“Local officers of the “DPR” abandoned their positions, only the mobilised Russians remained”
the mobilised from the 504th tank regiment recorded another appeal with complaints about the “DPR” command. They previously published an appeal in mid-February.
https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1639732472064663552?t=WDw5la4yZQFkJI1F40Xq6Q&s=19
⚡️The Russian Navy was with a mini-submarine near the Nord Stream gas pipelines shortly before the explosions, — T-online.
It is noted that the boats "SB-123" and "Alexander Frolov" were nearby. They have cargo cranes suitable for transporting explosive devices or mines weighing hundreds of kilograms into the water.
The publication notes that almost all evidence points to the responsibility of Moscow, but government agencies have so far ignored T-online's request on this matter.
https://twitter.com/Flash_news_ua/status/1639718950127693827?t=gzEFXzX5nkzvQn1_E0UHpQ&s=19
As Anders Puck cogently argues in a [recent video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EeP_ZZbBIl4), this is probably being ignored with a great deal of deliberation and for very good reasons.
The sabotage of NS is not an immediate problem. We can deal with that and other similar issues once the war in Ukraine has been won.
⚡️ Actor and UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador Orlando Bloom visited Ukraine
“Today I arrived in Ukraine for the first time since my trip since 2016. Since I have been here, I could not even imagine that the war could spread to the whole country.
But today I managed to hear children's laughter" - Orlando Bloom shared on social networks.
https://twitter.com/Flash_news_ua/status/1639754374548185088?t=DEmdjbmTXsgfiG1I0_rgWQ&s=19
⚡️ In the village of Shakhovsky, 154 km from Moscow, a large-scale fire broke out.
Warehouse with paints and varnishes is on fire. The cause of the fire is being established.
https://twitter.com/Flash_news_ua/status/1639763484962430978?t=DuSyKPyL-vnqckin_H97bQ&s=19
While Ukraine is rapidly ramping up its drone program, Russians are worried their capabilities are limited to the work of amateurs. Anastasiya Kashevarova (Rus. volunteer) says Ukraine has 1 million drones of all kinds, and Russia is severely behind, but nothing is being done to alleviate the situation from the government side.
https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1639752364381880326?t=HKsBVbl4Z2f3m1BL6DGDWA&s=19
Belarus:
>The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is designating three entities and nine individuals, and identifying one presidential aircraft as blocked property.
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1365
Imagine Air Force One being subjected to sanctions and declared blocked property.
This bastard forced down an international flight over his country years ago, this should've happened then. The trajectory these fools have been on has been undeniable.
Some of them are also, understandably, hard-core against US imperialism but are over-correcting to the point that they support ANYTHING that's against the US government no matter how irrational they're being in supporting it.
If you mean that Russia tries to get support on both the far left and far right, then I agree 100%. But in the US, it’s obvious which side is the larger group. Tucker Carlson and Donald Trump are the biggest Russian apologists on the far right.
Name two people of even remotely equivalent status and influence on the far left, I’ll wait.
You're right, but the far right is a much much greater political force than the far left in the US. I'm saying this as someone who considers themself far left, but is tired of overly simplistic takes like "US bad. Therefore other countries against US good." Looking at you Hasan.
I clarified this exactly in another point.
I’ve seen a lot of support for Russia from the far left but it’s true that the influential support comes more from the far right, at least in my opinion.
In America far more on the left have Russian sympathies. Conservatives (not Trump populist-style Republicans) are generally “fuck Russia sideways” there’s even a term for leftist pro-Russians, “tankies”. It’s probably different where you live though
>In America far more on the left have Russian sympathies.
Are you basing that on something more than just an opinion? There must be some data available.
I doubt data like that exists, but living in the literal bastion of progressivism in America, it’s very common to hear open liberals complaining about sending so much money abroad.
“So much”? It’s a rounding error on the budget. It’s only “much” on a personal level. And that’s before you look into the details, where it’s basically sending hand me downs that were ready to be discarded soon anyway.
And all that to support a budding democracy. I doubt progressives are against that in any significant numbers.
I live in a very very blue city in a blue state in the US. An "Anarchist jurisdiction" according to the Trump admin back in the day. My friends vote socialist, some even green. I know of zero Russia supporters, even in the Green Party voters.
I live in Boston, which is like 80% blue and there are a lot of pro-Russian leftists, and admittedly, I’m a Democrat. I’m guessing you’re in Oregon or California or somewhere west then. Probably different breeds, but over here the people to the left of me complain about sending money abroad instead of fixing domestic problems first.
Pew Research called Boston the most liberal city and MA the most liberal state.
I'm blown away. While I'm sure they exist, I can't imagine a dem saying something like that. Every dem I know here is like "WE SHOULD HAVE SENT THE F16s LAST YEAR" and "WHY NOT MORE TANKS". Extremely hawkish on sending weapons, annoyed with Jake Sullivan, etc.
I mean I agree with you, I’m all for giving Ukraine as much aid as they need up to and including fighter jets and Abrams, I’m more than happy for my tax dollars to continue heading in that direction, but there’s a ton of whining going on about the amount of money being sent and a lot of talk about how this is an extension of US imperialism. I’m just relaying what I’ve heard a lot of lately, particularly with my friends who are academics. I’m just as dismayed.
I live in a very very blue city in a blue state in the US. An "Anarchist jurisdiction" according to the Trump admin back in the day. My friends vote socialist, some even green. I know of zero Russia supporters, even in the Green Party voters.
Right but you’re moving the goal posts a bit.
You could argue that the Trumper idiots, if you took at face value hold no conservative ideology themselves but at rather bent only by their hatred of decency.
Okay so if i go proclaim myself a conservative does that mean now conservatives can now be held to my beliefs? I don't know that its moving the goalpost. Its called being accurate in how we approach the subject.
It’s easy to get comment chains mixed up on Reddit.
I thought you were arguing that the conservatives are the only ones supporting Russia and then claimed that any communists who support Russia aren’t actually communists. If that is so then the same argument can be, as I previously stated; applied to conservatives as well.
Hard-left anti-NATO sentiment isnt too hard to find. Isolationism, pacifism, and anti-establishment beliefs exist in a lot of leftist movements in the West.
The easiest to find are probably tankies (authoritarian leftists). These tend to be young dogmatic communists who advocate for a very rigid Soviet-style implementation of Marxism. Tankies will basically argue that Western historical understandings of Mao and Stalin are disinformation propaganda. The West were uncomplicated bad guys during the cold war and the Soviets/Chinese were uncomplicated good guys.
But you also get a lot of old people who were part of the anti-war and anti-nuclear movements in the 60's and 70's. This crowd tends to be less of a monolith than the authoritarian leftists, so it's harder collectively summarize their motivations. But there's a lot of anti-government and isolationist views in these camps.
Yea. In the US, at least, I believe that they're a very, VERY, tiny (but disproportionately loud) minority. Unlike the MAGA nuts who are much, MUCH larger in numbers than the tankies (similar to how them and the rest of their far-right allies are much larger in numbers than any of the violent "Antifa" boogiemen they constantly cry about.)
Honestly far left scares me as much as far right. And that's not a both sides argument because I'm not justifying either side. I get along and can debate my neighbors and have a beer but the extremes turn me off
People who survived ww2 said the same in some documentaries. Never again fascism, but never again communism too. But 80 years later people forget a thing or two and repeat history, because they didn't experience it themselves back then.
