?😂
https://twitter.com/AS7404542949/status/1502568820547981313
Translates to
"They said that there is no need to stop at the border of Ukraine, and it is worth going further to Europe.
Have they seen their army?😂"
I'm not sure who's in the video in the tweet, but it's definitely from Russian TV.
It's hard to get a grip on whether it did or not.
Never disturb the enemy while they’re making a mistake.
And months not years still takes us to beyond 16 days.
My only point is and has been we know almost literally nothing about the progress of the war and people posting videos from Twitter showing 40 seconds of something or other and then making a grand pronouncement about how the war is going is asinine in the extreme.
We are sadly just passengers at this point.
- The Hunt for Red October
- Firefox
Instead, he got Red Dawn.....
We have been incredibly generous to refugees from many, many conflicts. Chile, Somalia, Iran, Iraq, former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Syria spring to mind, but hundreds of others too.
Why is Sweden so generous?
Grumpy also because it's a long time until August...
After rather lacklustre performances in the large invitation agility round, we're now onto the semi-finals of the fun competitions judging the crossbreed entrants. Lots of impressive stories and achievements in the Good Citizen competition.
Tension is building for this evening's crossbreed grand final.
https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-march-10
Hardly tasteful.
Russia will stop supplying gas to Europe if required, per Russian foreign ministry
https://twitter.com/ragipsoylu/status/1502577995474784258
https://worldcrunch.com/culture-society/sweden-crime-mafia/crime-wave-anti-terror-debate
While overall crime levels in Sweden remain low, and homicide rates have fallen since the 1990s, it is particularly gang-related violence that worries authorities. A police report last year mapped out 36 different "clans" in major Swedish cities, tracking these family-based networks that often have roots in North Africa and the Middle East. These organizations engage in extortion and drug trafficking, fight each other over turf, and often have ties to other criminal outfits such as motorcycle clubs.
Another indication of Putin's geopolitical blunder. Not that we should feel smug. We don't know what Putin may resort to as retribution.
All Prof Hayward is doing is questioning the evidence over the bombing of a maternity hospital.
I would have thought that was a perfectly reasonable activity ... and especially for an academic.
Serious allegations deserve a serious investigation in which the evidence is actually scrutinised.
If you just hear the case for the prosecution, you always convict. It seems perfectly reasonable to present the case for the defence .... without a lynch mob organised by LBC, & the media.
Bertrand Russell was sacked by Trinity College Cambridge for opposing the First World War. Cambridge is now very embarrassed to be reminded of this.
It is the job of academics to consider a contrarian view. Prof Hayward is just doing his job .
The money is probably the prime source of hard currency, for Russia, at the moment.
Similarly, the Russians have been able to advance on Kyiv from two directions, and the advance from the east has been over a considerable distance given reported problems with Russian logistics. Again, given the evidence being presented of poor morale, poor communications, deficient tactics, etc, the only explanation for such an advance is overwhelming strength.
It might be that, over time, Ukraine is able to inflict losses that erode this strength, but it does not do any good to deny the evidence of overall Russian military superiority over the Ukrainians at present.
https://twitter.com/Rogozin/status/1502375246183211008
Of course from next year the NI rise will be replaced by the health and social care levy
The problem these days is an EXCESS of info. From soldiers posting on Telegram to citizens tweeting gory videos to governments adding Fake News on Tik Tok everything you need is out there. But you have to sieve out the disinformation and adjust for bias - in this case the tendency for pro-Ukrainian news to get more publicity, as most social media users are pro Ukraine
Is @foxy right in his analysis? I don’t know, and nor do you, but if he’s carefully looking at a lot of internet info and social media it is quite possible. He’s a doctor. He’s probably more forensic than most. And that’s what you need: a forensic brain. And a screen
Interestingly, as a result of re-armament, the BEF in 1940 was the first entirely motorised army, in the world.
The Germans never managed to motorise, completely - even their Panzer divisions had lots of horses, right till the end of the war.
