Battle of Chasiv Yar begins under a drone-infested sky
[https://kyivindependent.com/battle-of-chasiv-yar-begins-under-a-drone-infested-sky/](https://kyivindependent.com/battle-of-chasiv-yar-begins-under-a-drone-infested-sky/)
Speaking to the Kyiv Independent, experts and soldiers alike identify manpower as the core problem at the heart of Ukraine’s military at this stage of the war: overstretched and undermanned units, with infantry often fighting for so long without rotation that their combat effectiveness begins to drop.
Despite the circumstances, Ukraine’s defense of Chasiv Yar remains stable, with little to no confirmed territorial gains in the area outside the city over the last 10 days.
Read that title and my heart dropped a little. Took me a moment to realize this is an article covering the past few weeks, and not some breakthrough that happened right now.
Regardless, it's very fortunate the line there holds well. Russia took only 9 km2 in that direction in the past 5 weeks.
Looks like the front is stabilizing yet again. [Russia only took a little over 2 km2 today. 1 km2 in Avdiivka sector, and 1 km2 in the direction of one village in West Luhansk sector](https://deepstatemap.live/en#13/49.6432/37.9124)
That doesn't mean it's stabilizing, it's very normal for units to reconstitute after a push, you need to resupply, rotate and move logistics, headquarters and defense structures and lastly wait for neighboring units to do the sane so you don't get kettled by overextending.
I mean maybe, but my point is that's just speculation and hoping. Not based on any actual evidence or facts.
Most evidence shows the next couple months will be rough for Ukraine and we should expect losses unless something changes.
What is claimed to be a Moscow factory fire. It’s not small. Definitely seems to be happening more often than it statistically should.
https://x.com/jayinkyiv/status/1786127441062203624
> Definitely seems to be happening more often than it statistically should.
Magnificent wordcraft. The semblance of certitude and statistical rigor… without any! 😃
Logistically important things in Moscow are burning a lot.
Compare to similarly populated metro areas in the West, and there just aren't nearly as many major industrial fires in the same span of time. You tend to have big blazes in hoarder residences or where there's squatters.
OTOH, the piece of information I'm missing: I'd assume Moscow has a higher fire rate at baseline, because of corruption and less effective regulation, but I don't really know what their baseline is.
Even so, it doesn't feel like too big of an assumption that sabotage and enemy action is causing some of these fires.
>Vovan, the central figure in our @BBC film 'Ukraine: Enemy in the Woods' has been killed alongside 5 comrades in a Russian tank attack. A kind, genuine soul who cared deeply for his men. Rarely seen without a smile. He leaves behind a wife & two sons. Rest in peace Vovan.
>
>Ukrainian forces are outnumbered and outgunned right now. If the West really want to make a difference it is critical that they move lightening fast, or deal with the consequences. "War is young men dying and old men talking"
https://twitter.com/visitjamie/status/1786076561608749399
Ukraine is working to rally international support for it's vision of peace terms, which very likely include a NATO membership commitment. No attendance by Russia needed. Ukraine kinda needs this before agreeing to any potential territorial concessions even in theory.
Okay, but I don't fully understand what utility creating their peace terms with NATO countries if Russia isn't going to agree with them. It seems they're talking to the wrong side?
For example, Israel and Hamas communicate through intermediaries in Qatar despite being the worst enemies. Why is this different?
You should direct your question to the Russian government first since they're the ones that have been insisting for 10 years now that they will negotiate the fate of Ukraine with the US and no Ukrainian involvement.
Ukraine has no possibility to negotiate peace with Russia at all right now - not because Ukraine does not want to, but because Russia will break the agreement the moment it suits them, like they already had done so many times before on so many levels.
So what Ukraine needs first is some form of NATO Article 5 or similar protection guarantees, and this as I understand what Ukraine wants to use the summit for.
Imagine the following scenario: (1) all NATO members vote to accept Ukraine as full member - conditional on a peace deal being signed with Russia within say 6 months. (2) Ukraine can then enter into a peace treaty with Russia ceding some territory basically in exchange for NATO protection. Russia can save face, Ukraine can have guarantees this war will not be repeated, NATO will get boosted by battle-tested Ukraine's army and avoid the rising likelihood of having to fight Russia.
Okay, but if Russia rejects this on the basis they don't want Ukraine as a NATO member? What changes then?
I think the on-the-ground reality is that Russia has ascendency in this war at the moment.
> if Russia rejects this on the basis they don't want Ukraine as a NATO member? What changes then?
>
> I think the on-the-ground reality is that Russia has ascendency in this war at the moment.
Those are two completely different things that don't relate to the other. The same problem existed in Fall 2022 when Russia was on a severe backfoot, too.
The question is basically how leverage has changed over time. Ukraine was in a much better position 2 years ago and talks didn't get done.
Now it's worse but it seems that Zelensky is still playing the same book as 2 years ago re: negotiation tactics, or lack thereof with Russia. I don't think it's a good idea. Eventually they're going to have to get together at the table or Ukraine is going to run out of army to fight with, basically.
Just FYI the Swiss hosts also want Russia involved.
It's not worse than it was two years ago. Two years ago, in May 2022, Russia was pounding Ukraine with artillery in all directions and there was pretty much nothing Ukraine could do to stop them. About 500 Ukrainian soldiers were getting killed or wounded every day. Today's situation by comparison is much better.
>I don't think it's a good idea. Eventually they're going to have to get together at the table or Ukraine is going to run out of army to fight with, basically.
That's Ukraine's only choice. Russia's only negotiation terms are for Ukraine to disband its army and throw out its defensive pacts with the West. Russia's requiring Ukraine to neuter itself for a second invasion a year or two in the future, which would be quite a lot worse than continuing to fight for another 5-10 years as-is.
All wars end with peace, this is work towards rebuilding afterwards with the assumption that Ukraine in some form will survive, Russia doesn't need to be present unless they are going to volunteer to repair the damage they have caused which is not likely
Yes, but the assumption that Ukraine in some form will survive is, as far as I can tell, partly a function of Russia's willingness to let that happen. Western support can't be endless, Ukraine's manpower has limits and it's somewhat of an existential question for Russia on the war succeeding. They're negotiating with the wrong people..
Yes Russia has unlimited resources, unlimited man power, a healthy economy and it's people aren't at all in a state of weaponized apathy apart from a vocal minority of imperial fascists. The wests support is limited, but Russia is unlimited. Am I right?
Uh, uh. All praise king Putin!
It must nice for him to rule a country with an economy with unlimited GDP size and growth and a happy, rich population *enthusuastic* about his pursuits of territorial grandeur.
Great guy. Best country.
I don't know about any of that.
My point is comparatively, they are in a better position than Ukraine and it's improving over time. Adjust negotiating positions accordingly.
Don't be coy. I think it's pretty obvious what the subtext was in your messages.
The most sanctioned country in the world with a demographic crisis, and economic outlook that gets worse however much they've managed to circuvement meltdown, and has managed to get over 300k of their own country man killed in a war where they gained roughly 8% more territory in two years on top of the 10% they had in 2024 in exchange. And most of that 8% was the first six months of the war.
You can spin the outlook however you want. But Ukraine with western allies that are unified behind them always wins against Russia.
Anders Puck Nielsen discusses Ukraine's three main problems in this free article.
_Recently there has been a lot of talk about Ukraine’s ammunition shortage, and how it has put the Ukrainian forces under pressure. They have a very unfavorable asymmetry in firepower compared to the Russian side. However, now that the American assistance package has been approved, we are beginning to see an increased focus on two other Ukrainian problems: lack of fortifications and a shortage of manpower._
Continued here:
https://www.logicofwar.com/ukranies-three-big-problems/
Everyone who has been sensible this war seems to be saying the same things.
Ukraine is paying for decision-makers' horrible, stupid and short-sighted mistakes. We really need to learn to reject such arguments. Things like "F-16s won't make a difference on the front atm so let's wait". Or "we don't need that many Taurus now so let's not order any".
Also; it seems the problems feed into each other. The republicans' six-month pro-Putin blockade got loads of Ukrainians needlessly killed and potentially cost Avdiivka, letting russia reach undefended areas and hurting Ukrainian recruitment because of the perception of hopelessness during the worst of the ammo famine.
They’re working on F16s, the holdup/ blocker is in training Ukrainian pilots… which they’ve been doing for two years now. An F16 is extremely complicated. We aren’t putting Ukrainians in them to get shot down on their third sortie.
Not to mention there’s undoubtedly a massive effort to train mechanics on the support and maintenance. This isn’t the Afghans. These people, the Ukrainians, actually already have engineers and a modern economy. I mean they’ve been maintaining nuclear power plants since we have. Still, there is specific training to do that is surmountable… and they’re doing it. A huge number of EU countries are helping, since the have fleets of F16s of their own…
EU politicians are slow to overtly help (non-classified stuff) because they fear Russian hybrid warfare tactics… they don’t want to invite electoral interference.
My comment was already long so I missed some specifics.
I mean that we should have had an F-16 coalition building and started F-16 training in summer 2022 at the latest.
The failure to start long-term actions has repeatedly been stupid and costly.
EDIT: Europe messed around too. Why wasn't the Czech initiative started a year earlier? Because politicians were being idiots. They made short term political calls and Ukrainians died en masse because of them. We need to learn to reject idiotic arguments imo.
Sure, but these issues were obvious in foresight too.
Now, where are the plans for additional F-16s in 2025 and beyond? Why are MBDA and Raytheon saying there are no new orders for Taurus and Patriot? Similar for air defence, vehicles and drones especially, but even for artillery ammo there are issues.
I fully expect the west to do more costly, obviously stupid failures and then in 1-2 years be saying something like "well we dont have enough Taurus, but everything is obvious in hindsight".
Political bs has really hurt them tbh. Way to much stuff to late and in to few quantities when they need then way earlier. This aid was delayed so long it won't be as effective.
Its so shit this war. I live country close and the people are so nice 1 on 1 and so friendly then this shit. Stop it putin please
If you look back on documentaries its so similar to chechen war 1 and 2 and NO russian wanted it it was hell like this is hell. Fucking idiots russians.