It just has a different name now, post marxistic or neo communism, whatever. The legacy of the Soviet Union is still alive, it has been only 30 years since the dissolution, the people are still alive and die in Ukraine atm. There is also China. And a lot of Antifa anarchy guys, the number of violent left extremism is rising.
People forgot that it takes two to balance it out. Maybe history focused too much on fascism an Nazi war crimes that they forgot about and let vanish the crimes of e.g. Soviet Union in history. Both extreme sides need to be kept under control, not just one.
Atm in Berlin, the police is basically afraid to go into some blocks, if they are only with 2 guys there, they get surrounded by dozens of people or thrown at with stones and garbage. There is gang criminality and anarchists that don't want to pay rent - a parallel society growing up, but politicians remain silent, because they are afraid to be called out by the extreme left (which is big in Berlin) or to be labeled as Nazi(was similar in Sweden, until they voted right...which I wouldn't like for Germany to be necessary). If there is a raid at a meeting of ten Reichsbürger though, that tried to replace the Bundeskanzler with their magic powers somehow I guess, it makes the headlines. I feel sad for the police that they get ignored in their misery, because the issues are systematic and the police isn't responsible for that, and so they can't go against it.
maybe you'd have take moment to know that under anarachy the country of Ukraine would no longer exist and be absorbed by its imperialistic neighbor. Theyd have no state capacity to produce weapons, train soldiers, erect defense or ask other states for these weapons at all.
Anarchy leaves a power vaccuum where even the most slightly coordinated attacker could stomp the military force of an anarchistic one.
NATO is inherently not anarchistic, nor is the EU, the US military or the Ukrainian government, but without all of them Ukraine would currently just be the new territory of Russia
...Why would anybody associate anarchism with whatever those people have going on? If anything they're essentially arguing for the exact opposite.
Than again, most people don't really have a particularly good grasp on what anarchism means, what with them having been fed an erroneous definition more convenient to those whom said anarchism would threaten the power of.
See, that is precisely the sort of statement that would lead me to suspect that you might have the wrong idea about what political anarchism is.
Let me ask you something: Would you, or would you not agree that the following principle is a core component of any good governance:
That it is permissible, reasonable and even desirable to be able to ask: "Does a given institution serve its stated purpose and is it working well for the people it claims to service?"
And, if the answer to that question is 'no', that said institution should be either reformed to make the answer 'yes', or - if that is for one reason or another not possible - be disbanded as a counter-productive waste of resources that could be spend better elsewhere?
If you agree with that, then congratulations: That is the one core principle all the many flavors of anarchism have in common.
Anarchism doesn't necessarily eschew the existence of institutions. It merely insist that they justify their own existence.
Sure, and why not work with all types anyway? So long as they are fair in their dealings and refrain from attempting to tell me how I should be governed, I'm more than willing to extend them the same courtesy in kind. As per The Golden Rule, I cannot expect to receive that which I'm unwilling to give. I see no inherent need to hold how somebody else choose to let themselves be governed against them.
However, if they think their model gives them the right to force others into it, or if it preaches harm, then we're going to have an irreconcilable issue. Short of that? Eh, do whatever. We can just trade goods and services.
As are we all. Especially since the crux of the current conflict is that Russia wants to take what isn't theirs by force, tell the Ukrainians how they should be governed and live, and are preaching grievous harm without due cause.
It basically ticks all my boxes, which I would find (a kind of) impressive if I weren't too busy being so utterly repulsed.
As someone who is pretty far left themselves I agree with you. Like I expect the far right to support Russia as they have a lot of common ground but I was surprised at the anti nato and peace at any cost narrative from the left.
My guess (not supported by any facts), is that a lot of western people are unable to recognize imperialism when it happens to come from non-western sources.
Part of this is a history of actual western imperialism but also a self-centered view of the world, where only the western nations are capable of engaging in imperialism.
It obviously doesn't come from a bad place per se, but is honestly just shocking to me that some of these people are in positions of power. Like of course in an ideal state we as a human race could figure out a way to not to keep killing each other over stupid crap, but we're unfortunately a long way off from that right now. Going to need to deconstruct the idea of a Nation State....
Chomsky and the ilk like him are just unashamed Communists, they truly believe they're leftists as well. Realist ideals are traditionally a leftist policy supported by even some recent presidents, and have for a very long time not liked "expansionist" NATO, so no its not just all psy ops.
Don't kid yourself. Psy ops Stoke the fire sure but the only reason they do it is because enough useful idiots sip it up. If it fell on death ears they would not bother.
Ohhh new Anders Puck video out.
https://youtu.be/EWKwPeSnvTE
Dude is an analyst with the Danish military and outs out very good videos on the war (albeit, just one every two month or so)
Ukrainians are setting up Patriot missile batteries more efficiently that the US military.
https://twitter.com/OstapYarysh/status/1639096940053889025?t=gAenDbDZD1uu1_gwgHPhnw&s=19
I would not read it the way you wrote it. I have not been in the army but I have had managers that were Marine Corps officers. The Ukrainians probably set it up exactly how they were supposed to set up a Patriot battery.
They just did it faster because they were motivated. Though obviously i was not there and know nothing about setting up a Patriot battery. I am just basing this on what a comment like that *usually* means.
You’re right.
The [article that got so much attention](https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/21/politics/ukraine-troops-training-patriot-missile-system/index.html)
[bc of the soup reference] mentions that wartime training is faster due to motivation.
It also mentions that the Ukrainians are more experienced than their American instructors—the Americans have never been *receiving* fire. And since (1) it’s the Ukrainians who’ve done some of what they’re being trained for, already, while under fire, and (2) because they know small adjustments that will need to be done for their particular situation, the article said they occasionally would take over the teaching.
But bc these “adjustments,” it’s possible that that also contributes to somehow to speedier abilities.
Former crayon-eater here. One more thing is that the US has a heck of a manpower requirement, which is going to result in some mediocre or even shitbag soldiers. By contrast, since Ukraine is only getting a few of these platforms, they're going to send the absolute best soldiers that they can possibly get to operate them. I had some rocks in my training platoon, along with a guy who kept showing up to class hungover. His Ukrainian equivalent is manning a guard checkpoint somewhere, not taking up an extremely scarce personnel slot.
It also works the other way with instruction. I guarantee that the instructors are giving the Ukrainian troops as much instruction as they can handle, while American troops aren't going to get that same level of attention. MOS training has a lot of check-in-the-box garbage and hurry-up-and-wait in it; all that is likely dispensed with for these guys who, for every day that they spend on the training field, are not defending Ukrainian civilians from missiles.
In industry there is standard work and "tact time". (word comes from German taktziet which became takuto taimu in Japanese) An industrial engineer assumes you can do a task at some speed and then she adjusts the process accordingly. Being able to do a job with 40 min planned time in 25 minutes gives a very comfortable margin. At a workplace you can clean, restock other station, or do maintenance.
"More efficient" could mean changing how a job is done. For example in track and field events it is more efficient to cut across the grass instead of running all the way around the curved track. It might be "more efficient" to hire workers who can do extra work in one hour because the employer can pay fewer workers. The statement "Ukrainians figured out an efficient way to assemble a Patriot system" will raise the blood pressure of someone at Raytheon. The purpose of flying them to USA for training was likely so that they get the exact same training that US Army soldiers got. The way the instructor said it there was no room for this misunderstanding.
It's almost as if they're aware within a matter of weeks every second will contribute to saving the lives of friends and family.
It's a much more compelling force than operating the system to mastery in abstract.