The SCons have already maxed-out. SLab has nowhere to go but up.
The Russian Foreign Ministry said it will not negotiate with Nato, after the military alliance provided Ukraine with weapons.
“In the past few years the relationship between Nato and Russia through the fault of the alliance has fallen to zero”
https://telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/03/12/ukraine-latest-news-russia-war-putin-belarus-zelensky-kyiv/
https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1502586824413392900
That particular pony has played it’s one trick and is down at the knacker’s yard.
They are able to detect various fuels, as well as fire starters used to ignite fireplaces and barbecues.
They then mark their finds by scratching before firefighters remove the flammable substances or take a sample for lab testing.
But despite their protective boots, it’s still a risky job for the dogs.
The SCons will always get at least 15 to 20%
Trixie
Destiny Is All 14:10 Ayr
Hermes Boy 13:56 Hereford
Prince Escalus 15:41 Hereford
Double & Singles
Knappers Hill 1:50 Sandown
Milan Bridge 2:31 Hereford
I thought Saturday morning dogs meant Romford, Crayford or in former times Hackney and Harringay but @IanB2 reminds me it can, for one weekend, mean Cruft's.
Not sure about the track at Crufts and whether it favours wide runners or not so I'll stick to different animals running on an artificial surface. The weekend before Cheltenham is one of the poorest of the year in quality terms as all the good horses are heading to Prestbury Park but for Flat racing fans it's the first sign of the coming of spring - the Lincoln is just a fortnight away.
A very good all-weather card at Wolverhampton and a fair card at Lingfield and the Stodge Saturday Patent (1 winner and a near miss last weekend) returns to annoy and irritate. My three with less chance of winning than an SWP candidate in the City of London Corporation election are:
STONE SOLDIER 3.31 Lingfield
FOUNTAIN CROSS 3.51 Wolverhampton
PLUPERFECT 4.41 Lingfield
Stick a 1-point win patent on those or find something better to do with your cash, whether hard-earned or otherwise (I don't judge).
So yes, it was a collapse: but it was also a very different conflict. I really hope 85% of Kiev is not destroyed...
Take as an example oh I don't know, political betting. When political events loom we look at the markets and say ah yes, this means ABC. But if there's one thing we do here on PB it is political analysis. All day every day (plus pizzas and Netflix series). And we have no idea and fight like cats in a sack about potential political outcomes. If we don't know then how come "the markets" do.
And this is a war. Hugely unpredictable and no clear picture of anything. Of course "experts" can make assessments but none of us know what happens next and barely know what has happened already.
More than 80 adults and children are hiding there from the shelling, including citizens of Turkey.
#StopRussianAggression
#closeUAskyNOW
https://twitter.com/MFA_Ukraine/status/1502555077089034245
*Betting 🐎
I’ve checked the non runners and the going stick. All crammed into an hour because we are going out to watch the rugby 🏴
13:50 - Sandown - Thunder Rock
A specialist at this distance. Will compete on any ground. Hasn’t raced for a month.
14:05 - Wolverhampton - Scottish Summit
An each way bet.
14:25 - Sandown - Hystery Bere
Has form, track, distance and going on its side, shouldn’t let down each way bet.
14:40 - Wolverhampton - Amlicar
I don’t think I have ever backed a winner in a race this short, but I have given it serious consideration because I would like to.
Cheltenham week. Festival starts Tuesday. 😍 is anyone going?
I always struggle for winners at the festival. I went to Cheltenham in October and had 3 winners. I will likely be on most the races in some form, just chasing a winner, but each morning I will post the four I most fancy just because sharing is caring.
Did you say you were going to give Mike Smithson Cheltenham headers @stodge ?
I agree.
"Asked about the capabilities of Russia's air defense systems, Air Force Gen. Mark D. Kelly said, “They’re operating pretty well when they’re operated by Ukrainians."
https://twitter.com/SeapowerMag/status/1502360703503589391
Yes, caveats required. It's funny though.