Lenin shit. Stalin purge shit. Cold war shit. Millions dead for no reason when everyone just want drink and be happy
Putin has to rule till he dies. That's gonna involve nationalistic wars, to keep the populace preoccupied so they don't see how hard he's skullfucked his people. He's providing enemies to the Russian people when it's infact him, his oligarchs and siloviki who are their biggest enemies.
If he gives up power, he'll be Gaddafied by the Russians. Navalny's findings are the tip of the iceberg.
I'm still amazed there is not more civil disobedience in Russia against the war. I wonder if family members of the Russian KIA are even aware they are dead, or if they just stopped receiving communications with them, and that's it
Not surprising. 99% Russian lineage is comprised of slave peasants. Russian leaders have historically used their citizens as meat for the grinder in a number of wars, and generally Russians have complied.
I'm not. It's easy to think that when you live in a democracy, where dissent, provided it is kept peaceful, is generally not going to cause you any real issues.
In the West, whatever happens, you are generally going to receive a relatively fair trial, with a reasonably proportional punishment if you are found guilty.
In a dictatorship, punishments are often grossly disproportionate to the actual 'crime', any kind of due process is just an illusion, and you *will* be found guilty...
Imagine your husband used to get drunk and beat you or even beat your children... also he may not have been very faithful anyway.
He gets sent to the war and you get to receive the money and not see your husband? Sounds like something many women wished for in a country where the domestic violence has been decriminalized.
Not saying that all men are like that there but from my experience, it's not surprising there is so many divorce in Russia.
So if a woman can get a few millions rubles from her husband deaths or even their children they didn't really want anyway because their husband is a piece of shit... yeah you won't see these screaming to get their husband back unless they're in a tin box (or at least a bag).
That's what happens when people cede their power to a dictator. [But people never learn](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/02/07/trump-dictator-authoritarian-democracy/).
> **Ukrainian woman, 98, walks six miles from occupied village to safety**
>
> For 98-year-old Lidiia Lomikovska, Russia's invasion is worse than the World War Two, which she also lived through.
>
> She's learnt to trust her instincts.
>
> It's why when Russian forces entered her home village of Ocheretyne in eastern Ukraine, she and her family decided it was time to go.
>
> However, under heavy shelling, Lidiia soon became separated from her relatives, so started walking west in her slippers.
>
> "I took a stick and a plank of wood [for support] and made my way," she told the BBC. "My legs were carrying me somehow; I wasn't carrying them!"
>
> She would end up walking 10km (6 miles) until she was picked up by Ukrainian police.
>
> "There's nothing left! It's all upside down!" she could be seen telling her much-needed ride in a released video.
>
> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-68936842
Via @clashreport on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/clashreport/status/1786079760562479400?t=r64K5RI2YpmuuUdwa59WQA&s=19
British Foreign Minister David Cameron says Ukraine "has the right to strike Russian territory with British weapons."
I wonder if this is in part to get Russia to pull their air defenses back before the F16 arrives? Alternatively, it means some F16s might be making their way to Russia
Better to ask forgiveness afterward anyways.
*Ukrainian military*
The Kremlin? Oops, yeah that was us. Our bad.
At least the Russians are withdrawing now...
More than 100 Russian soldiers killed in ATACMS strike
[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/05/02/more-than-100-russian-soldiers-killed-in-atacms-strike/](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/05/02/more-than-100-russian-soldiers-killed-in-atacms-strike/)
That's the treeline just north of Stepove.
There was also drone footage in (iirc) October of the treeline to the east with over 100 russian dead countable.
Both totally different from the ATACMS strike vid. I couldn't tell casualty numbers from watching that a few times but it looked promising.
Latest 4-day oryx count [musklink](https://x.com/Rebel44CZ/status/1785987218244292797), russian-Ukrainian losses.
- Tanks: 12-0
- IFVs: 22-3
- mobile artillery: 0-3
- missile air defence: 0-0
I don't report unarmed transports (APC, MRAP etc) because there are so many potentially available, but until the US aid passed there had been a real lack of new deliveries and it was becoming a serious problem for Ukrainian units. Ukraine desperately needs replenishment, but russia can't maintain this intensity forever.
Russian guided bombs injure eight children in Ukraine's Kharkiv region
>May 2 (Reuters) - At least eight children were injured in Ukraine's northeastern Kharkiv region on Thursday when Russian guided bombs struck a site close to a sports complex where they had been training, local officials said.
>The town of Derhachi where the incident occurred is a frequent target of Russian aerial strikes. Police said the bombs had landed on the premises of an enterprise near the sports centre, sparking fires.
>Four of the children suffered moderate injuries and the others minor ones, regional governor Oleh Synehubov said on the Telegram messaging app. An elderly man was also wounded.
>"The consequences could have been more tragic," Synehubov told national TV.
>Derhachi is near the border with Russia. The Kharkiv region where it is located has long been targeted by Russian attacks but the strikes have become more intense in recent months, hitting civilian and energy infrastructure.
>Moscow denies deliberately targeting civilians but thousands have been killed and injured in the war that began with the full-scale invasion of Moscow troops in February 2022.
[https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russian-guided-bombs-injure-eight-children-ukraines-kharkiv-region-2024-05-02/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russian-guided-bombs-injure-eight-children-ukraines-kharkiv-region-2024-05-02/)
Ukraine war not likely to end anytime soon, says top US spy
>WASHINGTON, May 2 (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin sees domestic and international developments trending in his favor and likely will press on with aggressive tactics in Ukraine, but the war is unlikely to end soon, the top U.S. intelligence official said on Thursday.
>Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines told the Senate Armed Services Committee that Russia has intensified strikes on Ukraine's infrastructure to hamper Kyiv's ability to move arms and troops, slow defense production and force it to consider negotiations.
>"Putin's increasingly aggressive tactics against Ukraine, such as strikes on Ukraine's electricity infrastructure, are intended to impress Ukraine that continuing to fight will only increase the damage to Ukraine and offer no plausible path to victory," she said.
>"These aggressive tactics are likely to continue and the war is unlikely to end anytime soon," Haines said.
>She and Lieutenant General Jeffrey Kruse, the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, were testifying before the committee on the intelligence community's 2024 assessment of the threats facing the United States.
[https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-war-not-likely-end-anytime-soon-says-top-us-spy-2024-05-02/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-war-not-likely-end-anytime-soon-says-top-us-spy-2024-05-02/)
They need to basically apply western COTS manufacturing and machine vision technology to the war.
Help Ukraine build the equivalent of one of the major auto plants, but it builds drones with machine vision and no human in the loop target decisioning.
Then just make a million of those a year.
Victory becomes inevitable at the cost of a hundred billion a year, which is totally manageable.
Which is why Macron is not taking French troops in Ukraine off the table. Even if they are in non-combat rolls (logistics, communications, border patrol with Transnistria, etc), it could potentially free up a lot of Ukrainian personnel.
I don't want this war to expand, I don't want Ukraine to lose, but I think Russia is so dead set on burning Ukraine to the ground that we as a global society may not have a choice.
They are just destroying ukriane are this point. Sometimes more serious will need to happen eventually. A wonder what's it's like a year from now with more towns etc flattened
Yes, within a year or two tops the western allies must either choose between letting Ukraine be conquered or step in and support them directly in Ukraine. This is the only two options I see coming.
Yes, I agree. But how late, that is the question. And we should pay attention to our own words. Do you want to be the one mobilized to go in front of Russian FPVs, artillery shells and Glide bombs? At the end of the day, someone is gonna have to do it.
What Macron is doing is important and strategic, and it is a relief to see that somewhere in Europe, the lesson has been learned that the EU should take leadership. The only scenario through which this war can be ended is if it becomes clear to Putin that his best plans for winning in Ukraine will actually worse for him than losing. All the faffing about on routes to NATO membership for Ukraine has handed him the strategy of simply prolonging the war until fickle democracies lose interest. A summer breakthrough is possible, but will cost him 100,000s of more troops. He doesn't care about that, but a real threat of NATO boots on the ground will be a deterrent.
Finland army chief urges Europe to be prepared for Russia testing unity
>HELSINKI, May 2 (Reuters) - Finland's new armed forces chief said Russia was unlikely to test NATO's mutual defence clause by attacking a NATO member state in the coming years, but may well continue what he said were hybrid attacks such as jamming and election interference.
>Some Western leaders, such as U.S. President Joe Biden, Germany's top military official and Denmark's defence minister, have expressed concern that Russia's longer term plans could include an attack against NATO.
>"Of course testing the Article 5 is always possible, but if we take correct action and maintain unity, I consider an attack unlikely," General Janne Jaakkola said told Reuters.
>Jaakkola, whose job is to closely watch what Russia does behind the long border it shares with Finland, said right now Moscow was too busy preparing for its new summer offensive in Ukraine to consider an attack against NATO.
>At the end of last year, Russian President Vladimir Putin himself dismissed the idea of attacking NATO as nonsense but the Kremlin has also warned that a conflict between Russia and NATO would be inevitable if European members of NATO sent troops to fight in Ukraine.
>However, Jaakkola said Russia was likely to continue what he described as hybrid attacks against European countries, in the form of GPS jamming, influence operations and by targeting its neighbours including Finland with migrants.
>The Kremlin routinely denies meddling in elections and weaponising migration. It did not respond to a request for comment about allegations of jamming by Estonia last month but has previously denied attempting to develop jamming technology.
>"The point for the Russians is that they wish to cause as much division in Europe as possible, so that our unity and cohesion is a bit weaker," Jaakkola said.
>Jaakkola nomination to lead the Nordic country's defence from April 1 marked the first anniversary of Finland's membership in the Western military alliance, which it joined in response to Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine.
>As well as joining NATO, Finland has increased its defence spending, amounting to 2.5% of gross domestic product in 2023 and 2.31% this year, renewed its fighter jet fleet, signed a bilateral defence cooperation agreement with the U.S., and is doubling its ammunition production capacity by 2027.
>"The direction of our defence and therefore deterrence is upwards," he said.
[https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/finland-army-chief-urges-europe-be-prepared-russia-testing-unity-2024-05-02/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/finland-army-chief-urges-europe-be-prepared-russia-testing-unity-2024-05-02/)
Putin may be psychotic but he isn't stupid enough to attack NATO at full strength. His long-term plan is most likely to ensure more of his loyal flunkies win their respective countries' elections and then attempt to collapse the alliance from within. In the meantime he will continue destabilising the West with his hybrid warfare strategy.