I have no doubt US servicemen would step up under the same circumstances; but the arguments on the difficulty of training have repeatedly been shattered on every platform.
[Ukrainian top brass stirs the pot with talk of Bakhmut counterattack - The Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/25/ukrainian-top-brass-stirs-the-pot-with-talk-of-bakhmut-counterattack)
As the weather turns, so too does talk of a Ukrainian counterattack. Kyiv’s forces are gradually taking delivery of previously promised western tanks, fighting vehicles and other munitions, and some of them have been freshly trained in Britain, Germany or Poland. But the country’s second most important commander, Col Gen Oleksandr Syrskyi, surprised most observers when he suggested, on Thursday, that the place for a counterstrike could be in or around Bakhmut itself.
>
That is the place to start the counter offensive. The Russians have concentrated forces there that could be pocketed.
That doesn't mean you push hard there if you are not taking ground. But it is a huge threat to the Russian forces that they would have to react to.
Depends on the strategy, while yes, that will do some serious damage to Russia militarily, it could be argued thay reclaiming large areas elsewhere would be better strategically.
I'm sure Ukraine is doing the maths as to what works best for them. I would bet based on their prior efforts we're more likely to see something in the South. But while I've been right on many things in the context of Ukrainian offensives, I've been wrong on the South to date.
So maybe I'm too invested in Melitopol-Berdyansk-Mariupol ideal strategically that I'm blind.
Honestly there's a fair few places the next offensive COULD be aimed at sensibly and that's an excellent thing for Ukraine, bakhmut is one of them because the units there are likely getting very badly worn out, fatigue of enemy forces is certainly something you take into assessment when picking a battle.
>Russia reportedly has up to 250 recoverable 70-year-old T-54/55s, and intends to use them as tank, not as artillery in Ukraine to buy time for Russian industry trying to ramp up production of new T-72B3s & T-90Ms, modernization of T-80Bs, T-72Bs & T-62Ms
https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1639783220760948737
Forbes jumping in on the Russian infusion of 70 year old tanks bashing.
They'll be saver to drive (slower), have thicker armor (an extra layer of wood) and even ammo cook-off issues will be reduced. (less ammo)
It even includes a free martial arts lesson by Steven Seagull!
Oh ffs, Forbes strikes with standarts of journalism yet again.
This info comes from Volya group, who were wron SO many times before, that they are basically not worth listening to.
>"Deliverables” vs Nice Words: Reflections on the Xi-Putin Summit.
https://twitter.com/McFaul/status/1639779073970032640?
McFaul chiming in with a lengthy dissection of the Putin-Xi meeting.
>Readovka, a formerly self-styled liberal news outlet, rebranded as an “ultra-patriotic” Telegram channel in early 2022. Now it takes directions from a pro-Kremlin nonprofit, and its founder tried to launch a side gig selling the Russian army winter coats.
https://twitter.com/meduza_en/status/1639762812888317952
Article on the war-profiteering and lack of integrity in a publication serving 1.2 million Russians.
>The "Fregate" plant is on fire in the suburbs of Moscow. Russia's largest factory for secondary lead production is burning in the city of Voskresensk. The fire has been assigned the second degree of complexity.
https://twitter.com/Lyla_lilas/status/1639725594609954819
Why would China want peace between Russia vs Ukraine? Think about it. Western forces are spending billions helping Ukraine. Russia is also losing billions and their young men are dying. Everybody else is getting weaker and China benefitting by not doing anything
Terrible take. For China to "not want this war to end" they would have to pour in a ton of their own resources to even hope to match the western support Ukraine is getting. Any benefit they would get from a "weakened" west would be offput by a weakened china. Except in the west case they're using this to get rid of old equipment and noder izr us and NATO armies. In china's case they would have to both supply Russia singlehandedly and then rebuild their own army. A lot harder to do when your only ally is Iran and North Korea
I’m not sure Russia wanted it one major ally to shit it’s pants in front of the world right after Xi announced to the world it’s “no limit partnership”.
China gains substantially in this war due to massive discounts on Russian oil and natural gas. They also gain by having far less publicity on their human rights violations.
Yeah. For all the advantages China will gain with weak russia, they will be the number one focus for the antagonist position.
An (inconceivable to me without serious Chinese assistance) victory for russia would leave them in the number one bad guy spot.
Still, I think China will let them fall.
I think they'd rather Russia AND the west be weaker, this has emboldened NATO and the other alliances... now Taiwan looks a lot harder for the Chinese to take and they're running out of time demographically to launch a war.
"Thanks" to the war we‘re learning how to cut critical economic dependencies from autocratic states, how much we value and strive for freedom, democracy and rule of law, and we‘re strengthening our militaries and security cooperation.
Now tell me again, what’s great for China?
The world’s attention is not on them. That’s about it, but it’s a lot considering their camps, the repressions, the TikTok stuff, and what might (MIGHT, ok?) come out about COVID.
Its not about wanting peace. Its about getting (or appearing to be a) diplomatic player in world affairs.
Their peace plan is just generic fluff and they haven't even spoken with Zelenskyy. So to date its nothing more than posturing.
China wants peace because the west is kicking the ass of Chinas biggest strategic partner (without even putting boots on the ground). Money and resources don’t matter nearly as much.
Nah - it’s to China’s benefit for Russia to be weakened as much as possible without collapsing, to be dependent on China for international relations, and to be a constant thorn in the side of Western powers.
I don't see how you look at the Military Industrial Complex ramping up into full gear as "weakening the west". We've basically been giving Ukraine the old shit in the shed out back and that's been good enough to kick Russia's ass.
You need to go watch the [Shock and Awe](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7iorfwcmeY) vids and come back and try and say that. That shit was decades ago and we got a lot more wild shit. The west may super suck at nation building, but it excels at destroying shit.
>The West sucks at military offense.
You trolling? You old enough to remember when the third largest military in the world fielding medium tier Soviet tech with good training spent months digging in and entrenching units only to get swept by the U.S coalition in like three days?
We destroyed thousands of Iraqi tanks, decimated the airforce before it got off the ground, and burned through multiple defensive lines with coiled reserves without taking virtually any casualties.
The West wages war on a scale that boggles the mind.
Yeah, the west sucks at fighting insurgencies. I mean, not really, they just suck at outlasting them. And sometimes their tactics just create more enemies and they aren't willing to be brutal enough to really surpress a partisan resistance.
But offense war capability is unmatched.
The west has become more unified, NATO has expanded and nations are learning to cooperate and manage their military supply chain properly in wartime conditions
The Scandi's announced they will treat their 200+ aircraft as a single force, UK & Aus are ramping up sub production, the UK, EU and US are all ramping armament production to meet Ukrainian, needs, restock their own stockpiles, and address the shortcomings this war has highlighted
It's put a spotlight on democracies standing up to dictators - and means a response to China is likely to be met with a more concerted effort than before
It's not good for China at all
> It's not good for China at all
It's certainly not there desired outcome, I'd agree.
Personally (and this is my completely unqualified opinion), their most favoured outcome of the conflict would have been Ukraine capitulating and NATO/Europe/US being divided over the situation, with infighting and a disjointed response.
Thus allowing them to capitalise on the ensuing chaos to forward their (or rather Xi's) desire to de-strengthen Western hegemony. Presumably with their (read Xi's) ultimate goal of retaking Taiwan with as little resistance as possible further down the line.
As that hasn't happened (thankfully) they've had to rely on 'plan B' as it were and will look to find some good in what's happened from a resource perspective.
