ALERT RUSSIA INVADES UKRAINE - Consolidated Thread

Red Baron

Paleo-Conservative
_______________
When Russia commenced its invasion of Ukraine on 24 February, the West responded with a harsh regime of sanctions and measures that were intended to deeply wound the Russian economy.

Now, more than 100 days on, it's hard to find consensus over exactly how well those measures are working. Some will tell you that Russia is on its knees, incapable of carrying on the war much longer, while others will insist that it's Ukraine and Europe that are about to break.

n this video I look at the sanctions measures that have been imposed, what impact they've had, and try to assess how well the Russian and Ukrainian economies are holding up, and what may be next in store as the fighting (and economic pressure) continues.


Runtime 1:02:04

Two Economies at war - Russia and Ukraine after 100 days of sanctions and shelling

View: https://youtu.be/qGGwO99fQaI



Timestamps

00:00:00 — The Price of War II: Economics of the Russo-Ukraine War
00:00:39 — Sponsor Segment: BLINKIST
00:01:57 — What Am I covering?
00:02:59 — War is expensive: Opening Words
00:03:30 — War is expensive: Peloponnesian War
00:04:20 — War is expensive: WW1
00:04:48 — War is expensive: The War on Terror
00:05:09 — War is expensive: The Russo-Ukraine War & be careful with expenditure figures
00:07:27 — The Russian economy: Opening Words
00:07:39 — The Russian economy: Headline details
00:09:54 — The Russian economy: Sanctions
00:12:11 — The Russian economy: Restricting Russian exports
00:13:47 — The Russian economy: The Hydrocarbon Money Cannon
00:14:57 — The Russian economy: The issue with energy sanctions
00:17:33 — The Russian economy: The Long term challenge
00:19:32 — The Russian economy: Let's talk Roubles
00:23:26 — The Russian economy: Restricting imports
00:25:21 — The Russian economy: China, India & Sanctions
00:29:58 — The Russian economy: Industrial impacts
00:33:20 — The Russian economy: The private sector is vulnerable
00:35:27 — The Russian economy: Poverty Rising
00:37:19 — The Russian economy: “The Two Economies”
00:38:02 — The Russian economy: Where to from here for Russia?
00:40:40 — The Ukrainian economy: Health Check
00:42:17 — The Ukrainian economy: A Wartime economy
00:43:21 — The Ukrainian economy: Sustainability
00:46:06 — The resilience of Industrial states: Economic Collapse?
00:47:48 — The resilience of Industrial states: WW1 period France
00:51:04 — What about the world? Europe
00:54:00 — What about the world? The Wider World
00:55:49 — The Conclusion
00:57:17 — Rebuttal of the week
01:00:42 — Channel Update
 

jward

passin' thru




EndGameWW3
@EndGameWW3



Update: Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov: Russia offers the West sincere cooperation in areas of common interest, but it does not want that.

Lavrov: The Europeans are trying to persuade Ukraine to return to negotiations with Russia, but the United States and Britain are preventing it.
 

Zagdid

Veteran Member

Ніел Блейзер
@NeilBlaser


Replying to
@laraseligman
and
@AP
To cut off the nonsense at the knees, this $450M comes out of the 40B allocated to Ukraine. This is not new spending.
The previous 700 million package also came out of the 40B allocation. Any aid sent to Ukraine is coming from that package, unless congress authorizes new spending, which it currently has not. The 40B is to be distributed through Sept 2023. (Source: read the bill lol)

12:38 PM · Jun 23, 2022·Twitter Web App
Thanks, I found this:


My take is that the package is 40B but not all intended to go to Ukraine, maybe half. My summary might be, 'Drawing down military equipment is one thing, getting funding to replace the same equipment is quite another and lend-lease is a fiction. Everybody gets something out of this, even the US farmers.

What Does $40 Billion in Aid to Ukraine Buy?
May 23, 2022

Congress has approved $40 billion in aid for Ukraine and other countries affected by the conflict―the sixth aid package since the war began. A major change is that this package looks ahead months rather than weeks.

The aid package provides $19 billion for immediate military support to Ukraine, continuing the effort that has been vital to sustaining Ukrainian resistance, and $3.9 billion to sustain U.S. forces deployed to Europe. The package also contains about $16 billion for economic support to Ukraine, global humanitarian relief, and a wide variety of international programs as well as $2 billion for long-term support to NATO allies and DOD modernization programs.

Although some elements of the aid package will be available quickly, many will take years to fully implement. This raises questions about why long-term elements could not have gone through the regular congressional authorization and budget processes.

A New Timeline
A key change is that the timeline for this aid package implies the expectation of a long war. Previous aid packages were designed to last a few weeks. No one knew how long the war might go on or whether Ukraine would hold out. Thus, packages were announced on February 25, March 12, March 16, April 5, April 13, April 21, and April 24. This package breaks that pattern. Instead of looking out a few weeks, this package goes to September 30, the end of the fiscal year.

A Higher Level of Aid
For the first five weeks of the conflict, military support to Ukraine averaged about $30 million a day (excluding economic and humanitarian support and the costs of U.S. forces deployed to Europe for the crisis). In April, a series of $800 million aid packages implied a level of $100 million a day. This package increases the aid level to $135 million a day.