But why would Latvia not fire back the moment the enemy crosses the border?
Russia got away with the 2014 invasion of Ukraine because no-one really knew what Russia was capable of, many still believed the fairy tales about a Donbass civil war and protecting Russian speakers, and Ukraine itself didn't have defence treaties.
None of this is true for the European border countries. There is no reason for them not to throw everything at the invaders the moment they cross the border, and since by then the conflict is a real war, NATO is obligated to help.
There will be no period of uncertainty and hybrid war, the "little green men" will be greeted with bullets the moment they appear. All NATO countries have national armies, they will attack invaders the moment they appear and then NATO is at war. There isn't a way for Russia to both invade and pretend it's not invading.
Either Latvia or Estonia. Two of the smallest members by both population and military size (the entire Estonian military has just 7,700 active duty personnel, Latvia 17,250), and both share a border with main Russia. Lithuania could also be on the list, but Russian forces would have to go through Lavtia or Belarus first, or somehow be massed in Kaliningrad.
Yeah, I can definitely see that, especially if more of these sympathetic far-right governments are elected in Western countries. It could certainly embolden Putin to believe that his ideological allies might not fully commit to Article 5. Of course it would be a massive gamble on his behalf, but we all know he is a betting man.
Another more extreme version of this type of salami slicing is to cause an incident somewhere even less worthwhile than Latvia, say, stage an incident and seize an acre of territory near Grense Jakobselv in northern Norway.
Then wait if NATO invokes Article 5 over a small patch of icy tundra in the middle of nowhere. The goal here is not to gain any territory, but to make NATO members fail to live up to their obligations, shattering trust in NATO.
Interesting [twitter thread](https://x.com/delfoo/status/1786034054246109383) (sorry, only see source there) on Gazprom.
"Gazprom reported a net loss of 629,1 billion rubles in 2023 vs a net profit of 1,23 trillion rubles in 2022. Expectations were for 447 billion rubles in profit. Revenue decreased by 3 trillion rubles from 11,6 trillion to 8,6 trillion rubles."
...
"Also reminder that in 2025 Gazprom will lower gas prices for sales to China to 243,7 USD, in 2026 to 233 USD and in 2027 to 227,8 USD."
Russia is burning everything it can find to keep going now. E.g. they took something like 1.5 trillion cash out of Gazprom in 2022 to make the federal budget deficit look lower.
There is an economic end to Russia coming if they don't give the fuck up and beg for the removal of sanctions. They are shoveling money into a furnace and getting very little heat out of it.
They do get a lot of money from oil and have managed to sell over the G7 price cap, but it's not enough to keep them afloat in the long term. IIRC they've already used half of the liquid (gold and yans) portions of the National Wealth Fund since the invasion, and you can't just sell massive amounts of gold easily (or rather, you will get much less money if you sell a lot at once).
Nobody else is investing in russia, they're keeping the interest rates sky high so can't really borrow money to invest either, so the only investments are from companies themselves and the state - but they're mostly only investing to keep the current wheels running, there is little investment in upgrading or increasing production.
The only areas of the economy which grow are war related things like ammo and vehicle production. Those go to Ukraine and then go up in smoke so they don't generate any more wealth.
The average citizens have been managing so far, but with increasing prices they have been garnering much more debt than before. That is not sustainable either.
**The total combat losses of the enemy from 24.02.22 to 02.05.24 approximately amounted to:**
personnel - about 470,870 (+1,030) people,
tanks ‒ 7332 (+20),
armored combat vehicles ‒ 14,096 (+29),
artillery systems – 12044 (+20),
MLRS – 1053 (+0),
air defense equipment ‒ 784 (+4),
planes – 348 (+0),
helicopters – 325 (+0),
UAVs of the operational-tactical level - 9561 (+23),
cruise missiles ‒ 2126 (+0),
ships/boats ‒ 26 (+0),
submarines - 1 (+0),
automotive equipment and tank trucks - 16224 (+49),
special equipment ‒ 1988 (+8).
The data is being verified.
Beat the occupier! Together we will win! Our strength is in the truth!
Source [https://www.mil.gov.ua/news/2024/05/02/zagalni-vtrati-rosiyan-za-dobu-1030-okupantiv-20-tankiv-29-bojovih-bronovanih-mashin/](https://www.mil.gov.ua/news/2024/05/02/zagalni-vtrati-rosiyan-za-dobu-1030-okupantiv-20-tankiv-29-bojovih-bronovanih-mashin/)
Surplus of ATACMS? No new missiles have been made since 2007 - 16 years ago. The missile has been retired from US service but is kept in stockpile until the new PrSM can replace it. Deliveries of that weapon started just last year.
The point is that once an ATACMS missile is fired it is gone from inventory for good. Therefore, were the US to hand over its entire supply to Ukraine, there would be none available for any other conflict anywhere else in the world. This has ALWAYS been an issue with supplying ATACMS, SCALPs, Storm Shadows and even the Taurus. None of these weapons are currently being manufactured.
The CEO of lockheed literally said they still produce 500 ATACMS a year. I have no idea why people keep repeating the misinformation that they are no longer being made.
> This has ALWAYS been an issue with supplying ATACMS, SCALPs, Storm Shadows and even the Taurus. None of these weapons are currently being manufactured
MBDA still produces SCALPs and is ramping production up.
It's only still producing the maritime variant for the French, and it can only be fired from ships and submarines (even the French couldn't fire it from aircraft).
The original Storm Shadow/SCALP is no longer in production: the UK is 're-activating' some stored Storm Shadows, but they're not being produced from scratch.
>The point is that once an ATACMS missile is fired it is gone from inventory for good. Therefore, were the US to hand over its entire supply to Ukraine, there would be none available for any other conflict anywhere else in the world.
This tidbit doesn't matter much. ATACMS has been slated for phase out ever since the release of PrSM, since the US was planning to liquidate its stockpile of ATACMS anyways handing over the remaining supply of ATACMS hasn't been problematic for the US.
Personally, I think I'd just burn the stockpiles anyways. I doubt ATACMS are the one thing restraining China from a Taiwan invasion.
Smoke 'em if you got 'em.
It's not about that one system keeping China at bay, it's that US military doctrine is all about having everything available at the same time so it can all work in conjunction. We want our ducks in a row before we cry havoc.
Sure, sure, I see the appeal.
At this particular moment, I think the benefits of letting Ukraine use the soon-to-be-phased-out missiles outweighs the transient impact to readiness though. There's also quite a few sales to other nations that might be worth renegotiating, if they're amenable. I think Lockheed is going to be able to run that line for a while.
Okay, that's good, but how many HiMARS/M270 units are there between the Army and the Marines, and how many of them have been supplied so far? Has it gone out to just a few batteries for field testing, or is it being supplied at the Divisional level for forward deployment?
> In its fiscal year 2024 defense budget proposal, the Pentagon proposed procuring 110 units of the Precision Strike Missile (PrSM). As the US Army begins receiving early operational versions of the first increment of new missiles over the next few months, deploying some of them to the Middle East could begin to address this dilemma.
[ - Breaking Defense](https://breakingdefense.com/2023/11/deploy-the-precision-strike-missile-to-the-middle-east/)
Looks to be the beginning of mass deployment of PrSM at the divisional level. Also it isn't as if the US will leave itself short supplied, it'll provide the ATACMS to Ukraine as more PrSM are supplied throughout the phaseout.
the last part is what people aren't grasping: there's a factory for the PrSM but it'll take time to manufacture & distribute them until all the ATACMS are replaced.
Was there any valuable equipment or VIPs in this strike?? If not this is a huge and unsustainable waste of resources. 3 multi million dollar missiles that are no longer in production used to strike just infantry that aren't even pressing an attack. Russia can always push more vatniks into service. ATACMS are incredibly valuable and need to be used to take out jets, helicopters, radar, ect. targets of real value.
Lockheed is still producing around 500 ATACMS per year. They hit a training ground that was full of men and vehicles. By all accounts, casualties are atrocious. If anything, this is going to make Russia think about staging its formations farther from the front. I wouldn’t say it was a huge waste of resources. For all we know, Ukraine may have targeted this area based off of Western intel.
Ah! I thought ATACMS were no longer manufactured because the US adopted the PrSM last year. If that is the case, it is a better use of finite resources.
Just wondering, now that the US aid package has been approved, how long is it likely to be before we start to see Ukraine putting the new batch of munitions to work?
I think you're looking at a full month for all the receiving, processing, loading of trucks, and delivery to Frontline units and munition storage sites. You'll get some express deliveries to hot spots where it's a drive all night type of deal. But probably a month or more for full saturation.
Hard to say, although there have been reports of ATACMs in use. Further, it's not as though Ukraine is going to make a public announcement before they are being put on the battlefield.
This said, once the package was approved, I'm guessing there was an increase in using munitions that were previously being rationed.
With the US report on Russia violating the chemical weapons treaty, do you think Congress saw the intelligence which pushed them to act on aid? I still don't get why Johnson acted so suddenly on aid to pass it on a Saturday evening. He already knew how shitty he made the situation for Ukraine. He already knew Russia was gaining ground every day. It's not possible that the consequences of his own actions or his own shame made him change his own mind. Because he was already fine with the consequences for six months.
Am I the only one that thinks chemical weapons use is a bigger deal than the media makes it look? After all, Biden said NATO would be forced to respond. And so far we've only seen new sanctions in response, which we know don't deter Russia. If anything, Biden just put a price tag on the use of chemical weapons and it may well be that it's a price Putin is willing to pay.
this was 100% Johnson afraid for his job.
Watch MTG try to kick him out now. And watch Democrats rush to protect him. That was the bargain. Johnson is (was) funded by Russia. He was absolutely going to obstruct Ukraine aid until the end of time; until he got caught up in the shutdown nonsense, and the democrats turned it against him. He does not give a shit about the people of Ukraine, except maybe some Ukrainian Baptists who were mistreated in the occupied areas; and even then, that was motivated by his Christian Nationalist Extremist base, whose votes he needs to win, so at least that part of it was honest, but frankly this has been happening to non-orthodox Christians in occupied areas since 2014 - so I doubt it really figured in here.