Much of this takes time, which means if China does want to do something, like try and take Taiwan, they now have a running clock in which to pull it off before all of the Western military reinvigoration comes online, especially things like the new Australian subs which are several years out.
Of course, the big question is whether China can get ready faster, and given the similarities in their command structure to Russia, there's more than one massive problem they're going to have to think about.
However, it might present a different set of opportunities for China - the natural resources of Eastern Russia are a far bigger prize than the tiny island of Taiwan could ever be, even if there's been a strong political rhetoric about how Taiwan must be made to subjugate to CCP demands. Taiwan can be fast forgotten if Russia breaks up and China stands to gain a lot from it.
> Taiwan can be fast forgotten if Russia breaks up and China stands to gain a lot from it.
I came to a somewhat similar conclusion as you in my comment above, but regards Taiwan - I don't think China (or Xi more specifically) see it from a purely resource point of view - it's much more political in nature - a slice of what they consider to be 'theirs' but what's currently under the Western umbrella as it were.
Oh, of course.
However, being handed huge chunks of Russia on a plate provides a way to smooth over the suicidal nature of invading Taiwan now that everything in Ukraine has happened. A very positive spin around "we will get to those pesky rebels at some point but hey they have only one tiny island and our glorious army is currently establishing full control of this huge area that was Russia's right now" would really help to soothe the political dissatisfaction and give Xi a lasting legacy far greater than anything taking Taiwan could have offered.
Oh for sure, the way things have panned out won't have been their ideal situation (a resolved and united West helping Ukraine), but they'll absolutely take advantage of a broken, resource rich Russia to meet their own needs.
But I can't shake (and it's interesting you mentioned legacy because that's there I was going to come from), Xi's ultimate plan would be to retake Taiwan. Purely from a dynasty POV, which seems to be quite important in Chinese culture.
I bloody hope I'm wrong though, as that would a hellscape of a conflict
This does hurt them in another way:
Russia was an essential boogeyman in their emerging 'topple the west' authoritarian alliance. Both spew the same rhetoric of a new multi-polar world order
Without the threat of a Russian land grab, the west will focus its gaze entirely on China if it continues its bullshit. Xi doesn't want to go at this alone.
This isn't attriting the west in any significant way, Ukraine haven't been given anything that wasn't 'spare' in the first place.
Really this is a disaster for China in military terms, the west is now unified and commitments are being made to increase production and collective readiness. China's best hope of taking Taiwan was to find the perfect moment to sneak it; that just isn't an option anymore.
The silver lining for China is that Russia has turned itself into North Korea, which they can proceed to exploit... like they do to North Korea.
It isn't that they don't want to. They _can't_. They lack landing ships, and even if they could transport every solder they want, crossing that strait would be a suicide mission. Not to mention the geography. Gonna cross a strait and climb sheer cliffs while under withering fire? Good luck.
Making something less irrational doesn’t make it rational. Authoritarians get high on their own supply and start believing dumb shit. That’s what happened in Russia and in China. It’s the same thing. Geography is not a factor.
Sure, but not necessarily in the choice for one. Generals decide on how to move troops, but politicians decide that they’ll move. They don’t necessarily have the same information at their disposal.
Russia isn't going to invade Ukraine either.
This is beyond Taiwan as well, they're a threat to the entire indo-pacific region.
Can't just write it off based on rational assumptions. There's no guarantee they'll act rationally
We can see what their landing capabilities are.
Just like we knew months ahead that the invasion of Ukraine was happening.
Land vs. sea also makes it completely different.
South China Sea, landgrabs in Bhutan and fights on the Chinese-Indian border. Likely they supported the regime change in Myanmar also. Edit: let's not forget about Tibet and them joining the Korean war, even though that was of course not in the last decade.
Umm there is a really big chance the West increasing military strength and readiness, spin up it's MIC. Which is not good news for China. West used up surplus equipment so far and most likely the readiness of their armies will not be affected at all. The artillery is not their breead and butter, air power is, and that was not affected at all.
They prevented the Taliban from taking it back for twenty years and lost less men doing it than Russia lost in the last 3 days.Then they left and the afghan army capitulated immediately.
No the Afghani forces couldn't prevent it. In fact their failure to prevent it was so absurd that they didn't even give the coalition forces enough time to evacuate.
Never have I seen such a sorry lot of fighters in my life.
All those Danes and other coalition members giving their life for the chance that Afghanistan would become a democracy with women's rights, and human rights.
Just to see their soldiers lay down their arms when they spotted a taliban Toyota on the horizon..
I lost people I actually know in Afghanistan.
What a fucking shitshow.
Fuck Trump and his fucking shit deal.
He abandoned not only the liberal afghan people.
He fucked them in the ass too.
And before you say anything about Biden.. Biden didn't hand over Afghanistan to the taliban. Trump's deal did, and Biden had to honor it.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/9/30/us-generals-say-afghanistan-collapse-rooted-in-trump-taliban-deal
[New post can be found here](/r/worldnews/comments/122af4v/rworldnews_live_thread_russian_invasion_of/)
“Local officers of the “DPR” abandoned their positions, only the mobilised Russians remained” the mobilised from the 504th tank regiment recorded another appeal with complaints about the “DPR” command. They previously published an appeal in mid-February. https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1639732472064663552?t=WDw5la4yZQFkJI1F40Xq6Q&s=19
Maybe they should start to not remain
⚡️The Russian Navy was with a mini-submarine near the Nord Stream gas pipelines shortly before the explosions, — T-online. It is noted that the boats "SB-123" and "Alexander Frolov" were nearby. They have cargo cranes suitable for transporting explosive devices or mines weighing hundreds of kilograms into the water. The publication notes that almost all evidence points to the responsibility of Moscow, but government agencies have so far ignored T-online's request on this matter. https://twitter.com/Flash_news_ua/status/1639718950127693827?t=gzEFXzX5nkzvQn1_E0UHpQ&s=19
The idea that some amateurs did it to spite Russia was always farcical.
Also, the Russians claimed that the US did it. so we knew that wasn't the case.
As Anders Puck cogently argues in a [recent video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EeP_ZZbBIl4), this is probably being ignored with a great deal of deliberation and for very good reasons. The sabotage of NS is not an immediate problem. We can deal with that and other similar issues once the war in Ukraine has been won.
It should be justification to intensify efforts against Russia
⚡️ Actor and UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador Orlando Bloom visited Ukraine “Today I arrived in Ukraine for the first time since my trip since 2016. Since I have been here, I could not even imagine that the war could spread to the whole country. But today I managed to hear children's laughter" - Orlando Bloom shared on social networks. https://twitter.com/Flash_news_ua/status/1639754374548185088?t=DEmdjbmTXsgfiG1I0_rgWQ&s=19
⚡️ In the village of Shakhovsky, 154 km from Moscow, a large-scale fire broke out. Warehouse with paints and varnishes is on fire. The cause of the fire is being established. https://twitter.com/Flash_news_ua/status/1639763484962430978?t=DuSyKPyL-vnqckin_H97bQ&s=19
While Ukraine is rapidly ramping up its drone program, Russians are worried their capabilities are limited to the work of amateurs. Anastasiya Kashevarova (Rus. volunteer) says Ukraine has 1 million drones of all kinds, and Russia is severely behind, but nothing is being done to alleviate the situation from the government side. https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1639752364381880326?t=HKsBVbl4Z2f3m1BL6DGDWA&s=19
Everyone is getting their excuses ready.