Aid from the United States, NATO, and other countries has been vital in allowing Ukraine to maintain its forces in combat for nearly three months. Forces in combat need a constant flow of munitions and supplies. Without them, combat effectiveness declines and eventually collapses. The provision of major weapons, initially Soviet-era and recently NATO-standard weapons, has allowed Ukrainian forces to replace losses and to build additional combat power. Bottom line: without these aid packages, the Russians would be on the Polish and Romanian border.

Near-Term Military Aid to Ukraine
The package contains $19 billion of near-term military aid in three categories, though there is much apparent overlap in what the categories do.

  • Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI, $6 billion): This special fund, established in 2016 National Defense Authorization Act (section 1250), provides training, equipment, weapons, logistic support, supplies and services, salaries and stipends, sustainment, and intelligence support to the military and national security forces of Ukraine―i.e., just about anything Ukraine might need. The USAI is a transfer account, which means that DOD will decide later where the money goes. Congress has typically not liked transfer accounts because they look like "slush funds," where Congress has less control over how the money is ultimately spent. The statutory language requires that DOD report to Congress 15 days before any transfers occur. In theory, Congress could block such transfers, but that is difficult to do politically and procedurally.
    A problem with USAI is that the capabilities it funds may take a while to deliver to Ukrainian frontline forces. While supplies and services can be acquired quickly, new equipment takes months or years to produce.
  • Replenishment of U.S. weapons stocks ($9 billion): This provides money for DOD to replace items sent to Ukraine in the past or in the future. The White House press announcement cites artillery, armored vehicles, anti-tank, and antiair capabilities. DOD is not necessarily replacing items like-for-like, but may substitute similar capabilities where the previous items are unavailable or obsolescent. The amount ($9 billion) is nearly three times the stated cost of equipment drawdown provided to date ($3.3 billion) implying that the replacements will be more expensive and that there will be additional drawdown in the future. As with the USAI, the secretary of defense must notify the congressional defense committees of the details of such transfers not less than 15 days before any such transfer.
    Note: There is a difference between drawdown authority and funding. With authorization from Congress, the president has the authority to draw down stocks of weapons and send them to friendly countries like Ukraine. However, funding to replace these lost stocks must be provided separately. DOD has been using money from an earlier supplemental to replace equipment sent to Ukraine, but that money is apparently running out. This provides funds to continue backfilling stockpiles. Authority for additional drawdown is provided separately (see below). The administration has not provided a detailed accounting of the drawdown or supplemental funding.
  • Foreign Military Financing Program ($4 billion): This program, run by the Department of State, allows Ukraine and other countries to buy new military equipment, not just get items from existing stocks. This is a long-term effort, however, since procurement of large weapon systems has a multiyear lead time. Procurement of smaller items is quicker, but it still takes months or years.
Funding the U.S. Military Response ($3.9 billion)
The United States has sent about 10,500 troops to Europe and is now rotating those forces. These forces were sent to reassure eastern NATO allies that the United States stood with them in a crisis and to discourage any Russian adventurism against Eastern Europe. U.S. military forces will likely be there for a while. Deploying forces entails additional costs for operations and personnel benefits, so additional funds are needed, lest other DOD programs be cut to offset the higher costs.

One surprise in this category is the procurement of an additional Patriot missile battery. Since the United States has not lost any such equipment, it would either be an expansion of Army force structure or would replace a system given to an ally (perhaps Poland). In any case, it will take several years to implement. Budget documents indicate that the lead time for such a procurement is 24-36 months.

Military Support to Allies and Partners/Enhancements to U.S. Military Capabilities
Some elements of the aid package support allies and partners affected by the conflict in Ukraine, while others are general enhancements to U.S. military capabilities. However, all these enhancements will take a long time to implement.

  • Aid to friendly foreign nations ($500 million): Under 10 USC 331, the United States can provide logistical support, equipment, and training to friendly countries. Money in this package likely reimburses allies and partners for equipment that they have sent to Ukraine. Many Eastern European NATO allies had equipment left over from the Soviet era―T-72 tanks, S-300 air defense systems, aircraft, and helicopters. Because the Ukrainians already operate the systems, they do not need special training or logistics pipelines to put the equipment to immediate use. Transferring this equipment has been a win-win-win. Ukraine gets additional equipment to replace losses. The Eastern European allies get rid of old Soviet-era equipment and can buy newer, NATO-standard equipment. The U.S. defense industry can sell more products.
  • Increases in "critical" munitions stocks ($500 million): The war in Ukraine has shown the value of large munitions inventories, but munitions often don't compete well in the budget process. They are not visible or operational in peacetime like a ship, a tank, or an aircraft, but sit in secure shelters until needed. This funding would procure missiles not directly related to the conflict in Ukraine, but instead to prepare for a wide variety of conflicts, such as against China. However, it will take years for this effort to execute fully. Lead times for most missile programs run 18 to 24 months.
  • Defense Production Act ($600 million): This will support expansion of the missile production base and, according to the statutory language, "expanded domestic capacity of strategic and critical minerals." The former would ease production constraints, such as currently being experienced in rebuilding stockpiles of the Javelin and Stinger missiles. The latter seems aimed at rare earth minerals, which are needed for a wide variety of technologies, including weapons, but which the United States gets mostly from China. The United States has rare earth deposits in abundance, but these are not mined because of costs and environmental restrictions. Both efforts seem worthwhile but will take years to implement. Indeed, developing new mines could take over a decade.
  • Research and development (R&D) ($364 million): The purpose of this funding is vaguely described in the statutory language as "to respond to the situation in Ukraine and for related expenses." The congressional description does cite one specific use―making U.S. equipment more export-friendly ($50 million). This seems reasonable given the sensitivity of some technologies and the need for interoperability with comparable systems of allies and partners. However, executing this and all the R&D effort will likely take years. R&D is, by its nature, a long-term effort.
Additional Drawdown Authority
The act raises the statutory cap on drawdown authority (22 USC 2318) by $11 billion, which allows the president to send equipment to friendly countries like Ukraine from existing U.S. stockpiles. By providing such a large amount of authority, the administration will not need to come back to Congress for a long time and thereby speed up the process of providing support. Because this is the authority to do something in the future and not the provision of actual equipment or funding, it does not constitute currently provided military support.