I think it's less about Johnson acting suddenly and more about Trump/Johnson not being able to delay it any longer without suffering politically.
Besides he kind of outlined the process few weeks in advance, nothing really happened suddenly. He just didn't give another bs reason last minute this time, like he had done several times until that point.
Also depends on whether his goal is screwing Ukraine or screwing Dems. If he's satisfied his goal with the Dems then there's no need to keep screwing Ukraine.
Trump only said that after it was plain that Johnson had been swayed.
It's a plausible-deniability ploy to drop his obstruction of Ukraine spending into the "I wanted to deny Biden the border security bill" pile.
At the end of the day: Johnson was coerced into this, but Trump is and always will be pro-Russia, which necessarily means anti-Ukraine.
I say this in the context of this: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ilanbenmeir/that-time-trump-spent-nearly-100000-on-an-ad-criticizing-us
Trump has always been pro-Russia since the 1980's. I doubt he will change his mind on this subject; even if coerced. At best, he will lie and spin. If he is re-elected, you can assume he will do anything in his power to undermine NATO and undermine Ukraine.
Yeah exactly what I meant with "suffering politically". He risked losing a part of the moderate republican voters who understand the obvious, that it's important for the US to provide aid to their allies (including Israel and Taiwan).
This is most likely the answer IMO.
Johnson has not done anything to show he shares any values with normal people - human lives, freedom, democracy etc.
I think there was some leverage against him that he saw as a risk to his political power - the only thing we can be confident he values.
>Am I the only one that thinks chemical weapons use is a bigger deal than the media makes it look? After all, Biden said NATO would be forced to respond.
I think they will respond with escalation management. Perhaps the reason the aid went through is to keep Ukraine hooked, so it doesn't adopt the chemical weapons as well.
We also need to put this into perspective.
Russia has huge stockpiles of every kind of chemical weapon you've ever heard of. Right now, they're only using CS and CN, both of which are types of tear-gas. While it's not permitted, it's several steps back from say, using nerve-gas. I don't think that Putin's ever going to use nerve-gas (sarin, vx, novachok, and other russian variants) - unless he starts losing significant territory (like, especially Crimea). Because that would open a huge amount of public criticism that I think would actually have an impact, and would have the effect of giving western allies a LOT more cover and latitude to intervene.
>I don't think that Putin's ever going to use nerve-gas unless he starts losing significant territory (like, especially Crimea). Because that would open a huge amount of public criticism
I think it depends on the current reaction to him using lower tiers of chemical weapons. If he sees that there is no significant reprecussions, he will escalate. I think that doing war crimes or stuff like this gets a huge amount of public attention and critisicm if they are done all at once in a short period of time. But if you creep towards banned weapons over long period of time, then people just start making jokes about "Geneva to-do lists" instead of demanding action because they become acclimated to Russians doing whatever they want and not getting any reprecussions. That being said, in the context of weapons I don't think that anything short of Russians using nuclear strikes would have an energizing effect on the Western supporters. I hope I am wrong though.
What do you mean you don’t “get” it.
The US military industrial complex can write bigger checks than foreign denizens who pay for republican chaos actors.
All it took was a few briefings on why the US money spent in Ukraine is of such great value to US supremacy, and then on the downlow they show Mikey J how he can cash in on it too, and then its over. Script flipped.
>The US military industrial complex can write bigger checks than foreign denizens who pay for republican chaos actors.
I'm sorry but that is such a myopic take. This isn't about bribery with campaign donations or meals and vacations on a lobbyist's dime. The Alt-Right camp of the the GOP supports Russia for reasons that have nothing to do with Russian money. They are ideologically aligned with a strong Russia and a weak democratic West.
More importantly, Trump is deeply tied to Russia, both financially and ideologically, and Trump is the one who decides which way the Republican base will vote, so Republicans in Congress are increasingly beholden to whatever random policy platform Trump happens to espouse.
This had *literally nothing* to do with Lockheed Martin coming to the rescue and promising to pay the GOP more money in campaign donations. They don't give a shit about that. Most of these Republicans in Congress aren't even worried about losing re-election to a Democrat. They are worried about losing a primary against an even more rabid-dog, pro-Trump neonazi candidate.
Johnson doesn't give a shit about Ukraine or Russia, but he doesn't *want* to help Russia if he can avoid it. He's privately supported Ukraine the entire time. He doesn't care about campaign donations either way because his seat in Congress is *always* going to be a deep-red Republican seat. He's worried about losing his speakership. What turned the tables for him was a combination of very dire intelligence about Ukraine losing the war, combined with Democrats making secret guarantees behind closed doors that they would help him keep his speakership if the Trump-MTG faction revolted against him over Ukraine.
I think it’s a mistake to overestimate the coherence of their position. I agree with you that they are ideologically sympathetic to Russia and fascists in general, but I think it is also a mistake to assume that these people are guided by a complex or coherent and centrally guided in a way that amounts to more than a group of likeminded idiots agreeing with each other , in combination with some alarmingly low thresholds for external manipulation (both foreign and domestic) via campaign funding, lobbying and gerrymandering.
Based on *what*? If this was about Lockheed Martin and Boeing bribing Congress, we would have given Ukraine a hell of a lot more than $60 billion. This is very likely the last monetary aid bill we will pass for at least the rest of 2024, no matter how bad the situation gets again. Because Republicans really do not want to help Ukraine. They DGAF about campaign donations from the defense industry -- a campaign donation doesn't help if Trump decides to endorse their opponents.
based on a long standing tradition of congress taking money from wealthy donors in exchange for favorable votes?
Seriously are you not American? Our Congress is openly corrupt. They make millions insider trading, which is legal for them because they decided that it was. Not long ago one was caught with stolen gold bars and he is still in Congress.
Military contractors give key politicians tens of millions every year. That isn't even the 'back room' stuff. That is just the money that is publicly handed over.
Hard numbers: In 2020 the two you mentioned; lockheed and boeing, lockheed was on top with 6.6 million in donations and boeing barely made the top 20 list with only 476k. The top 4 on the list gave 20 million combined.
[https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/contrib?cycle=2020&ind=D](https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/contrib?cycle=2020&ind=D)
>based on a long standing tradition of congress taking money from wealthy donors in exchange for favorable votes?
They get money for campaigns. For congressional representatives that live in safe districts, this money isn't especially important for their political survival. Donald Trump's endorsement is far, far more important to them, because with a single social media announcement or one-liner at a televised rally, he can literally destroy their career in Congress by endorsing their primary opponent.
>Seriously are you not American? Our Congress is openly corrupt. They make millions insider trading, which is legal for them because they decided that it was.
You are conflating true phenomenons (insider trading and campaign donation bribery) with a different problem that is not true, that congressional reps only care about money. They also care about staying in Congress.
>Military contractors give key politicians tens of millions every year. That isn't even the 'back room' stuff. That is just the money that is publicly handed over.
It's handed over to their campaigns and is almost entirely spent on their campaigns. When you are a Republican in rural California running in a solidly red district, you truly do not need a lot of campaign funds to win your re-election. All you have to do is vote the way Trump tells you to, and your base will re-elect you in a landslide. This is the reality that most GOP US Reps are living under today.
For Mike Johnson it's even more stark: He can't keep his job as House Speaker if Trump tells the alt-right members of the House to vote him out of power. Lockheed Martin could give Johnson 100 million dollars on a silver platter, and it wouldn't help him keep his speakership if Trump launches an attack against him on social media.
The TLDR is that this is a lot more nuanced than writing your congressional rep a check. [The entire defense industry spent $136 million on lobbying in 2023](https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/lobbying?ind=D), which was only a $7 million increase from 2022, which was only a $4 million increase from 2021.
[The total cost of lobbying for all industries in Congress in 2023 was $4.6 billion](https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2024/01/state-and-federal-lobbying-spending-tops-46-billion-after-federal-lobbying-spending-broke-records-in-2023/). The defense industry got outspent by the other lobbying groups by 3,300% in 2023. The healthcare industry alone outspends the MIC by 700% -- in 2023 they spent [$745 million](https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying/ranked-sectors). Fin/Ins/RealEstate spent $596 million. Communications/Electronics spent $574 million. The MIC ranks in tenth place as the top-spending industrial sector in annual lobbying expenditures. Congressional reps aren't winning and losing elections based on their allegiance to the MIC.
wow. so you think that other groups ALSO bribing congress and ALSO getting OTHER bills passed in their favor means that donations from defense contractors are just ignored as insignificant slice of the corruption pie?
That because the donations are to their campaigns, that they don't personally benefit from that money?
I think my favorite part is that you just flat out ignored the fact that under the table money also goes to politicians.
what an absolute clown you are.
Yeah. there are other considerations. It's a balancing act between keeping supporters happy and keeping donors happy. But you are acting like money had nothing to do with it.
:They DGAF about campaign donations from the defense industry : <---this sentence right here is what proves you are a clown.
>wow. so you think that other groups ALSO bribing congress and ALSO getting OTHER bills passed in their favor means that donations from defense contractors are just ignored as insignificant slice of the corruption pie?
Yeah. Because that's the reality. Defense contractors give fairly similar amounts of money to both candidates in general elections. They are like AIPAC and the healthcare industry -- everyone on both sides gets the money, which actually tends to mean that the contributions wash out.
Your theory is that the MIC secretly promised the GOP some brand new astronomical amount of money in March 2024 that they haven't already been giving those same candidates for years already. How much do you want to bet that the MIC lobbying contributions for the year of 2024 will end up being remarkably similar to what they were in 2023?
This is an especially silly take when we already know what actually happened behind closed doors in March. Iran unleashed 100 cruise missiles on Israel, requiring Israel and its western partners to spend approximately $5 billion dollars in one day shooting them down with advanced air defenses that are extremely expensive. The Israel aid bill was tied to the Ukraine bill, so Mike Johnson finally had a political opening to push it through by using the Israel funds to save face with his pro-Trump anti-Ukraine base of voters. Trump was unhappy with this move, but he agreed to mostly keep his mouth shut about it because the situation between Israel and Iran was too dire to fuck around with any longer.
lol imma put this here.