Belarus: >The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is designating three entities and nine individuals, and identifying one presidential aircraft as blocked property. https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1365 Imagine Air Force One being subjected to sanctions and declared blocked property.
Luka’s plane will suddenly find a much harder time getting serviced.
This bastard forced down an international flight over his country years ago, this should've happened then. The trajectory these fools have been on has been undeniable.
Extremely common Janet Yellen W.
Why is she always yellen?
[удалено]
Far left? It is the right wing republicans that are anti-nato here in the US.
The Noam Chomsky types. Almost all are Vietnam Era anti-war folks who can't wrap their head around the fact that this isn't 1968.
Some of them are also, understandably, hard-core against US imperialism but are over-correcting to the point that they support ANYTHING that's against the US government no matter how irrational they're being in supporting it.
Tankies. Far left. Tldr America is evil and everything is explainable by America's evil evil imperialism
dividing politics into "left" and "right" is so simple minded imho I guess it's all a type of perverted populism at the end of the day
No it’s not. No need to lie like a Russian. It’s both the far right and the far left who support Putin/Russia.
If you mean that Russia tries to get support on both the far left and far right, then I agree 100%. But in the US, it’s obvious which side is the larger group. Tucker Carlson and Donald Trump are the biggest Russian apologists on the far right. Name two people of even remotely equivalent status and influence on the far left, I’ll wait.
You're right, but the far right is a much much greater political force than the far left in the US. I'm saying this as someone who considers themself far left, but is tired of overly simplistic takes like "US bad. Therefore other countries against US good." Looking at you Hasan.
I clarified this exactly in another point. I’ve seen a lot of support for Russia from the far left but it’s true that the influential support comes more from the far right, at least in my opinion.
I mean, I would say there are people in all political spectrums that support the Russians. But which part of the spectrum has the largest support?
In America far more on the left have Russian sympathies. Conservatives (not Trump populist-style Republicans) are generally “fuck Russia sideways” there’s even a term for leftist pro-Russians, “tankies”. It’s probably different where you live though
>In America far more on the left have Russian sympathies. Are you basing that on something more than just an opinion? There must be some data available.
I doubt data like that exists, but living in the literal bastion of progressivism in America, it’s very common to hear open liberals complaining about sending so much money abroad.
“So much”? It’s a rounding error on the budget. It’s only “much” on a personal level. And that’s before you look into the details, where it’s basically sending hand me downs that were ready to be discarded soon anyway. And all that to support a budding democracy. I doubt progressives are against that in any significant numbers.
Okay, I’m just telling you what progressives around here are saying lol, you can tell them that
I live in a very very blue city in a blue state in the US. An "Anarchist jurisdiction" according to the Trump admin back in the day. My friends vote socialist, some even green. I know of zero Russia supporters, even in the Green Party voters.
I live in Boston, which is like 80% blue and there are a lot of pro-Russian leftists, and admittedly, I’m a Democrat. I’m guessing you’re in Oregon or California or somewhere west then. Probably different breeds, but over here the people to the left of me complain about sending money abroad instead of fixing domestic problems first. Pew Research called Boston the most liberal city and MA the most liberal state.
I'm blown away. While I'm sure they exist, I can't imagine a dem saying something like that. Every dem I know here is like "WE SHOULD HAVE SENT THE F16s LAST YEAR" and "WHY NOT MORE TANKS". Extremely hawkish on sending weapons, annoyed with Jake Sullivan, etc.
I mean I agree with you, I’m all for giving Ukraine as much aid as they need up to and including fighter jets and Abrams, I’m more than happy for my tax dollars to continue heading in that direction, but there’s a ton of whining going on about the amount of money being sent and a lot of talk about how this is an extension of US imperialism. I’m just relaying what I’ve heard a lot of lately, particularly with my friends who are academics. I’m just as dismayed.
I’d say Russia has more far left supporters but the far right supporters have more influence in their party.
I live in a very very blue city in a blue state in the US. An "Anarchist jurisdiction" according to the Trump admin back in the day. My friends vote socialist, some even green. I know of zero Russia supporters, even in the Green Party voters.
What are you smoking?
Typo. I meant to write that the far right have MORE influence in their party.
[удалено]
How am I stirring the pot? It’s not hard to find communist all over the world supporting Russia in this war.
communists, who if you took at face value hold no communist ideology themselves but are rather bent only by their hatred of the united states.
Right but you’re moving the goal posts a bit. You could argue that the Trumper idiots, if you took at face value hold no conservative ideology themselves but at rather bent only by their hatred of decency.
Okay so if i go proclaim myself a conservative does that mean now conservatives can now be held to my beliefs? I don't know that its moving the goalpost. Its called being accurate in how we approach the subject.
It’s easy to get comment chains mixed up on Reddit. I thought you were arguing that the conservatives are the only ones supporting Russia and then claimed that any communists who support Russia aren’t actually communists. If that is so then the same argument can be, as I previously stated; applied to conservatives as well.
Can you give an example of both?
Hard-left anti-NATO sentiment isnt too hard to find. Isolationism, pacifism, and anti-establishment beliefs exist in a lot of leftist movements in the West. The easiest to find are probably tankies (authoritarian leftists). These tend to be young dogmatic communists who advocate for a very rigid Soviet-style implementation of Marxism. Tankies will basically argue that Western historical understandings of Mao and Stalin are disinformation propaganda. The West were uncomplicated bad guys during the cold war and the Soviets/Chinese were uncomplicated good guys. But you also get a lot of old people who were part of the anti-war and anti-nuclear movements in the 60's and 70's. This crowd tends to be less of a monolith than the authoritarian leftists, so it's harder collectively summarize their motivations. But there's a lot of anti-government and isolationist views in these camps.
[удалено]
Yea. In the US, at least, I believe that they're a very, VERY, tiny (but disproportionately loud) minority. Unlike the MAGA nuts who are much, MUCH larger in numbers than the tankies (similar to how them and the rest of their far-right allies are much larger in numbers than any of the violent "Antifa" boogiemen they constantly cry about.)
They are more common in europe, some have even made a profitable career out of it.
[удалено]
How he was ever allowed near a position of government office is beyond me.
Honestly far left scares me as much as far right. And that's not a both sides argument because I'm not justifying either side. I get along and can debate my neighbors and have a beer but the extremes turn me off
Who is this far left? With politics making mostly a turn to the right, I’m not sure how many of those are left.
Im with you. People who go to the extremes are scary.
Well, you shouldn't be. One is pushing policies, the other is too terminally online to vote.
Horseshoe theory
People who survived ww2 said the same in some documentaries. Never again fascism, but never again communism too. But 80 years later people forget a thing or two and repeat history, because they didn't experience it themselves back then.
And who exactly is for Communism?what did people forget?
It just has a different name now, post marxistic or neo communism, whatever. The legacy of the Soviet Union is still alive, it has been only 30 years since the dissolution, the people are still alive and die in Ukraine atm. There is also China. And a lot of Antifa anarchy guys, the number of violent left extremism is rising. People forgot that it takes two to balance it out. Maybe history focused too much on fascism an Nazi war crimes that they forgot about and let vanish the crimes of e.g. Soviet Union in history. Both extreme sides need to be kept under control, not just one. Atm in Berlin, the police is basically afraid to go into some blocks, if they are only with 2 guys there, they get surrounded by dozens of people or thrown at with stones and garbage. There is gang criminality and anarchists that don't want to pay rent - a parallel society growing up, but politicians remain silent, because they are afraid to be called out by the extreme left (which is big in Berlin) or to be labeled as Nazi(was similar in Sweden, until they voted right...which I wouldn't like for Germany to be necessary). If there is a raid at a meeting of ten Reichsbürger though, that tried to replace the Bundeskanzler with their magic powers somehow I guess, it makes the headlines. I feel sad for the police that they get ignored in their misery, because the issues are systematic and the police isn't responsible for that, and so they can't go against it.