Unclear is how this drawdown authority operates with recently passed lend-lease legislation, which does essentially the same thing. Because lend-lease is based on a fiction―that the equipment will eventually be returned to the United States―the president may rely primarily on drawdown authority.

Humanitarian and Global Assistance
About $16 billion of the package is for humanitarian assistance, general support to the Ukrainian government, and efforts to mitigate the effects of the war globally. As with the military programs, there is some overlap in the categories. (Note: “Statutory language” refers to text in “Additional Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2022,” and “congressional explanation” refers to the three-page paper discussing the elements of the supplemental.)

  • Migration and refugee assistance ($350 million): This seems intended to help the countries of Eastern Europe, particularly Poland, deal with the mass of Ukrainian refugees who fled their homeland because of the war.
  • International Disaster Assistance ($4.3 billion): according to the statutory language, this will "respond to humanitarian needs in Ukraine and in countries impacted by the situation in Ukraine.” The congressional explanation is that this will provide “emergency food assistance to people around the world suffering from hunger as a result of the conflict in Ukraine and other urgent humanitarian needs of populations and communities inside Ukraine.” Populations in Africa have been particularly affected by the disruption of food shipments from Ukraine and Russia, so much of the assistance will likely go there.
  • Economic Support ($8.8 billion): The statutory language (Title five) specifies that this provides "assistance for Ukraine and countries impacted by the situation in Ukraine, including for programs to combat human trafficking." The congressional explanation focuses on budget support for the Ukrainian government, where normal revenue collection has likely broken down. The White House fact sheet also includes countering Russian disinformation and support to small- and medium-sized agribusinesses in Ukraine. The statutory language provides that $760 million "may be made available to prevent and respond to food insecurity." According to the White House fact sheet, $500 million of this may go to U.S. farmers.
  • Humanitarian aid ($900 million): This provision supports Ukrainian refugees in the United States. It has become controversial because some have interpreted the provision as supporting any refugee. However, the statutory language is clear that it only applies to people from Ukraine and does not entitle a person to permanent resident status.
  • War crimes and human trafficking ($400 million): Title five funds efforts "to document and collect evidence of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by the Government of the Russian Federation in Ukraine." That seems quite sensible since successful prosecutions require meticulous collection of evidence. It also funds programs to combat human trafficking, as do two other programs in the package.
  • Diplomatic Programs ($190 million)/International narcotics control and law enforcement ($400 million)/Embassy security ($110 million)/Nonproliferation and demining ($100 million): These provisions fund increases in Department of State diplomatic activities in Ukraine and worldwide, as well as various specialized programs. Although justified by events in Ukraine, the language is flexible enough that the funding could cover a wide variety of projects.
  • International organizations ($650 million): $500 million is for the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and $150 million for the Global Agricultural and Food Security Program.
  • Tracing the property of Russian oligarchs ($52 million): In section 601, the Treasury Department gets money “to trace Russian financial activities including . . . identifying true beneficial ownership.” It looks like the United States is coming after those magnificent oligarch yachts.
 

Zagdid

Veteran Member
cont:

Oversight
Despite criticisms about a lack of oversight and control, the package does include increased resources for the Department of State inspector general ($4 million), the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) inspector general ($1 million), and directions to DOD to report periodically on activities. These provisions provide some assurance that the funds will be spent as intended. The Ukrainian government, despite many admirable actions in the last few months, was notorious before the war for its corruption.

The "Christmas Tree" Problem
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is always wary about supplemental appropriations. By policy, supplemental appropriations are for "emergency and unforeseen" situations. Hurricanes are the classic example, but the early stages of conflicts are also unforeseen. If government is to respond to emergencies quickly and effectively, then sometimes money must be provided outside of the regular cycle. However, OMB is also very aware that supplemental appropriations become "Christmas trees" onto which advocates can hang initiatives that did not get funded through the regular cycle. Many elements described above have the air of “Christmas tree ornaments.”

One manifestation of the “Christmas tree” problem is the long spend out of some items in the package. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that about $5 billion of the $40 billion will spend out in this fiscal year and the next (FY 2022 and FY 2023). However, $14 billion will spend out in FY 2026 and after, while some money will not be spent until FY 2031.