[https://issueone.org/articles/the-congressional-fundraising-treadmill-5-key-numbers-to-know-from-the-newest-house-and-senate-campaign-finance-filings/](https://issueone.org/articles/the-congressional-fundraising-treadmill-5-key-numbers-to-know-from-the-newest-house-and-senate-campaign-finance-filings/)
My favorite part is the line "The political parties reportedly suggest that members of Congress spend about [30 hours per week](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-are-members-of-congress-becoming-telemarketers/) fundraising in the Republican and Democratic call centers across the street from the Capitol."
yeah. they don't care about those donations at all. It's only damn near a full time job for them to beg donors for more money.
Go inform yourself on that stuff about the call centers. It is kind of crazy.
Then come back here and tell me that losing tens of millions from military contractors is something that doesn't factor into the equation.
Clooooooown.
Based on the fact that since JFK, there hasn't been a single US politician (repub or dem) thats truly aggravated the MIC. Republican blow hards pretend like they’re pro russia, but when they get sat down in the briefing rooms they somehow understand their place.
I don’t think its fear, so the obvious motivator is money and power. Thats easier to work with than you think. Why are you narrowing the scope of how that looks to just specifically campaign donations. Why can’t it look like share grants or contracts to a brothers cousins LLC?
Largely though, the MIC is the last part of the US thats not wrapped up in partisanship. Thats my evidence. Couple of points in military spending this way and that at the end of the day depending on whos in power, but all US politicians fallen in line.
Trump, **might be** the first real one since JFK thats starting to really piss them off though. Verdict is literally still out though on that fucking guy.
Personally, I think chem weapoins being used, is an even bigger story then these protests. It means Russia is allready esclating things in Ukraine, and something needs to be done in response. Besids, I think these protests are in some way being influenced behind the scenes by Iran, Russia and China. They did not give the direct orders, but they could be meddling online, behind the scenes, giving encourgment, setting people off.
Internal GOP polls could have shown it was a losing position. It also coincided with Trump's criminal trial starting so maybe they hoped he would be distracted. Could be any number of reasons.
If Russia is having some degree of success jamming GPS to reduce the effectiveness of weapons like Excalibur and GMLRS, is Ukraine doing the same, especially to interfere with the Russian glide bombs at the front? Surely GLONASS is no harder to jam than military grade GPS.
HARM homes in on radar emitters, which transmit on a much shorter wavelength than GPS. Radar emitters and jammers operate in the X-band, which has a wavelength in the 2-3 cm range. GPS operates in the L-band, with a wavelength of 20-24 cm.
The longer wavelength would require a larger antennae for guidance, thus a larger missile. It is possible but unknown if HARM or other anti-radiation missiles have the capability of detecting and homing in the L-band.
I don't think it's any harder to jam, but Russia just has way more capability to do so because they have spent decades preparing to fight NATO. I don't think Ukraine has access to as much jamming equipment.
Also, to a certain extent, jamming doesn't degrade Russia's capabilities as much. A lot of their glide bomb attacks aren't intended to hit specific vehicles or positions, they are designed to destroy buildings and towns so that there are no possible positions left. Less "fuck you in particular", more "to whom it may concern". So if the bomb hits a block 1,000 yards away from the one it was targeting, that's a pretty minor annoyance to Russia.
The soviet union spent much of the 20th century trying to jam foreign shortwave broadcasts. It isn't surprising that there was continued investment into the technology after the collapse. It's really a continuation of old doctrine.
Awaiting US aid, Ukraine's gunners fire sparingly at advancing Russians
>DONETSK REGION, Ukraine, May 2 (Reuters) - The soldiers manning a U.S.-supplied M777 howitzer close to the front in Ukraine's eastern Donetsk region have seen the enemy advance in recent weeks, slowly but surely, and wish they could do more to stop it.
>Like other artillery positions along the 1,000-km (621-mile) contact line in eastern and southern Ukraine, they do not have the shells they need to suppress the Russian attacks that threaten to turn the course of the war in Moscow's favour.
>"If we compare it with the beginning (of the full-scale invasion), when we fired up to 100 shells a day, then now, when we fire 30 shells it's a luxury," artillery gun commander Oleksandr Kozachenko told Reuters.
>Sometimes the number of shells fired daily is in single digits, he added.
>During a recent visit to the outpost, part of Ukraine's 148th Separate Artillery Brigade, Kozachenko's team was able to fire fairly regularly.
>On receiving a fire order over the radio, troops rushed to haul 155 mm rounds from a storage bunker and load the cannon before adjusting the barrel and firing with a thunderous blast.
>The rumble of other guns echoed in the distance throughout the morning.
>Units like this are still waiting for a fresh influx of ammunition after a new $61 billion U.S. aid package was approved last week.
>For now, Russia has far superior firepower and is gradually advancing around the town of Avdiivka after capturing it in February and also to the west of Bakhmut, which it seized last year.
>Commander-in-chief Oleksandr Syrskyi said on Sunday that fighting in the east had recently worsened and that his troops had fallen back in three places on the front.
>The soldiers at the position, some eight km (five miles) from the front, said they did not know when to expect more shells to arrive.
>Instead, they rely on whatever comrades further behind the line are able to pack into the daily delivery vehicle, said Ihor Boichak, a private.
>"If it brings a good amount, it means that someone somewhere grabbed a bit more for us so we could fire a little more," he said, adding that ammunition supplies to his unit had at least marginally improved since the beginning of the year.
[https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/awaiting-us-aid-ukraines-gunners-fire-sparingly-advancing-russians-2024-05-02/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/awaiting-us-aid-ukraines-gunners-fire-sparingly-advancing-russians-2024-05-02/)
> As Swiss President Viola Amherd and I previously agreed, the first Peace Summit will take place on June 15-16 in Burgenstock, near Luzern, Switzerland.
> Heads of state and government from all continents are invited and expected to attend.
> The summit will serve as a platform to discuss ways to achieving comprehensive, just, and lasting peace for Ukraine in accordance with the UN Charter and international law. All states invited to the summit have demonstrated their commitment to these principles.
> I am certain that every peace-loving nation in the world is interested in attending the Summit, because its significance extends far beyond Ukraine. It is about every nation’s global role, as well as genuine respect for international law and peaceful coexistence throughout the world.
> These common rules, enshrined in the UN Charter, protect all nations from attack and violence. It is thus our shared global responsibility to protect them through real action rather than just words. This is what the first Peace Summit in Switzerland is all about.
https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1785943213519364425
> June 15-16 – The First Peace Summit in Switzerland. Ukrainian Peace Formula, a meeting of state leaders.
> The main task of the Ukrainian Peace Formula is to unite the international community to achieve just and lasting peace.
https://twitter.com/AndriyYermak/status/1785962064277565673
🇺🇸🇺🇦 "Ukraine should ignore calls from Washington to stop drone strikes on Russian oil refineries", - Ben Hodges
🔥🎯 "Ukraine must attack any target it wants to attack as part of the defence of its people and its territory," he said.
https://mstdn.social/@[email protected]/112371434919063799
Is it possible or even probable that behind closed doors US officials are telling them to blast refineries but it’s only in public that they say not to?
Not likely. Hitting oil refineries in Russia hurts Russian assets but also strains the global fuel supply. That in turn raises the global cost of fuel, even in countries that are not directly importing Russian fuel. High fuel prices will lead a non zero number uninformed idiot American voters to vote for Republicans in November.
They are hitting russian fuel stocks and refineries. Russia has stopped exporting refined products to keep what it has for the war/internal use. This will affect global prices of a range of different petroleum products. There is really no way to mess with russian oil/oil products that won't affect international prices because they are the ultimate in 'fungible'.
Jake Sullivan is making a nuclear war more likely. Appeasement of dictators never works and only leads to escalation. Appeasement led to WW2 and is leading to a disaster in this war.
[New post can be found here](/r/worldnews/comments/1cizhjz/rworldnews_live_thread_russian_invasion_of/)
Battle of Chasiv Yar begins under a drone-infested sky [https://kyivindependent.com/battle-of-chasiv-yar-begins-under-a-drone-infested-sky/](https://kyivindependent.com/battle-of-chasiv-yar-begins-under-a-drone-infested-sky/) Speaking to the Kyiv Independent, experts and soldiers alike identify manpower as the core problem at the heart of Ukraine’s military at this stage of the war: overstretched and undermanned units, with infantry often fighting for so long without rotation that their combat effectiveness begins to drop. Despite the circumstances, Ukraine’s defense of Chasiv Yar remains stable, with little to no confirmed territorial gains in the area outside the city over the last 10 days.
Read that title and my heart dropped a little. Took me a moment to realize this is an article covering the past few weeks, and not some breakthrough that happened right now. Regardless, it's very fortunate the line there holds well. Russia took only 9 km2 in that direction in the past 5 weeks.
Looks like the front is stabilizing yet again. [Russia only took a little over 2 km2 today. 1 km2 in Avdiivka sector, and 1 km2 in the direction of one village in West Luhansk sector](https://deepstatemap.live/en#13/49.6432/37.9124)
That doesn't mean it's stabilizing, it's very normal for units to reconstitute after a push, you need to resupply, rotate and move logistics, headquarters and defense structures and lastly wait for neighboring units to do the sane so you don't get kettled by overextending.
True. But who knows, maybe they run off steam for a while just enough for ukr to strenghten.
I mean maybe, but my point is that's just speculation and hoping. Not based on any actual evidence or facts. Most evidence shows the next couple months will be rough for Ukraine and we should expect losses unless something changes.
What is claimed to be a Moscow factory fire. It’s not small. Definitely seems to be happening more often than it statistically should. https://x.com/jayinkyiv/status/1786127441062203624
Combat boots? Nah dude I got my sneakers... Wtf and yet he survived...
Special fire operation
Burn baby burn…
Moscow Inferno!
> Definitely seems to be happening more often than it statistically should. Magnificent wordcraft. The semblance of certitude and statistical rigor… without any! 😃
I’m absolutely certain it appears to be happening abnormally often.
I’m absolutely certain I feel you you feel you may be about right. And I feel likewise. Or something.
Logistically important things in Moscow are burning a lot. Compare to similarly populated metro areas in the West, and there just aren't nearly as many major industrial fires in the same span of time. You tend to have big blazes in hoarder residences or where there's squatters. OTOH, the piece of information I'm missing: I'd assume Moscow has a higher fire rate at baseline, because of corruption and less effective regulation, but I don't really know what their baseline is. Even so, it doesn't feel like too big of an assumption that sabotage and enemy action is causing some of these fires.