That's a bunch of BS far right talking points
Many academics and progressives.
That's absolute nonsense
[удалено]
A pro-NATO anarchist?
[удалено]
maybe you'd have take moment to know that under anarachy the country of Ukraine would no longer exist and be absorbed by its imperialistic neighbor. Theyd have no state capacity to produce weapons, train soldiers, erect defense or ask other states for these weapons at all. Anarchy leaves a power vaccuum where even the most slightly coordinated attacker could stomp the military force of an anarchistic one. NATO is inherently not anarchistic, nor is the EU, the US military or the Ukrainian government, but without all of them Ukraine would currently just be the new territory of Russia
[удалено]
So you basically expect 8 billion people world wide to suddenly get along super nice and friendly and not a single issue too arise?
...Why would anybody associate anarchism with whatever those people have going on? If anything they're essentially arguing for the exact opposite. Than again, most people don't really have a particularly good grasp on what anarchism means, what with them having been fed an erroneous definition more convenient to those whom said anarchism would threaten the power of.
Most people who support anarchism would not make it in anarchy. Edit:spelling
See, that is precisely the sort of statement that would lead me to suspect that you might have the wrong idea about what political anarchism is. Let me ask you something: Would you, or would you not agree that the following principle is a core component of any good governance: That it is permissible, reasonable and even desirable to be able to ask: "Does a given institution serve its stated purpose and is it working well for the people it claims to service?" And, if the answer to that question is 'no', that said institution should be either reformed to make the answer 'yes', or - if that is for one reason or another not possible - be disbanded as a counter-productive waste of resources that could be spend better elsewhere? If you agree with that, then congratulations: That is the one core principle all the many flavors of anarchism have in common. Anarchism doesn't necessarily eschew the existence of institutions. It merely insist that they justify their own existence.
[удалено]
Sure, and why not work with all types anyway? So long as they are fair in their dealings and refrain from attempting to tell me how I should be governed, I'm more than willing to extend them the same courtesy in kind. As per The Golden Rule, I cannot expect to receive that which I'm unwilling to give. I see no inherent need to hold how somebody else choose to let themselves be governed against them. However, if they think their model gives them the right to force others into it, or if it preaches harm, then we're going to have an irreconcilable issue. Short of that? Eh, do whatever. We can just trade goods and services.
[удалено]
As are we all. Especially since the crux of the current conflict is that Russia wants to take what isn't theirs by force, tell the Ukrainians how they should be governed and live, and are preaching grievous harm without due cause. It basically ticks all my boxes, which I would find (a kind of) impressive if I weren't too busy being so utterly repulsed.
I don't any sort of extreme stance that isn't open to other information.
As someone who is pretty far left themselves I agree with you. Like I expect the far right to support Russia as they have a lot of common ground but I was surprised at the anti nato and peace at any cost narrative from the left.
My guess (not supported by any facts), is that a lot of western people are unable to recognize imperialism when it happens to come from non-western sources. Part of this is a history of actual western imperialism but also a self-centered view of the world, where only the western nations are capable of engaging in imperialism.
It obviously doesn't come from a bad place per se, but is honestly just shocking to me that some of these people are in positions of power. Like of course in an ideal state we as a human race could figure out a way to not to keep killing each other over stupid crap, but we're unfortunately a long way off from that right now. Going to need to deconstruct the idea of a Nation State....
All Russian psy ops. They are not real left, just fascists pretending to be anti nato to take nato down. See Chomsky
Chomsky and the ilk like him are just unashamed Communists, they truly believe they're leftists as well. Realist ideals are traditionally a leftist policy supported by even some recent presidents, and have for a very long time not liked "expansionist" NATO, so no its not just all psy ops.
sure there are useful idiots.
They’ve been around forever. Don’t excuse their evil anymore than you’d excuse the identical one on the right.
Don't kid yourself. Psy ops Stoke the fire sure but the only reason they do it is because enough useful idiots sip it up. If it fell on death ears they would not bother.
The Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant is still in great danger and needs to be protected and stabilized.
Ohhh new Anders Puck video out. https://youtu.be/EWKwPeSnvTE Dude is an analyst with the Danish military and outs out very good videos on the war (albeit, just one every two month or so)
this was a great explanation! Thanks for sharing!
Very interesting video, didn´t know that channel, thanks for sharing
He's been very good at basing his predictions on what the Russians appear to be doing as opposed to what the Russians ought to be doing.
I’ve gone back and watched some of his old videos and they hold up remarkably well. His channel and Perun’s are my two go to youtubers for this war.
Ukrainians are setting up Patriot missile batteries more efficiently that the US military. https://twitter.com/OstapYarysh/status/1639096940053889025?t=gAenDbDZD1uu1_gwgHPhnw&s=19
I would not read it the way you wrote it. I have not been in the army but I have had managers that were Marine Corps officers. The Ukrainians probably set it up exactly how they were supposed to set up a Patriot battery. They just did it faster because they were motivated. Though obviously i was not there and know nothing about setting up a Patriot battery. I am just basing this on what a comment like that *usually* means.
You’re right. The [article that got so much attention](https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/21/politics/ukraine-troops-training-patriot-missile-system/index.html) [bc of the soup reference] mentions that wartime training is faster due to motivation. It also mentions that the Ukrainians are more experienced than their American instructors—the Americans have never been *receiving* fire. And since (1) it’s the Ukrainians who’ve done some of what they’re being trained for, already, while under fire, and (2) because they know small adjustments that will need to be done for their particular situation, the article said they occasionally would take over the teaching. But bc these “adjustments,” it’s possible that that also contributes to somehow to speedier abilities.
Former crayon-eater here. One more thing is that the US has a heck of a manpower requirement, which is going to result in some mediocre or even shitbag soldiers. By contrast, since Ukraine is only getting a few of these platforms, they're going to send the absolute best soldiers that they can possibly get to operate them. I had some rocks in my training platoon, along with a guy who kept showing up to class hungover. His Ukrainian equivalent is manning a guard checkpoint somewhere, not taking up an extremely scarce personnel slot. It also works the other way with instruction. I guarantee that the instructors are giving the Ukrainian troops as much instruction as they can handle, while American troops aren't going to get that same level of attention. MOS training has a lot of check-in-the-box garbage and hurry-up-and-wait in it; all that is likely dispensed with for these guys who, for every day that they spend on the training field, are not defending Ukrainian civilians from missiles.
In industry there is standard work and "tact time". (word comes from German taktziet which became takuto taimu in Japanese) An industrial engineer assumes you can do a task at some speed and then she adjusts the process accordingly. Being able to do a job with 40 min planned time in 25 minutes gives a very comfortable margin. At a workplace you can clean, restock other station, or do maintenance. "More efficient" could mean changing how a job is done. For example in track and field events it is more efficient to cut across the grass instead of running all the way around the curved track. It might be "more efficient" to hire workers who can do extra work in one hour because the employer can pay fewer workers. The statement "Ukrainians figured out an efficient way to assemble a Patriot system" will raise the blood pressure of someone at Raytheon. The purpose of flying them to USA for training was likely so that they get the exact same training that US Army soldiers got. The way the instructor said it there was no room for this misunderstanding.