Looking Ahead
There is strong bipartisan support for helping Ukraine. It is on the frontline against aggression, and a successful defense will strengthen NATO and reduce the chances of future conflicts. Further, the war looks like it will continue, so having an aid package that looks out five months makes sense. That obviates the need to provide a new package every few weeks but does not extend so far that it requests money that may never be needed.

One can question whether all this money needs to come through a supplemental appropriation, which gets less review than regular appropriations. For example, there has not been a single hearing on this package, unlike the usual DOD authorization and appropriations processes, which have multiple hearings and extensive discussions. Long-term items might reasonably be left to the regular cycle.

Further, the large amount of money being provided might require more oversight than existing structures can provide. Congress and the administration, to their credit, have included some in the package, but that may not be sufficient. A structure like the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) might be appropriate.
 

WTSR

Veteran Member

⚡A draft law has been submitted to the Verkhovna Rada proposing to draft disabled people "with their consent" into the army. Also, once again it is proposed to tighten the ban on leaving the territory of Ukraine for men from 18 to 60 years old.
The problems of the "war to the last Ukrainian" is that the number of Ukrainians is finite, so when the motivated ones began to run out, all that remains is to drive deviationists and disabled people to the slaughterhouse
 

WTSR

Veteran Member

Official losses of the Donetsk People's Republic from January 1 to June 24, 2022:

Military:

Killed - 2196
Wounded - 9246

Civilian:

Killed - 677
Wounded - 2186
 

jed turtle

a brother in the Lord

Official losses of the Donetsk People's Republic from January 1 to June 24, 2022:

Military:

Killed - 2196
Wounded - 9246

Civilian:

Killed - 677
Wounded - 2186
Reagan bankrupted the USSR by a number of means, including bleeding it hard by supplying the
Afghans in the Soviet war in Afghanistan. But also by pouring money into developing ”Starwars” anti-mission defense.
The (no longer communist) Russian government is bleeding America and NATO financially dry in Ukraine even as the (communist) Democrats are bleeding America dry with prolific spending on multitude of ineffective, useless programs designed to overwhelm us with bankruptcy.
 

Zagdid

Veteran Member

PRESIDENT
24 JUNE 2022, 18:19
Belarus plans to redirect 20m tonnes of cargo to St Petersburg ports
Photo courtesy of seaport.spb.ru

Photo courtesy of seaport.spb.ru

ST PETERSBURG, 24 June (BelTA) – We have plans to redirect some 20 million tonnes of cargo to the ports of St Petersburg, Belarusian President Aleksandr Lukashenko said as he met with St Petersburg Governor Alexander Beglov on 24 June, BelTA has learned.

“We have a lot to talk about, especially amid the West's pressure on Belarus. We want to redirect about 20 million tonnes of cargo to your ports. I will ask for your support and assistance. We have agreed on this with the Russian president. You know about it as he had phoned you on the matter. I think that if we do it, St Petersburg will also have a great deal of work here. This means good jobs for our friends from St Petersburg,” said the head of state.

As BelTA reported earlier, the use of the Russian seaport infrastructure for the transshipment of Belarusian cargo was discussed at the meeting of Aleksandr Lukashenko with Leningrad Oblast Governor Alexander Drozdenko in Minsk in early June. “I am going to lift the curtain a bit because I am not ready and don't have the right to tell you the details for now. We discussed a mixed option. Belarusian specialists have already examined the land plots where Belarusian port structures can be built. A very tight construction schedule was mentioned. And the existing terminals can be used meanwhile.

We mentioned some of the terminals, which are ready to sign the paperwork now and go as far as possibly handing over some of the territory, some of the port facilities to the Belarusian side in order to start shipments today,” Alexander Drozdenko told the media on 2 June.
 

raven

Has No Life - Lives on TB

PRESIDENT
24 JUNE 2022, 18:19
Belarus plans to redirect 20m tonnes of cargo to St Petersburg ports
Photo courtesy of seaport.spb.ru

Photo courtesy of seaport.spb.ru

ST PETERSBURG, 24 June (BelTA) – We have plans to redirect some 20 million tonnes of cargo to the ports of St Petersburg, Belarusian President Aleksandr Lukashenko said as he met with St Petersburg Governor Alexander Beglov on 24 June, BelTA has learned.

“We have a lot to talk about, especially amid the West's pressure on Belarus. We want to redirect about 20 million tonnes of cargo to your ports. I will ask for your support and assistance. We have agreed on this with the Russian president. You know about it as he had phoned you on the matter. I think that if we do it, St Petersburg will also have a great deal of work here. This means good jobs for our friends from St Petersburg,” said the head of state.

As BelTA reported earlier, the use of the Russian seaport infrastructure for the transshipment of Belarusian cargo was discussed at the meeting of Aleksandr Lukashenko with Leningrad Oblast Governor Alexander Drozdenko in Minsk in early June. “I am going to lift the curtain a bit because I am not ready and don't have the right to tell you the details for now. We discussed a mixed option. Belarusian specialists have already examined the land plots where Belarusian port structures can be built. A very tight construction schedule was mentioned. And the existing terminals can be used meanwhile.

We mentioned some of the terminals, which are ready to sign the paperwork now and go as far as possibly handing over some of the territory, some of the port facilities to the Belarusian side in order to start shipments today,” Alexander Drozdenko told the media on 2 June.
I wonder if that cuts Lithuania out of cargo transit fees for shipping between Kaliningrad and Belarus?
 