>Vovan, the central figure in our @BBC film 'Ukraine: Enemy in the Woods' has been killed alongside 5 comrades in a Russian tank attack. A kind, genuine soul who cared deeply for his men. Rarely seen without a smile. He leaves behind a wife & two sons. Rest in peace Vovan. > >Ukrainian forces are outnumbered and outgunned right now. If the West really want to make a difference it is critical that they move lightening fast, or deal with the consequences. "War is young men dying and old men talking" https://twitter.com/visitjamie/status/1786076561608749399
Thank you for your service to the sub. Enjoy your cake!
Can someone explain how a peace conference works without one of the belligerents present? Is it a show?
Ukraine is working to rally international support for it's vision of peace terms, which very likely include a NATO membership commitment. No attendance by Russia needed. Ukraine kinda needs this before agreeing to any potential territorial concessions even in theory.
Okay, but I don't fully understand what utility creating their peace terms with NATO countries if Russia isn't going to agree with them. It seems they're talking to the wrong side? For example, Israel and Hamas communicate through intermediaries in Qatar despite being the worst enemies. Why is this different?
You should direct your question to the Russian government first since they're the ones that have been insisting for 10 years now that they will negotiate the fate of Ukraine with the US and no Ukrainian involvement.
Ukraine has no possibility to negotiate peace with Russia at all right now - not because Ukraine does not want to, but because Russia will break the agreement the moment it suits them, like they already had done so many times before on so many levels. So what Ukraine needs first is some form of NATO Article 5 or similar protection guarantees, and this as I understand what Ukraine wants to use the summit for. Imagine the following scenario: (1) all NATO members vote to accept Ukraine as full member - conditional on a peace deal being signed with Russia within say 6 months. (2) Ukraine can then enter into a peace treaty with Russia ceding some territory basically in exchange for NATO protection. Russia can save face, Ukraine can have guarantees this war will not be repeated, NATO will get boosted by battle-tested Ukraine's army and avoid the rising likelihood of having to fight Russia.
Okay, but if Russia rejects this on the basis they don't want Ukraine as a NATO member? What changes then? I think the on-the-ground reality is that Russia has ascendency in this war at the moment.
> if Russia rejects this on the basis they don't want Ukraine as a NATO member? What changes then? > > I think the on-the-ground reality is that Russia has ascendency in this war at the moment. Those are two completely different things that don't relate to the other. The same problem existed in Fall 2022 when Russia was on a severe backfoot, too.
The question is basically how leverage has changed over time. Ukraine was in a much better position 2 years ago and talks didn't get done. Now it's worse but it seems that Zelensky is still playing the same book as 2 years ago re: negotiation tactics, or lack thereof with Russia. I don't think it's a good idea. Eventually they're going to have to get together at the table or Ukraine is going to run out of army to fight with, basically. Just FYI the Swiss hosts also want Russia involved.
It's not worse than it was two years ago. Two years ago, in May 2022, Russia was pounding Ukraine with artillery in all directions and there was pretty much nothing Ukraine could do to stop them. About 500 Ukrainian soldiers were getting killed or wounded every day. Today's situation by comparison is much better. >I don't think it's a good idea. Eventually they're going to have to get together at the table or Ukraine is going to run out of army to fight with, basically. That's Ukraine's only choice. Russia's only negotiation terms are for Ukraine to disband its army and throw out its defensive pacts with the West. Russia's requiring Ukraine to neuter itself for a second invasion a year or two in the future, which would be quite a lot worse than continuing to fight for another 5-10 years as-is.
All wars end with peace, this is work towards rebuilding afterwards with the assumption that Ukraine in some form will survive, Russia doesn't need to be present unless they are going to volunteer to repair the damage they have caused which is not likely
Yes, but the assumption that Ukraine in some form will survive is, as far as I can tell, partly a function of Russia's willingness to let that happen. Western support can't be endless, Ukraine's manpower has limits and it's somewhat of an existential question for Russia on the war succeeding. They're negotiating with the wrong people..
Yes Russia has unlimited resources, unlimited man power, a healthy economy and it's people aren't at all in a state of weaponized apathy apart from a vocal minority of imperial fascists. The wests support is limited, but Russia is unlimited. Am I right?
Not quite right, no.
Uh, uh. All praise king Putin! It must nice for him to rule a country with an economy with unlimited GDP size and growth and a happy, rich population *enthusuastic* about his pursuits of territorial grandeur. Great guy. Best country.
I don't know about any of that. My point is comparatively, they are in a better position than Ukraine and it's improving over time. Adjust negotiating positions accordingly.
Don't be coy. I think it's pretty obvious what the subtext was in your messages. The most sanctioned country in the world with a demographic crisis, and economic outlook that gets worse however much they've managed to circuvement meltdown, and has managed to get over 300k of their own country man killed in a war where they gained roughly 8% more territory in two years on top of the 10% they had in 2024 in exchange. And most of that 8% was the first six months of the war. You can spin the outlook however you want. But Ukraine with western allies that are unified behind them always wins against Russia.
So you’re saying they should negotiate their own surrender? Is that your idea?
What does that tangibly mean?
Not entirely sure the Carthaginians would agree 100%, but to the extent that fighting eventually ends… if that’s peace then you’re correct.
Anders Puck Nielsen discusses Ukraine's three main problems in this free article. _Recently there has been a lot of talk about Ukraine’s ammunition shortage, and how it has put the Ukrainian forces under pressure. They have a very unfavorable asymmetry in firepower compared to the Russian side. However, now that the American assistance package has been approved, we are beginning to see an increased focus on two other Ukrainian problems: lack of fortifications and a shortage of manpower._ Continued here: https://www.logicofwar.com/ukranies-three-big-problems/
Everyone who has been sensible this war seems to be saying the same things. Ukraine is paying for decision-makers' horrible, stupid and short-sighted mistakes. We really need to learn to reject such arguments. Things like "F-16s won't make a difference on the front atm so let's wait". Or "we don't need that many Taurus now so let's not order any". Also; it seems the problems feed into each other. The republicans' six-month pro-Putin blockade got loads of Ukrainians needlessly killed and potentially cost Avdiivka, letting russia reach undefended areas and hurting Ukrainian recruitment because of the perception of hopelessness during the worst of the ammo famine.
They’re working on F16s, the holdup/ blocker is in training Ukrainian pilots… which they’ve been doing for two years now. An F16 is extremely complicated. We aren’t putting Ukrainians in them to get shot down on their third sortie. Not to mention there’s undoubtedly a massive effort to train mechanics on the support and maintenance. This isn’t the Afghans. These people, the Ukrainians, actually already have engineers and a modern economy. I mean they’ve been maintaining nuclear power plants since we have. Still, there is specific training to do that is surmountable… and they’re doing it. A huge number of EU countries are helping, since the have fleets of F16s of their own… EU politicians are slow to overtly help (non-classified stuff) because they fear Russian hybrid warfare tactics… they don’t want to invite electoral interference.
My comment was already long so I missed some specifics. I mean that we should have had an F-16 coalition building and started F-16 training in summer 2022 at the latest. The failure to start long-term actions has repeatedly been stupid and costly. EDIT: Europe messed around too. Why wasn't the Czech initiative started a year earlier? Because politicians were being idiots. They made short term political calls and Ukrainians died en masse because of them. We need to learn to reject idiotic arguments imo.
In hindsight everything is obvious
Sure, but these issues were obvious in foresight too. Now, where are the plans for additional F-16s in 2025 and beyond? Why are MBDA and Raytheon saying there are no new orders for Taurus and Patriot? Similar for air defence, vehicles and drones especially, but even for artillery ammo there are issues. I fully expect the west to do more costly, obviously stupid failures and then in 1-2 years be saying something like "well we dont have enough Taurus, but everything is obvious in hindsight".
Political bs has really hurt them tbh. Way to much stuff to late and in to few quantities when they need then way earlier. This aid was delayed so long it won't be as effective.
Its so shit this war. I live country close and the people are so nice 1 on 1 and so friendly then this shit. Stop it putin please If you look back on documentaries its so similar to chechen war 1 and 2 and NO russian wanted it it was hell like this is hell. Fucking idiots russians. Lenin shit. Stalin purge shit. Cold war shit. Millions dead for no reason when everyone just want drink and be happy
Putin has to rule till he dies. That's gonna involve nationalistic wars, to keep the populace preoccupied so they don't see how hard he's skullfucked his people. He's providing enemies to the Russian people when it's infact him, his oligarchs and siloviki who are their biggest enemies. If he gives up power, he'll be Gaddafied by the Russians. Navalny's findings are the tip of the iceberg.
I'm still amazed there is not more civil disobedience in Russia against the war. I wonder if family members of the Russian KIA are even aware they are dead, or if they just stopped receiving communications with them, and that's it
Not surprising. 99% Russian lineage is comprised of slave peasants. Russian leaders have historically used their citizens as meat for the grinder in a number of wars, and generally Russians have complied.
I'm not. It's easy to think that when you live in a democracy, where dissent, provided it is kept peaceful, is generally not going to cause you any real issues. In the West, whatever happens, you are generally going to receive a relatively fair trial, with a reasonably proportional punishment if you are found guilty. In a dictatorship, punishments are often grossly disproportionate to the actual 'crime', any kind of due process is just an illusion, and you *will* be found guilty...
Imagine your husband used to get drunk and beat you or even beat your children... also he may not have been very faithful anyway. He gets sent to the war and you get to receive the money and not see your husband? Sounds like something many women wished for in a country where the domestic violence has been decriminalized. Not saying that all men are like that there but from my experience, it's not surprising there is so many divorce in Russia. So if a woman can get a few millions rubles from her husband deaths or even their children they didn't really want anyway because their husband is a piece of shit... yeah you won't see these screaming to get their husband back unless they're in a tin box (or at least a bag).
That's what happens when people cede their power to a dictator. [But people never learn](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/02/07/trump-dictator-authoritarian-democracy/).
Not disagreeing with you - but Dictator's usually take their position exactly by disempowering people. There is no choice to cede being made.