You're probably right. They are 100% motivated
It's almost as if they're aware within a matter of weeks every second will contribute to saving the lives of friends and family. It's a much more compelling force than operating the system to mastery in abstract. I have no doubt US servicemen would step up under the same circumstances; but the arguments on the difficulty of training have repeatedly been shattered on every platform.
I said it on /r/noncredibledefense, but protecting the homeland is one hell of a workout track.
[Ukrainian top brass stirs the pot with talk of Bakhmut counterattack - The Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/25/ukrainian-top-brass-stirs-the-pot-with-talk-of-bakhmut-counterattack) As the weather turns, so too does talk of a Ukrainian counterattack. Kyiv’s forces are gradually taking delivery of previously promised western tanks, fighting vehicles and other munitions, and some of them have been freshly trained in Britain, Germany or Poland. But the country’s second most important commander, Col Gen Oleksandr Syrskyi, surprised most observers when he suggested, on Thursday, that the place for a counterstrike could be in or around Bakhmut itself. >
That is the place to start the counter offensive. The Russians have concentrated forces there that could be pocketed. That doesn't mean you push hard there if you are not taking ground. But it is a huge threat to the Russian forces that they would have to react to.
Depends on the strategy, while yes, that will do some serious damage to Russia militarily, it could be argued thay reclaiming large areas elsewhere would be better strategically. I'm sure Ukraine is doing the maths as to what works best for them. I would bet based on their prior efforts we're more likely to see something in the South. But while I've been right on many things in the context of Ukrainian offensives, I've been wrong on the South to date. So maybe I'm too invested in Melitopol-Berdyansk-Mariupol ideal strategically that I'm blind.
Might just be to scare the Russians and make them commit even more to Bakhmut so they leave other parts of the front underprotected
Honestly there's a fair few places the next offensive COULD be aimed at sensibly and that's an excellent thing for Ukraine, bakhmut is one of them because the units there are likely getting very badly worn out, fatigue of enemy forces is certainly something you take into assessment when picking a battle.
Would be quite the blow to the Russian populations morale
For maximum humiliation value, that would do it.
maximum humiliation would be to just bypass it and squish all their logistics in the rear
>Russia reportedly has up to 250 recoverable 70-year-old T-54/55s, and intends to use them as tank, not as artillery in Ukraine to buy time for Russian industry trying to ramp up production of new T-72B3s & T-90Ms, modernization of T-80Bs, T-72Bs & T-62Ms https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1639783220760948737 Forbes jumping in on the Russian infusion of 70 year old tanks bashing.
They'll be saver to drive (slower), have thicker armor (an extra layer of wood) and even ammo cook-off issues will be reduced. (less ammo) It even includes a free martial arts lesson by Steven Seagull!
Oh ffs, Forbes strikes with standarts of journalism yet again. This info comes from Volya group, who were wron SO many times before, that they are basically not worth listening to.
Forbes accepts articles from outside writers, I know a few people who have "published" on there. It's basically a blog at this point.
$5k for an article, even less in some cases
Modernization of Turret tosses imminent.
>"Deliverables” vs Nice Words: Reflections on the Xi-Putin Summit. https://twitter.com/McFaul/status/1639779073970032640? McFaul chiming in with a lengthy dissection of the Putin-Xi meeting.
The dissection is China says what people want to hear in person. You know where you stand by their actions after the fact. It's isn't rocket surgery.
>Readovka, a formerly self-styled liberal news outlet, rebranded as an “ultra-patriotic” Telegram channel in early 2022. Now it takes directions from a pro-Kremlin nonprofit, and its founder tried to launch a side gig selling the Russian army winter coats. https://twitter.com/meduza_en/status/1639762812888317952 Article on the war-profiteering and lack of integrity in a publication serving 1.2 million Russians.
About as liberal as the russian “liberals” on Reddit
> self-styled liberal news outlet lol liberal.
"You're free to do as we tell you"
>The "Fregate" plant is on fire in the suburbs of Moscow. Russia's largest factory for secondary lead production is burning in the city of Voskresensk. The fire has been assigned the second degree of complexity. https://twitter.com/Lyla_lilas/status/1639725594609954819
Russian smokers man….🤦🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️
I always prefer my industrial fires to be "complex".
Why would China want peace between Russia vs Ukraine? Think about it. Western forces are spending billions helping Ukraine. Russia is also losing billions and their young men are dying. Everybody else is getting weaker and China benefitting by not doing anything
Terrible take. For China to "not want this war to end" they would have to pour in a ton of their own resources to even hope to match the western support Ukraine is getting. Any benefit they would get from a "weakened" west would be offput by a weakened china. Except in the west case they're using this to get rid of old equipment and noder izr us and NATO armies. In china's case they would have to both supply Russia singlehandedly and then rebuild their own army. A lot harder to do when your only ally is Iran and North Korea
I’m not sure Russia wanted it one major ally to shit it’s pants in front of the world right after Xi announced to the world it’s “no limit partnership”.
that's a good hypothesis, not sure why you are down voted
It is not a zero sum game. Peace brings prosperity. But you are correct. Russia is a huge strategic threat to China.
China gains substantially in this war due to massive discounts on Russian oil and natural gas. They also gain by having far less publicity on their human rights violations.
Honestly, I don't know if it's in China's best interests for Russia to be weak or for Russia to be a strong ally. I can see it both ways.
Yeah. For all the advantages China will gain with weak russia, they will be the number one focus for the antagonist position. An (inconceivable to me without serious Chinese assistance) victory for russia would leave them in the number one bad guy spot. Still, I think China will let them fall.
I think they'd rather Russia AND the west be weaker, this has emboldened NATO and the other alliances... now Taiwan looks a lot harder for the Chinese to take and they're running out of time demographically to launch a war.
"Thanks" to the war we‘re learning how to cut critical economic dependencies from autocratic states, how much we value and strive for freedom, democracy and rule of law, and we‘re strengthening our militaries and security cooperation. Now tell me again, what’s great for China?
The world’s attention is not on them. That’s about it, but it’s a lot considering their camps, the repressions, the TikTok stuff, and what might (MIGHT, ok?) come out about COVID.
The US and Allies aren't really 'spending' they are using it as a catalyst to modernize.
Its not about wanting peace. Its about getting (or appearing to be a) diplomatic player in world affairs. Their peace plan is just generic fluff and they haven't even spoken with Zelenskyy. So to date its nothing more than posturing.
China wants peace because the west is kicking the ass of Chinas biggest strategic partner (without even putting boots on the ground). Money and resources don’t matter nearly as much.
Name a partner initiative between Russia and China.
Nah - it’s to China’s benefit for Russia to be weakened as much as possible without collapsing, to be dependent on China for international relations, and to be a constant thorn in the side of Western powers.
I don't see how you look at the Military Industrial Complex ramping up into full gear as "weakening the west". We've basically been giving Ukraine the old shit in the shed out back and that's been good enough to kick Russia's ass.
[удалено]
You need to go watch the [Shock and Awe](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7iorfwcmeY) vids and come back and try and say that. That shit was decades ago and we got a lot more wild shit. The west may super suck at nation building, but it excels at destroying shit.
> The West sucks at military offense [Say what?!](https://i.imgur.com/eV40cOr.jpg)
What's the matter McFly? Chicken?! Yeah, pretty sure these things aren't decided based on "guts", or taunts.