Zagdid

Veteran Member
I wonder if that cuts Lithuania out of cargo transit fees for shipping between Kaliningrad and Belarus?
Might cut out Lithuania from all rail service from the Belarus side. Lithuania is building an all EU (territory) standard gauge rail line but not sure its finished yet. Otherwise trains need to go through Belarus.
 
Last edited:

Walrus

Veteran Member
And so Lithuania will not be getting any cargo from Kaliningrad or Belarus either.
People who survived under Soviet rule always found a way, just like the Chinese have for centuries.

Bribes will have to increase, of course, due to circumstances ....

But seriously, my take is that there's more being made of this than there actually is. Only certain goods are subject to restrictions and the Europeans already seem to be backtracking on them.
 

Nowski

Let's Go Brandon!
If the Europeans can find a way, to break the strangle hold that the
ZUSA has on them, the Russia-Ukraine war can be brought to
an end, and all European nations can again be free.

Problem isn't Russia. Has not been since the ending of The Soviet Union
in 1990. The problem is ZUSA hegemony, and that at least half of
the ZUSA population, is now outright Communist.

Please be safe everyone.

Regards to all.

Nowski
 

Squid

Veteran Member
When Russia commenced its invasion of Ukraine on 24 February, the West responded with a harsh regime of sanctions and measures that were intended to deeply wound the Russian economy.

Now, more than 100 days on, it's hard to find consensus over exactly how well those measures are working. Some will tell you that Russia is on its knees, incapable of carrying on the war much longer, while others will insist that it's Ukraine and Europe that are about to break.

n this video I look at the sanctions measures that have been imposed, what impact they've had, and try to assess how well the Russian and Ukrainian economies are holding up, and what may be next in store as the fighting (and economic pressure) continues.


Runtime 1:02:04

Two Economies at war - Russia and Ukraine after 100 days of sanctions and shelling

View: https://youtu.be/qGGwO99fQaI




Timestamps

00:00:00 — The Price of War II: Economics of the Russo-Ukraine War
00:00:39 — Sponsor Segment: BLINKIST
00:01:57 — What Am I covering?
00:02:59 — War is expensive: Opening Words
00:03:30 — War is expensive: Peloponnesian War
00:04:20 — War is expensive: WW1
00:04:48 — War is expensive: The War on Terror
00:05:09 — War is expensive: The Russo-Ukraine War & be careful with expenditure figures
00:07:27 — The Russian economy: Opening Words
00:07:39 — The Russian economy: Headline details
00:09:54 — The Russian economy: Sanctions
00:12:11 — The Russian economy: Restricting Russian exports
00:13:47 — The Russian economy: The Hydrocarbon Money Cannon
00:14:57 — The Russian economy: The issue with energy sanctions
00:17:33 — The Russian economy: The Long term challenge
00:19:32 — The Russian economy: Let's talk Roubles
00:23:26 — The Russian economy: Restricting imports
00:25:21 — The Russian economy: China, India & Sanctions
00:29:58 — The Russian economy: Industrial impacts
00:33:20 — The Russian economy: The private sector is vulnerable
00:35:27 — The Russian economy: Poverty Rising
00:37:19 — The Russian economy: “The Two Economies”
00:38:02 — The Russian economy: Where to from here for Russia?
00:40:40 — The Ukrainian economy: Health Check
00:42:17 — The Ukrainian economy: A Wartime economy
00:43:21 — The Ukrainian economy: Sustainability
00:46:06 — The resilience of Industrial states: Economic Collapse?
00:47:48 — The resilience of Industrial states: WW1 period France
00:51:04 — What about the world? Europe
00:54:00 — What about the world? The Wider World
00:55:49 — The Conclusion
00:57:17 — Rebuttal of the week
01:00:42 — Channel Update
Based on the damage to western citizens and the likely planned ratcheting up on government control and loss of personal liberties to usher in the elites WEF new fascism I would say its likely following the plan as well as can be expected.
 

Squid

Veteran Member
If the Europeans can find a way, to break the strangle hold that the
ZUSA has on them, the Russia-Ukraine war can be brought to
an end, and all European nations can again be free.

Problem isn't Russia. Has not been since the ending of The Soviet Union
in 1990. The problem is ZUSA hegemony, and that at least half of
the ZUSA population, is now outright Communist.

Please be safe everyone.

Regards to all.

Nowski
Only half right.

Yes the problem is WEF cabal, mostly run by Euro-old money aristocrats. So F-Europe.

Also Putin is a despot so Russia is a problem as is Xi’s China.
 

jward

passin' thru
EndGameWW3
@EndGameWW3

3h

NATO Secretary General: We need to maintain channels of communication with Moscow so that misunderstanding does not lead to uncontrollable reactions.


Replying to
@EndGameWW3

NATO Secretary General: We have no intention of deploying nuclear weapons in Eastern Europe.


Update: NATO Secretary General: The war in Ukraine is brutal, but a war between NATO and Russia would be worse.
 

Shadow

Swift, Silent,...Sleepy
EndGameWW3
@EndGameWW3

3h

NATO Secretary General: We need to maintain channels of communication with Moscow so that misunderstanding does not lead to uncontrollable reactions.