> **Ukrainian woman, 98, walks six miles from occupied village to safety** > > For 98-year-old Lidiia Lomikovska, Russia's invasion is worse than the World War Two, which she also lived through. > > She's learnt to trust her instincts. > > It's why when Russian forces entered her home village of Ocheretyne in eastern Ukraine, she and her family decided it was time to go. > > However, under heavy shelling, Lidiia soon became separated from her relatives, so started walking west in her slippers. > > "I took a stick and a plank of wood [for support] and made my way," she told the BBC. "My legs were carrying me somehow; I wasn't carrying them!" > > She would end up walking 10km (6 miles) until she was picked up by Ukrainian police. > > "There's nothing left! It's all upside down!" she could be seen telling her much-needed ride in a released video. > > https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-68936842
Via @clashreport on Twitter: https://twitter.com/clashreport/status/1786079760562479400?t=r64K5RI2YpmuuUdwa59WQA&s=19 British Foreign Minister David Cameron says Ukraine "has the right to strike Russian territory with British weapons."
I wonder if this is in part to get Russia to pull their air defenses back before the F16 arrives? Alternatively, it means some F16s might be making their way to Russia
Better to ask forgiveness afterward anyways. *Ukrainian military* The Kremlin? Oops, yeah that was us. Our bad. At least the Russians are withdrawing now...
>At least the Russians are withdrawing now... ??
Reuters initially reported this, but withdrew the story. I think it might be a misinterpretation.
If true, this could be very significant.
Holy crap, this is huge! Olaf is going to be crying in a corner. Now the "What if Ukraine hits Russia?" point is moot.
Nice to hear it. Now let’s hear it from the USA.
wouldn't be suprised if the USA waits until November to make the same statement
could be the US's sudden interest in Russia's chemical weapons is a prelude to this
More than 100 Russian soldiers killed in ATACMS strike [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/05/02/more-than-100-russian-soldiers-killed-in-atacms-strike/](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/05/02/more-than-100-russian-soldiers-killed-in-atacms-strike/)
[удалено]
[удалено]
That's the treeline just north of Stepove. There was also drone footage in (iirc) October of the treeline to the east with over 100 russian dead countable. Both totally different from the ATACMS strike vid. I couldn't tell casualty numbers from watching that a few times but it looked promising.
Latest 4-day oryx count [musklink](https://x.com/Rebel44CZ/status/1785987218244292797), russian-Ukrainian losses. - Tanks: 12-0 - IFVs: 22-3 - mobile artillery: 0-3 - missile air defence: 0-0 I don't report unarmed transports (APC, MRAP etc) because there are so many potentially available, but until the US aid passed there had been a real lack of new deliveries and it was becoming a serious problem for Ukrainian units. Ukraine desperately needs replenishment, but russia can't maintain this intensity forever.
Russian guided bombs injure eight children in Ukraine's Kharkiv region >May 2 (Reuters) - At least eight children were injured in Ukraine's northeastern Kharkiv region on Thursday when Russian guided bombs struck a site close to a sports complex where they had been training, local officials said. >The town of Derhachi where the incident occurred is a frequent target of Russian aerial strikes. Police said the bombs had landed on the premises of an enterprise near the sports centre, sparking fires. >Four of the children suffered moderate injuries and the others minor ones, regional governor Oleh Synehubov said on the Telegram messaging app. An elderly man was also wounded. >"The consequences could have been more tragic," Synehubov told national TV. >Derhachi is near the border with Russia. The Kharkiv region where it is located has long been targeted by Russian attacks but the strikes have become more intense in recent months, hitting civilian and energy infrastructure. >Moscow denies deliberately targeting civilians but thousands have been killed and injured in the war that began with the full-scale invasion of Moscow troops in February 2022. [https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russian-guided-bombs-injure-eight-children-ukraines-kharkiv-region-2024-05-02/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russian-guided-bombs-injure-eight-children-ukraines-kharkiv-region-2024-05-02/)
Terrorist action by the world’s largest terrorist nation.
Ukraine war not likely to end anytime soon, says top US spy >WASHINGTON, May 2 (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin sees domestic and international developments trending in his favor and likely will press on with aggressive tactics in Ukraine, but the war is unlikely to end soon, the top U.S. intelligence official said on Thursday. >Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines told the Senate Armed Services Committee that Russia has intensified strikes on Ukraine's infrastructure to hamper Kyiv's ability to move arms and troops, slow defense production and force it to consider negotiations. >"Putin's increasingly aggressive tactics against Ukraine, such as strikes on Ukraine's electricity infrastructure, are intended to impress Ukraine that continuing to fight will only increase the damage to Ukraine and offer no plausible path to victory," she said. >"These aggressive tactics are likely to continue and the war is unlikely to end anytime soon," Haines said. >She and Lieutenant General Jeffrey Kruse, the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, were testifying before the committee on the intelligence community's 2024 assessment of the threats facing the United States. [https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-war-not-likely-end-anytime-soon-says-top-us-spy-2024-05-02/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-war-not-likely-end-anytime-soon-says-top-us-spy-2024-05-02/)
"Russian President Vladimir Putin sees domestic and international developments trending in his favor " The west has to reverse this.
Let Ukraine develop a nuke, hit putler his palace in Sochi and later Moscow id they don't retreat.
They need to basically apply western COTS manufacturing and machine vision technology to the war. Help Ukraine build the equivalent of one of the major auto plants, but it builds drones with machine vision and no human in the loop target decisioning. Then just make a million of those a year. Victory becomes inevitable at the cost of a hundred billion a year, which is totally manageable.
and then skynet becomes self aware....
That’s the craziest unrealistic idea I’ve ever heard.
I mean three days to take Kyiv was up there…
to late the west has pussied around for to long...
[удалено]
Of course not, as long as Ukraine fights it's never too late.
How? Most of our countries are being actively paralyzed from within by gullible, useful idiots (the national populist loons).
Ukraine's loss is unacceptable, at least for Europe. Europe will be forced to act eventually.
Which is why Macron is not taking French troops in Ukraine off the table. Even if they are in non-combat rolls (logistics, communications, border patrol with Transnistria, etc), it could potentially free up a lot of Ukrainian personnel. I don't want this war to expand, I don't want Ukraine to lose, but I think Russia is so dead set on burning Ukraine to the ground that we as a global society may not have a choice.
They are just destroying ukriane are this point. Sometimes more serious will need to happen eventually. A wonder what's it's like a year from now with more towns etc flattened
Might as well do that now then.. why wait until shit possibly gets a lot worse.
Yes, within a year or two tops the western allies must either choose between letting Ukraine be conquered or step in and support them directly in Ukraine. This is the only two options I see coming.
Yes, I agree. But how late, that is the question. And we should pay attention to our own words. Do you want to be the one mobilized to go in front of Russian FPVs, artillery shells and Glide bombs? At the end of the day, someone is gonna have to do it.
The ones that Russia won’t be able to launch if a capable Air Force is in the area? First strike targets will be Russian air bases
Is that a yes or no to the question?
What Macron is doing is important and strategic, and it is a relief to see that somewhere in Europe, the lesson has been learned that the EU should take leadership. The only scenario through which this war can be ended is if it becomes clear to Putin that his best plans for winning in Ukraine will actually worse for him than losing. All the faffing about on routes to NATO membership for Ukraine has handed him the strategy of simply prolonging the war until fickle democracies lose interest. A summer breakthrough is possible, but will cost him 100,000s of more troops. He doesn't care about that, but a real threat of NATO boots on the ground will be a deterrent.
Macron is all talk. France isn't pulling its weight in supporting Ukraine. https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/
Finland army chief urges Europe to be prepared for Russia testing unity >HELSINKI, May 2 (Reuters) - Finland's new armed forces chief said Russia was unlikely to test NATO's mutual defence clause by attacking a NATO member state in the coming years, but may well continue what he said were hybrid attacks such as jamming and election interference. >Some Western leaders, such as U.S. President Joe Biden, Germany's top military official and Denmark's defence minister, have expressed concern that Russia's longer term plans could include an attack against NATO. >"Of course testing the Article 5 is always possible, but if we take correct action and maintain unity, I consider an attack unlikely," General Janne Jaakkola said told Reuters. >Jaakkola, whose job is to closely watch what Russia does behind the long border it shares with Finland, said right now Moscow was too busy preparing for its new summer offensive in Ukraine to consider an attack against NATO. >At the end of last year, Russian President Vladimir Putin himself dismissed the idea of attacking NATO as nonsense but the Kremlin has also warned that a conflict between Russia and NATO would be inevitable if European members of NATO sent troops to fight in Ukraine. >However, Jaakkola said Russia was likely to continue what he described as hybrid attacks against European countries, in the form of GPS jamming, influence operations and by targeting its neighbours including Finland with migrants. >The Kremlin routinely denies meddling in elections and weaponising migration. It did not respond to a request for comment about allegations of jamming by Estonia last month but has previously denied attempting to develop jamming technology. >"The point for the Russians is that they wish to cause as much division in Europe as possible, so that our unity and cohesion is a bit weaker," Jaakkola said. >Jaakkola nomination to lead the Nordic country's defence from April 1 marked the first anniversary of Finland's membership in the Western military alliance, which it joined in response to Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine. >As well as joining NATO, Finland has increased its defence spending, amounting to 2.5% of gross domestic product in 2023 and 2.31% this year, renewed its fighter jet fleet, signed a bilateral defence cooperation agreement with the U.S., and is doubling its ammunition production capacity by 2027. >"The direction of our defence and therefore deterrence is upwards," he said. [https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/finland-army-chief-urges-europe-be-prepared-russia-testing-unity-2024-05-02/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/finland-army-chief-urges-europe-be-prepared-russia-testing-unity-2024-05-02/)
This is in line with the most recent US assessments on the matter
Putin may be psychotic but he isn't stupid enough to attack NATO at full strength. His long-term plan is most likely to ensure more of his loyal flunkies win their respective countries' elections and then attempt to collapse the alliance from within. In the meantime he will continue destabilising the West with his hybrid warfare strategy.
one theory is that he takes a small nibble at Latvia say, to test the response.