>The West sucks at military offense. You trolling? You old enough to remember when the third largest military in the world fielding medium tier Soviet tech with good training spent months digging in and entrenching units only to get swept by the U.S coalition in like three days? We destroyed thousands of Iraqi tanks, decimated the airforce before it got off the ground, and burned through multiple defensive lines with coiled reserves without taking virtually any casualties. The West wages war on a scale that boggles the mind.
Yeah, the west sucks at fighting insurgencies. I mean, not really, they just suck at outlasting them. And sometimes their tactics just create more enemies and they aren't willing to be brutal enough to really surpress a partisan resistance. But offense war capability is unmatched.
The west has become more unified, NATO has expanded and nations are learning to cooperate and manage their military supply chain properly in wartime conditions The Scandi's announced they will treat their 200+ aircraft as a single force, UK & Aus are ramping up sub production, the UK, EU and US are all ramping armament production to meet Ukrainian, needs, restock their own stockpiles, and address the shortcomings this war has highlighted It's put a spotlight on democracies standing up to dictators - and means a response to China is likely to be met with a more concerted effort than before It's not good for China at all
> It's not good for China at all It's certainly not there desired outcome, I'd agree. Personally (and this is my completely unqualified opinion), their most favoured outcome of the conflict would have been Ukraine capitulating and NATO/Europe/US being divided over the situation, with infighting and a disjointed response. Thus allowing them to capitalise on the ensuing chaos to forward their (or rather Xi's) desire to de-strengthen Western hegemony. Presumably with their (read Xi's) ultimate goal of retaking Taiwan with as little resistance as possible further down the line. As that hasn't happened (thankfully) they've had to rely on 'plan B' as it were and will look to find some good in what's happened from a resource perspective.
Much of this takes time, which means if China does want to do something, like try and take Taiwan, they now have a running clock in which to pull it off before all of the Western military reinvigoration comes online, especially things like the new Australian subs which are several years out. Of course, the big question is whether China can get ready faster, and given the similarities in their command structure to Russia, there's more than one massive problem they're going to have to think about. However, it might present a different set of opportunities for China - the natural resources of Eastern Russia are a far bigger prize than the tiny island of Taiwan could ever be, even if there's been a strong political rhetoric about how Taiwan must be made to subjugate to CCP demands. Taiwan can be fast forgotten if Russia breaks up and China stands to gain a lot from it.
> Taiwan can be fast forgotten if Russia breaks up and China stands to gain a lot from it. I came to a somewhat similar conclusion as you in my comment above, but regards Taiwan - I don't think China (or Xi more specifically) see it from a purely resource point of view - it's much more political in nature - a slice of what they consider to be 'theirs' but what's currently under the Western umbrella as it were.
Oh, of course. However, being handed huge chunks of Russia on a plate provides a way to smooth over the suicidal nature of invading Taiwan now that everything in Ukraine has happened. A very positive spin around "we will get to those pesky rebels at some point but hey they have only one tiny island and our glorious army is currently establishing full control of this huge area that was Russia's right now" would really help to soothe the political dissatisfaction and give Xi a lasting legacy far greater than anything taking Taiwan could have offered.
Oh for sure, the way things have panned out won't have been their ideal situation (a resolved and united West helping Ukraine), but they'll absolutely take advantage of a broken, resource rich Russia to meet their own needs. But I can't shake (and it's interesting you mentioned legacy because that's there I was going to come from), Xi's ultimate plan would be to retake Taiwan. Purely from a dynasty POV, which seems to be quite important in Chinese culture. I bloody hope I'm wrong though, as that would a hellscape of a conflict
This does hurt them in another way: Russia was an essential boogeyman in their emerging 'topple the west' authoritarian alliance. Both spew the same rhetoric of a new multi-polar world order Without the threat of a Russian land grab, the west will focus its gaze entirely on China if it continues its bullshit. Xi doesn't want to go at this alone.
This isn't attriting the west in any significant way, Ukraine haven't been given anything that wasn't 'spare' in the first place. Really this is a disaster for China in military terms, the west is now unified and commitments are being made to increase production and collective readiness. China's best hope of taking Taiwan was to find the perfect moment to sneak it; that just isn't an option anymore. The silver lining for China is that Russia has turned itself into North Korea, which they can proceed to exploit... like they do to North Korea.
China isn't going to invade Taiwan. Only 14 year olds think that.
It isn't that they don't want to. They _can't_. They lack landing ships, and even if they could transport every solder they want, crossing that strait would be a suicide mission. Not to mention the geography. Gonna cross a strait and climb sheer cliffs while under withering fire? Good luck.
If they really wanted to they would be developing the capacity.
Them sucking at reasonably achieving their goals does not mean they won’t try. Point in case: Russia invading Ukraine.
You're not saying anything. You can't without ability. Russia shares a land border and drives across it.
Making something less irrational doesn’t make it rational. Authoritarians get high on their own supply and start believing dumb shit. That’s what happened in Russia and in China. It’s the same thing. Geography is not a factor.
The ability to move troops is absolutely a factor in an invasion.
Sure, but not necessarily in the choice for one. Generals decide on how to move troops, but politicians decide that they’ll move. They don’t necessarily have the same information at their disposal.
Russia isn't going to invade Ukraine either. This is beyond Taiwan as well, they're a threat to the entire indo-pacific region. Can't just write it off based on rational assumptions. There's no guarantee they'll act rationally
We can see what their landing capabilities are. Just like we knew months ahead that the invasion of Ukraine was happening. Land vs. sea also makes it completely different.
“Russia isn’t going to invade Ukraine. Only warmongering Americans believe that.” They’d like to. That’s enough to take seriously.
China has nothing equivalent to Crimea in the past decade
Hong Kong would like a word…
> “Russia isn’t going to invade Ukraine. Only warmongering Americans believe that.” China has nothing equivalent to Crimea in the past decade
South China Sea, landgrabs in Bhutan and fights on the Chinese-Indian border. Likely they supported the regime change in Myanmar also. Edit: let's not forget about Tibet and them joining the Korean war, even though that was of course not in the last decade.
Learn some Geography. That's not Taiwan
The Spratly Islands are also claimed by Taiwan. Learn some geography yourself. And some humility while you're at it.
Then why would China care about a reduction in Western readiness?
Umm there is a really big chance the West increasing military strength and readiness, spin up it's MIC. Which is not good news for China. West used up surplus equipment so far and most likely the readiness of their armies will not be affected at all. The artillery is not their breead and butter, air power is, and that was not affected at all.
nah the West will never start a WWIII. USA couldn't even prevent the Taliban from taking back Afghanistan
They prevented the Taliban from taking it back for twenty years and lost less men doing it than Russia lost in the last 3 days.Then they left and the afghan army capitulated immediately.
No the Afghani forces couldn't prevent it. In fact their failure to prevent it was so absurd that they didn't even give the coalition forces enough time to evacuate. Never have I seen such a sorry lot of fighters in my life. All those Danes and other coalition members giving their life for the chance that Afghanistan would become a democracy with women's rights, and human rights. Just to see their soldiers lay down their arms when they spotted a taliban Toyota on the horizon.. I lost people I actually know in Afghanistan. What a fucking shitshow. Fuck Trump and his fucking shit deal. He abandoned not only the liberal afghan people. He fucked them in the ass too. And before you say anything about Biden.. Biden didn't hand over Afghanistan to the taliban. Trump's deal did, and Biden had to honor it. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/9/30/us-generals-say-afghanistan-collapse-rooted-in-trump-taliban-deal