Replying to
@EndGameWW3

NATO Secretary General: We have no intention of deploying nuclear weapons in Eastern Europe.


Update: NATO Secretary General: The war in Ukraine is brutal, but a war between NATO and Russia would be worse.
Sounds like common sense... seems suspicious!

Shadow
 

WTSR

Veteran Member

Over the last 2 days, about 1000 Ukrops were killed near Lisichansk and another 2.5 to 3.5 thousand wounded.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment

The Kyiv Independent
@KyivIndependent

5h

Russian MP threatens London with bombardment. Andrey Gurulyov, a member of the Russian parliament, said that London would be the first city to be bombed by Russia if the blockade of Kaliningrad Oblast, a Russian exclave, led to a war with NATO.
Someone had better explain to MP Gurulyov what a Vanguard class SSBN of the RN could do to the Rodina all by its lonesome......
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Posted for fair use.....(For maps and images please see article source. HC)

UKRAINE WAR
Ukraine – the situation June 24, 2022
Severodonetsk is not a Pyrrhic but a telling Russian victory

By UWE PARPART
JUNE 25, 2022

Summary/overview

The Ukrainian General Staff (UGS) has ordered the withdrawal of forces from Severodonetsk.

Russian forces south of Lysychansk have closed the corridor (“salient within the [Donbas] salient”) from Myrna Dolyna south through Hirske to Zolote [see map 1 and comparison map 2 of 48 hours earlier] and, according to the Russian Ministry of Defense, have trapped some 2000 Ukrainian troops (four battalions and an artillery unit) and foreign fighters. The closure of the salient but not the number of troops encircled has been confirmed by the UGS.

Russian forces are pressing north out of Toshkivka into the southern approaches to Lysychansk and are swinging west and north to cut off Severodonetsk’s twin city entirely. Ukrainian Luhansk Oblast head Sergyi Haidai said on Telegram that the Ukrainian forces might soon retreat from Lysychansk since their defensive positions had been destroyed and there is “little sense” in staying.

Ukrainian sources report that Russia has moved an S-300 air defense unit into just-occupied Severodonetsk. The S-300 would be layered with shorter-range systems (Pantsir), provide air denial and make the use of long-range artillery by the Ukrainians more difficult and less accurate.

Russian air defenses have been beefed up across the board and have begun to effectively attrit Ukrainian drones. The Ukrainians are currently flying only 20 to 30 sorties per day. Russians sorties number 300 per day – of all types.

The ability to successfully deny airspace to drones will be of significance as it will severely limit the effectiveness of long-range artillery systems such as HIMARS.

According to US sources, the first HIMARS multiple rocket launch systems (all four promised?) have been delivered to Ukraine.

Belarus is conducting maneuvers and mobilization exercises in southeastern Belarus, directly north of Kiev. This appears to be designed to tie down some Ukrainian forces, but Belarus President Lukashenko is unlikely to be prodded into attacking Ukraine. The exercises will wrap up on July 1.

Center/east

In addition to activities in the Severodonetsk/Lysychansk area, Russian forces are continuing to press north from the area of Popasna and have the entire main road from Bakhmut to Lysychansk under fairly constant artillery fire.

On the north side of the Donbas salient Russian forces continue to position toward and slowly advance under heavy artillery cover to attack Slovyansk. But there was no substantive ground force activity in that area.

There were no substantive movements by either Russian or Ukrainian forces north and northeast of Kharkiv. But intermittent Russian artillery and rocket fire on suburbs of Kharkiv continues.

South

Russian forces continue to strengthen their defensive positions and are moving more forces and gear into the Kherson area. There was no significant ground activity.
Assessment

There is an argument put forward by some credible analysts that the Russian victory at Severodonetsk is a Pyrrhic victory, that they have spent so much time and so many troops and ordnance that it cannot be considered a decisive victory.

The argument overlooks several points.

First, the implied historical reference makes no sense. Pyrrhus of Epirus in his victorious but debilitating engagements with the Romans was the demographically and economically weaker party. The victorious Russians are the equivalent of the Romans, superior in manpower and economic reserves.

Second, while the Russians in the battle for Severodonetsk certainly incurred significant losses, there is no doubt by any objective observer that the slow-grind, heavily artillery-supported Russian advance led to much heavier losses – of manpower, in particular – on the Ukrainian side.

Indeed, military analyst Colonel Reisner of the Austrian Military Academy argues, the Russian slow-grind strategy was precisely designed to inflict maximum destruction of Ukrainian military assets: “The Russians have in effect operationally encircled [eingekessel] the Donbas salient. They can open and close the entrance to the cauldron at will. They have not closed it because the Ukrainians continually are sending in soldiers and weapons, which the Russian can then destroy. They’ve got the Ukrainians where they want them, in a cauldron.”

Third, as any reader of Clausewitz will of, course, note, a victory is a victory and a loss is a loss and it tells on morale. Says an American observer: “The Russians and Ukrainians stood toe-to-toe and the Russians came out ahead.”

Lastly, in a war of attrition, the type of war that the Russian have forced upon the Ukrainians and that the Ukrainians have accepted to fight, the country with four times the population and ten times the economic power will win.