I have boatloads of brave, fresh-faced overseas conscripts whose conscience has been pricked by my cause.
You have desperately press ganged a bunch of foreign thugs because your losses are so great and your regular troops are incompetent drunks.
I am progressing toward a stunning military victory.
You are committing genocide.
I am doing research into disease prevention and biological weapons security.
You are developing biological weapons and storing nasty diseases ready to unleash on the world.
Etc.
The numbers are completely irrelevant compared to the scale of the Ukrainian crisis, and clearly much lower than most people assume given the disproportionate attention arrivals of refugees typically receives in the right-wing press.
The helicopter assaults, the amount of forces for the campaign, the logistics and now Putin arresting people for not telling him that the Ukrainians would resist.
I can't see how that could possibly make sense, other than a very quick, complete victory was expected.
I’m definitely not the military expert in the family but I do have a longstanding interest in prediction and forecasting. Phillip Tetlock and team have shown that, while most pundits’ predictions are no better than random guesses, some people do make consistently better forecasts than others. These “superforecasters” tend to be open-minded, good at seeing a wide range of perspectives, not closely tied to an ideological worldview, and relatively immune to cognitive biases.
https://samf.substack.com/p/predicting-the-war-predicting-the
Lurkers waiting all morning for a horse racing post and three came at once!
The myth of the blitzkrieg and the motorised Wehrmacht has a powerful grip, but it is very much an illussion.
The most reliable information is simply the maps. And here it's fairly clear that Russia is inching forward on most fronts. 17 days isn't very long, and we should expect to see encirclements of several cities complete over the next weeks. The fundamental Russian problem is that they can't take the cities by direct assault except by surprise (worked in Kherson, failed in Kharkiv, unlikely to be repeated), house-to-house fighting (horrendous in terms of losses) or long-range bombardment and siege (horrible for civilians). They have form for that in Syria, they're doing it in Mariupol and sadly it seems the most likely. At some point, they reckon, Zelensky will feel it's not worth putting up with that merely to retain a theoretical chance of joining NATO and the theoretical chance of regaining Crimea and Donbas one day.
Could Western sanctions change that? It's doubtful, as we've already unleashed most of them. Our most useful role is probably a Zelensky bargaining chip - "settle for less than you want and I'll bring in Scholz and Macron and get them to loosen the sanctions". I think Putin needs Zelensky for that.
I think that Russia does have enough to sustain a prolonged offensive if the Ukrainians are not getting the support to replenish at least what they started with. While Russia may have committed just about all the forces it initially earmarked for this war, this is still a relatively small proportion of its overall armed forces. So the Russians have plenty of reserves to draw on whereas the Ukranians don't. I don't think Russian logistical difficulties can be relied upon to hold them back in the long term, as opposed to just slowing them down - they will no doubt be capable of learning from their mistakes rather than just repeating them. By contrast, the Ukranians are dependent upon adequate resupply from the US and Nato and I am not convinced that they are getting what they need, beyond light weapons.
To draw on another historical parallel, in 1944-45 the German Army was very well supplied with what was by far the most effective infantry anti-tank weapon, the Panzerfaust. Streets ahead of the Bazooka and PIAT, such that the allies reused any they could capture. The Panzerfaust did restrict the use of Allied armour without close infantry support, but it wasn't decisive. Ultimately the material imbalance in heavy equipment and air power was such that the Allies prevailed. So in putting a lot of faith in the Ukranians' use of NLAWs, we're hoping that things have moved on and such that an assumption that this war will be like the last European one on this scale will be a mistake.
That is, obviously, a pessimistic perspective and I dearly hope that it's too pessimistic. Assuming that the next war will be like the last is often mistaken, so it is not cut and dried. What worries me most at this stage is the lack of US resolve, with the half measures at every stage coming too late and just encouraging Putin to double down.
The professionals told us a lab leak was impossible. “A racist conspiracy theory”. The *professionals* actually prohibited us from even talking about a potential lab leak explanation for a year. But a bunch of amateurs got online and dug out the uncomfortable facts until the professionals were forced to admit Yes, OK, it could be true
“For most of last year, the idea that the coronavirus pandemic could have been triggered by a laboratory accident in Wuhan, China, was largely dismissed as a racist conspiracy theory of the alt-right. The Washington Post in early 2020 accused Senator Tom Cotton of "fanning the embers of a conspiracy theory that has been repeatedly debunked by experts." CNN jumped in with "How to debunk coronavirus conspiracy theories and misinformation from friends and family." Most other mainstream outlets, from The New York Times ("fringe theory") to NPR ("Scientists debunk lab accident theory"), were equally dismissive.”
But then that all changed, because of
“A group of amateur sleuths, with few resources except curiosity and a willingness to spend days combing the internet for clues. Throughout the pandemic, about two dozen or so correspondents, many anonymous, working independently from many different countries, have uncovered obscure documents, pieced together the information, and explained it all in long threads on Twitter—in a kind of open-source, collective brainstorming session that was part forensic science, part citizen journalism, and entirely new. They call themselves DRASTIC, for Decentralized Radical Autonomous Search Team Investigating COVID-19.”
https://www.newsweek.com/exclusive-how-amateur-sleuths-broke-wuhan-lab-story-embarrassed-media-1596958
Recently there has been evidence pointing back to the wet market. But again that is being questioned by others
https://twitter.com/jamiemetzl/status/1501927733177339906?s=21
The point remains, without amateurs and their “lightly educated guesswork” we wouldn’t even be having this vital discussion. We’d still be in 2020 and literally prevented from talking about it on Facebook
“ she’s not good enough a leader to be the Democrat’s presidential candidate “
You are right Nigel, she would be loser if gets the nomination. 😕
Clear, concise, accurate.
The myth is that the german army was all this motorised force, when the reality is completely opposite, and as @Malmesbury says the British were the first to be fully motorised.
In addition the German had very few cars, lorries and drivers in 1939, compared to say America were car ownership was widespread. This had huge implications for having drivers and indeed mechanics available to maintain armoured forces.
Saw several punch ups while trying to get money out of the bank and buying stuff in the supermarket.
Took the train to the Polish border via Lviv.
20 hour wait at the border.
The Ukrainian border guard didn't give a fuck that he was Russian after he gave him 500 €. (Pricey!)
Any Ukrainian men who couldn't bribe their way out of it were not allowed to cross to Poland, slung on a KrAZ 7 tonner and told they were going "East".
My mate's comments to the reluctant conscripts in the truck: "No sadness! You'll get a Javelin! XAXAXAXA!'
He's now in Berlin trying to work out how to get back to SPb. Possibly via Doha.
His last comment on WhatsApp to me, "Lace up your boots, old man! You're going to war! XAXAXAXA!"
Don't judge. As a younger man he was a nav on Blinders and has probably given himself brain damage from drinking the avionics coolant.
The war is not about the borders of Ukraine. It is not about Crimea and the Donbas. It's not even about Ukrainian membership of NATO. It is about the existence of a democratic Ukraine that is free of a dependency on Russia. All the rest is mere pretext.
There may come a point when Ukraine is sufficiently brutalised by war that they choose a future as a Russian vassal state as a least-worst option compared to continued resistance. Given what is happening in Kharkiv, Mariupol and elsewhere it would be an understandable choice. But that is what is at stake.
The decisive question is how long each side can sustain the fight. For the Ukranians it is existential, so like the Soviets in 1941 they will fight on. The Russians meanwhile have limited capacity to replace losses and are being economically strangled so need a shorter war.
A lot of Ukrainian cities will be a wasteland afterwards, but it likely will become stalemate in the months ahead, and ultimately Russian defeat.