By their own count, the Ukrainians have taken large losses. By their own count, the Ukrainians, to speak of only one weapons system, need one hundred Himars or 270mm MRLS units, not 8 or 10 or 12.

They cannot trade numbers over the long run. A war that lasts more than the next few months will require that they make some effort to keep their more experienced soldiers. At an operational level, they need to consider collapsing the Donbas salient and withdrawing to a defensive line farther west that they can hold.

Strategically, Zelensky needs a better plan.

___________

I have to wonder whether the Russian ground forces available holding those occupied territories would be able to effectively suppress "ranging companies" behind their lines if the Ukrainians had them available or could stand up "good enough" units to fill that role in any numbers?
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment

Posted for fair use....

Ukraine Situation Report: Sievierodonetsk On The Brink Of Collapse
Reports indicate that Ukrainian troops have been forced to withdraw from their defense of the key city of Sieverodonetsk.
BYTHOMAS NEWDICKJUN 24, 2022 12:49 PM
THE WAR ZONE
UKRAINE-RUSSIA-CONFLICT

Photo by YASUYOSHI CHIBA/AFP via Getty Images
SHARE

THOMAS NEWDICK
View Thomas Newdick's Articles
CombatAir

The eastern Ukrainian city of Sieverodonetsk (Severodonetsk), which has for weeks now been a central focus of the Russian military, is on the verge of falling to the Kremlin’s forces. As of today, reports indicate that the final Ukrainian forces fighting in the city have been ordered to withdraw, while the fate of the neighboring city of Lysychansk is also starting to look increasingly precarious.

Sieverodonetsk has been the scene of fierce fighting, including extensive Russian artillery bombardment. At this point, however, it seems the Ukrainian authorities have decided that a continued defense of the city is not worthwhile, as Russian forces threaten to encircle it. Meanwhile, the pre-war civilian population of Sieverodonetsk is thought to have been reduced from 160,000 to just 12,000 after evacuations.

View: https://twitter.com/thewarrage/status/1540291257083351041?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1540291257083351041%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedrive.com%2Fthe-war-zone


“The situation right now is as such that staying at these destroyed positions just for the sake of being there doesn’t make sense,” said Serhiy Haidai, the governor of the Luhansk region. He confirmed that Ukrainian troops had received orders to “retreat to new positions and continue fighting there.”

View: https://twitter.com/JackDetsch/status/1540324521743466496?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1540324521743466496%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedrive.com%2Fthe-war-zone


After extensive street fighting in Sieverodonetsk, the last Ukrainian forces were apparently defending the city from industrial areas, paralleling what previously happened ahead of the fall of the southern city of Mariupol.

Oleksandr Striuk, mayor of Sieverodonetsk, told AP that the Russian forces had been engaged in a “frenzied push,” supported by heavy artillery bombardments, which had left at least half of the city under their control.

Exactly how much longer there will be resistance in the beleaguered city is unclear, but there are fears of a looming humanitarian crisis here after major bridges that provide access to the west were destroyed. These three bridges that cross the Siverskyi Donets River also provide a connection to nearby Lysychansk. Local officials say that 90 percent of the city has been damaged to some degree, with all critical infrastructure currently out of action.

View: https://twitter.com/TpyxaNews/status/1538962775157915649?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1538962775157915649%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedrive.com%2Fthe-war-zone


Lysychansk, meanwhile, may well be the next eastern Ukrainian city in the Kremlin’s sights, with reports that Russian forces are now moving toward it from Zolote and Toshkivka. governor Haidai added that Ukrainian troops had repulsed some Russian advances on the outskirts of Lysychansk, but these were apparently Russian reconnaissance units rather than the main thrust.

View: https://twitter.com/TheStudyofWar/status/1540113342559358977?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1540113342559358977%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedrive.com%2Fthe-war-zone


As it stands, Lysychansk is the last major Ukrainian-held city in the Luhansk province, and capturing it would be a significant boost for the Kremlin, which would be left with de facto control of the region.
While the Ukrainians suffered heavy losses in their defense of Sieverodonetsk, this may ultimately have been enough to at least continue to wear down the Russian invasion force and to inflict further attrition here. That, in turn, would pile more pressure on the Russian logistics network and require more soldiers and equipment to be moved in to support the offensive centered on Lysychansk, where the local geography could favor the defenders:

View: https://twitter.com/Mariia_Zolkina/status/1540250566626103298?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1540251289740886016%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es2_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedrive.com%2Fthe-war-zone


As for the conflict at large, there have been suggestions that Ukraine’s tactics of attempting to stall the Russian offensive in the Donbas, despite being heavily outnumbered, could be part of a longer-term plan.

“Russian offensive operations will likely stall in the coming weeks, whether or not Russian forces capture the Sievierodonetsk-Lysychansk area, likely granting Ukrainian forces the opportunity to launch prudent counteroffensives,” the U.S.-based Institute for the Study of War (ISW) has predicted. The institute has argued that the Kremlin’s fixation on Sievierodonetsk could ultimately be counter-productive, as the Russian forces sustain more losses in terms of troops and materiel.

Overall, however, developments in the Luhansk province again demonstrate the degree to which the Kremlin is now focusing its efforts on the Donbas after having tried and failed to take the Ukrainian capital earlier in the conflict. While the capture of Sievierodonetsk-Lysychansk would put almost all of the Luhansk in Russian hands, that would still leave around half of the wider Donbas region under Ukrainian control.
WARNING: Some of the updates below contain graphic material.
Before getting into the rest of the latest news below, The War Zone readers can first get themselves up to speed on the existing state of the conflict in Ukraine through our preceding rolling coverage here.

POSTED: 1:00 PM EST—
While so far unclear if directly related to the war in Ukraine or not, the Russian Aerospace Forces, or VKS, was struck a blow this morning with the crash of one of its four-engine Il-76MD Candid transport aircraft. Reuters reports that the airlifter was landing at Ryazan Air Base in western Russia when it caught fire. The aircraft had apparently been flying from Orenburg to Belgorod and was making a refueling stop In Ryazan.

The Interfax news agency quoted the Russian Ministry of Defense as saying the Il-76 suffered an engine malfunction during on a training flight. However, these aircraft have, in the past, been used in support of the war in Ukraine, bringing supplies to forward air bases in western Russia and even reportedly taking part in a failed airborne assault on Kyiv at the start of the war.

View: https://twitter.com/Archer83Able/status/1540227570096037888?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1540227570096037888%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedrive.com%2Fthe-war-zone


View: https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1540322780465561602?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1540322780465561602%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedrive.com%2Fthe-war-zone


View: https://twitter.com/uasupport999/status/1540332561909665794?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1540332561909665794%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedrive.com%2Fthe-war-zone


There are reports that a senior figure in one of the Russian-installed administrations in occupied southern Ukraine has been assassinated. According to the deputy head of the Kherson Military-Civilian Administration, a bomb blast today killed Dmitry Savluchenko, head of the families, youth, and sports department of that organization.

Details remain scarce, but the Russian TASS news agency reported two burnt-out cars in a courtyard in Kherson, as well as windows knocked out of a nearby four-story building. An adviser to the Ukrainian governor of Kherson described the assassination as a successful partisan operation conducted on behalf of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

View: https://twitter.com/igorsushko/status/1540235713597145088?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1540235713597145088%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedrive.com%2Fthe-war-zone


View: https://twitter.com/spriteer_774400/status/1540246732222730240?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1540246732222730240%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedrive.com%2Fthe-war-zone


View: https://twitter.com/revishvilig/status/1540320047863832577?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1540320047863832577%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedrive.com%2Fthe-war-zone



Russia took control of the Kherson region early in the conflict and there have since been regular civilian protests as well as reports of increasing partisan activity. This has apparently targeted both officials within the Russian-installed administration as well as soldiers from the occupying Russian forces.

The Ukrainian Air Force reportedly remains active, especially with regard to air-to-ground missions. According to the latest briefing from the Centre for Defence Strategies (CDS), a Ukrainian security think tank, Ukrainian Su-24M Fencer strike aircraft and Su-25 Frogfoot close air support aircraft flew around two dozen airstrikes against advancing Russian units south of Lysychansk, yesterday.

View: https://twitter.com/TheBaseLeg/status/1540224123993231361?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1540224123993231361%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedrive.com%2Fthe-war-zone


Video has appeared that seems to show, for the first time, the recently delivered M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems, or HIMARS, in action in Ukraine. Although the date and location are unclear, multiple accounts on social media claim that the two Ukrainian HIMARS seen in the footage are engaging Russian targets with their rockets. Ukraine confirmed yesterday that it had begun to receive HIMARS, when Ukrainian Defence Minister Oleksii Reznikov tweeted: “Thank you to my U.S. colleague and friend Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin for these powerful tools! Summer will be hot for Russian occupiers. And the last one for some of them.”

View: https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1540247955046912001?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1540247955046912001%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedrive.com%2Fthe-war-zone


We will continue to update this post with new information until we state otherwise.

Contact the author: thomas@thedrive.com
stripe


MORE TO READ
Russian ‘Boomerang’ Missile Video Explained By Air Defense Expert
RELATED
Russian ‘Boomerang’ Missile Video Explained By Air Defense Expert
A veteran air defense operator has some ideas as to what could have led to this spectacular mishap in Ukraine.
READ NOW

These Are The Riverine Patrol Boats Ukraine Is Getting From The U.S.
RELATED
These Are The Riverine Patrol Boats Ukraine Is Getting From The U.S.
The shallow-draft vessels will greatly augment Ukraine’s current riverine fleet, made up largely of converted fishing and pleasure boats.

Ukraine Situation Report: Patrol Boats, More HIMARS In New U.S. Aid Package
RELATED
Ukraine Situation Report: Patrol Boats, More HIMARS In New U.S. Aid Package
U.S.-supplied patrol boats could be a boon to Ukrainian forces operating on inland waterways and off the country’s Black Sea coasts.
 
Last edited:

raven

Has No Life - Lives on TB
So the common sense actions are really a trap.
it is common sense if there was no evidence to the contrary.
Keeping open lines of communication between two adversaries with nukes would typically be considered common sense.
Except the Washington/Moscow hotline has been active since 1963 and, as the Russians have said, it has not worked because they can't believe anything Washington says.

I think about that and I have to tell you "I do not believe anything Washington says"

So what might seem to be common sense may simply be another trap.

If you keep open communications with someone that lies to you,
when does it become pointless to maintain the communication?
 
Top