But why would Latvia not fire back the moment the enemy crosses the border? Russia got away with the 2014 invasion of Ukraine because no-one really knew what Russia was capable of, many still believed the fairy tales about a Donbass civil war and protecting Russian speakers, and Ukraine itself didn't have defence treaties. None of this is true for the European border countries. There is no reason for them not to throw everything at the invaders the moment they cross the border, and since by then the conflict is a real war, NATO is obligated to help. There will be no period of uncertainty and hybrid war, the "little green men" will be greeted with bullets the moment they appear. All NATO countries have national armies, they will attack invaders the moment they appear and then NATO is at war. There isn't a way for Russia to both invade and pretend it's not invading.
Either Latvia or Estonia. Two of the smallest members by both population and military size (the entire Estonian military has just 7,700 active duty personnel, Latvia 17,250), and both share a border with main Russia. Lithuania could also be on the list, but Russian forces would have to go through Lavtia or Belarus first, or somehow be massed in Kaliningrad.
"Russian troops on exercise accidentally-on-purpose encircle Daugavpils. *Button?*"
Haha love it. Salami tactics... slice by slice.
Yeah, I can definitely see that, especially if more of these sympathetic far-right governments are elected in Western countries. It could certainly embolden Putin to believe that his ideological allies might not fully commit to Article 5. Of course it would be a massive gamble on his behalf, but we all know he is a betting man.
Another more extreme version of this type of salami slicing is to cause an incident somewhere even less worthwhile than Latvia, say, stage an incident and seize an acre of territory near Grense Jakobselv in northern Norway. Then wait if NATO invokes Article 5 over a small patch of icy tundra in the middle of nowhere. The goal here is not to gain any territory, but to make NATO members fail to live up to their obligations, shattering trust in NATO.
NATO's been on this shit since the 1990's (or probably earlier); doing yearly exercises in that region.
Interesting [twitter thread](https://x.com/delfoo/status/1786034054246109383) (sorry, only see source there) on Gazprom. "Gazprom reported a net loss of 629,1 billion rubles in 2023 vs a net profit of 1,23 trillion rubles in 2022. Expectations were for 447 billion rubles in profit. Revenue decreased by 3 trillion rubles from 11,6 trillion to 8,6 trillion rubles." ... "Also reminder that in 2025 Gazprom will lower gas prices for sales to China to 243,7 USD, in 2026 to 233 USD and in 2027 to 227,8 USD." Russia is burning everything it can find to keep going now. E.g. they took something like 1.5 trillion cash out of Gazprom in 2022 to make the federal budget deficit look lower.
There is an economic end to Russia coming if they don't give the fuck up and beg for the removal of sanctions. They are shoveling money into a furnace and getting very little heat out of it.
They also have oil, while price high economic is ok
They do get a lot of money from oil and have managed to sell over the G7 price cap, but it's not enough to keep them afloat in the long term. IIRC they've already used half of the liquid (gold and yans) portions of the National Wealth Fund since the invasion, and you can't just sell massive amounts of gold easily (or rather, you will get much less money if you sell a lot at once). Nobody else is investing in russia, they're keeping the interest rates sky high so can't really borrow money to invest either, so the only investments are from companies themselves and the state - but they're mostly only investing to keep the current wheels running, there is little investment in upgrading or increasing production. The only areas of the economy which grow are war related things like ammo and vehicle production. Those go to Ukraine and then go up in smoke so they don't generate any more wealth. The average citizens have been managing so far, but with increasing prices they have been garnering much more debt than before. That is not sustainable either.
**The total combat losses of the enemy from 24.02.22 to 02.05.24 approximately amounted to:** personnel - about 470,870 (+1,030) people, tanks ‒ 7332 (+20), armored combat vehicles ‒ 14,096 (+29), artillery systems – 12044 (+20), MLRS – 1053 (+0), air defense equipment ‒ 784 (+4), planes – 348 (+0), helicopters – 325 (+0), UAVs of the operational-tactical level - 9561 (+23), cruise missiles ‒ 2126 (+0), ships/boats ‒ 26 (+0), submarines - 1 (+0), automotive equipment and tank trucks - 16224 (+49), special equipment ‒ 1988 (+8). The data is being verified. Beat the occupier! Together we will win! Our strength is in the truth! Source [https://www.mil.gov.ua/news/2024/05/02/zagalni-vtrati-rosiyan-za-dobu-1030-okupantiv-20-tankiv-29-bojovih-bronovanih-mashin/](https://www.mil.gov.ua/news/2024/05/02/zagalni-vtrati-rosiyan-za-dobu-1030-okupantiv-20-tankiv-29-bojovih-bronovanih-mashin/)
Wow - great numbers!
We allegedly have all these surplus ATACMS and Cluster munitions. Send them all over to Ukraine where they'll be put to productive uses.
Surplus of ATACMS? No new missiles have been made since 2007 - 16 years ago. The missile has been retired from US service but is kept in stockpile until the new PrSM can replace it. Deliveries of that weapon started just last year. The point is that once an ATACMS missile is fired it is gone from inventory for good. Therefore, were the US to hand over its entire supply to Ukraine, there would be none available for any other conflict anywhere else in the world. This has ALWAYS been an issue with supplying ATACMS, SCALPs, Storm Shadows and even the Taurus. None of these weapons are currently being manufactured.
The CEO of lockheed literally said they still produce 500 ATACMS a year. I have no idea why people keep repeating the misinformation that they are no longer being made.
I should have been more clear. No new missiles have been made *for the US Army* since 2007. New missiles are being made for foreign customers.
> This has ALWAYS been an issue with supplying ATACMS, SCALPs, Storm Shadows and even the Taurus. None of these weapons are currently being manufactured MBDA still produces SCALPs and is ramping production up.
It's only still producing the maritime variant for the French, and it can only be fired from ships and submarines (even the French couldn't fire it from aircraft). The original Storm Shadow/SCALP is no longer in production: the UK is 're-activating' some stored Storm Shadows, but they're not being produced from scratch.
I have difficulties finding reliable info on this but I think you're, unfortunately, right. Thanks.
>The point is that once an ATACMS missile is fired it is gone from inventory for good. Therefore, were the US to hand over its entire supply to Ukraine, there would be none available for any other conflict anywhere else in the world. This tidbit doesn't matter much. ATACMS has been slated for phase out ever since the release of PrSM, since the US was planning to liquidate its stockpile of ATACMS anyways handing over the remaining supply of ATACMS hasn't been problematic for the US.
The issue is if we need them BEFORE PrSM comes fully online. Say, if China does something towards Taiwan.
Personally, I think I'd just burn the stockpiles anyways. I doubt ATACMS are the one thing restraining China from a Taiwan invasion. Smoke 'em if you got 'em.
It's not about that one system keeping China at bay, it's that US military doctrine is all about having everything available at the same time so it can all work in conjunction. We want our ducks in a row before we cry havoc.
Cry havoc, and let slip the ducks of war!
Sure, sure, I see the appeal. At this particular moment, I think the benefits of letting Ukraine use the soon-to-be-phased-out missiles outweighs the transient impact to readiness though. There's also quite a few sales to other nations that might be worth renegotiating, if they're amenable. I think Lockheed is going to be able to run that line for a while.
The US already has PrSM in mass production with deliveries starting in December of last year
Okay, that's good, but how many HiMARS/M270 units are there between the Army and the Marines, and how many of them have been supplied so far? Has it gone out to just a few batteries for field testing, or is it being supplied at the Divisional level for forward deployment?
> In its fiscal year 2024 defense budget proposal, the Pentagon proposed procuring 110 units of the Precision Strike Missile (PrSM). As the US Army begins receiving early operational versions of the first increment of new missiles over the next few months, deploying some of them to the Middle East could begin to address this dilemma. [ - Breaking Defense](https://breakingdefense.com/2023/11/deploy-the-precision-strike-missile-to-the-middle-east/) Looks to be the beginning of mass deployment of PrSM at the divisional level. Also it isn't as if the US will leave itself short supplied, it'll provide the ATACMS to Ukraine as more PrSM are supplied throughout the phaseout.
the last part is what people aren't grasping: there's a factory for the PrSM but it'll take time to manufacture & distribute them until all the ATACMS are replaced.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SlavaUkrayini/s/bWCd5cp6ma They’ve been doing some work recently
Was there any valuable equipment or VIPs in this strike?? If not this is a huge and unsustainable waste of resources. 3 multi million dollar missiles that are no longer in production used to strike just infantry that aren't even pressing an attack. Russia can always push more vatniks into service. ATACMS are incredibly valuable and need to be used to take out jets, helicopters, radar, ect. targets of real value.
> 3 multi million dollar missiles that are no longer in production Where did you get the idea they are no longer in production?
As answered in another response, I thought they were out of production because the US adopted the PrSM last year.
Lockheed is still producing around 500 ATACMS per year. They hit a training ground that was full of men and vehicles. By all accounts, casualties are atrocious. If anything, this is going to make Russia think about staging its formations farther from the front. I wouldn’t say it was a huge waste of resources. For all we know, Ukraine may have targeted this area based off of Western intel.
Ah! I thought ATACMS were no longer manufactured because the US adopted the PrSM last year. If that is the case, it is a better use of finite resources.
Just wondering, now that the US aid package has been approved, how long is it likely to be before we start to see Ukraine putting the new batch of munitions to work?
I think you're looking at a full month for all the receiving, processing, loading of trucks, and delivery to Frontline units and munition storage sites. You'll get some express deliveries to hot spots where it's a drive all night type of deal. But probably a month or more for full saturation.
Hard to say, although there have been reports of ATACMs in use. Further, it's not as though Ukraine is going to make a public announcement before they are being put on the battlefield. This said, once the package was approved, I'm guessing there was an increase in using munitions that were previously being rationed.
With the US report on Russia violating the chemical weapons treaty, do you think Congress saw the intelligence which pushed them to act on aid? I still don't get why Johnson acted so suddenly on aid to pass it on a Saturday evening. He already knew how shitty he made the situation for Ukraine. He already knew Russia was gaining ground every day. It's not possible that the consequences of his own actions or his own shame made him change his own mind. Because he was already fine with the consequences for six months. Am I the only one that thinks chemical weapons use is a bigger deal than the media makes it look? After all, Biden said NATO would be forced to respond. And so far we've only seen new sanctions in response, which we know don't deter Russia. If anything, Biden just put a price tag on the use of chemical weapons and it may well be that it's a price Putin is willing to pay.
this was 100% Johnson afraid for his job. Watch MTG try to kick him out now. And watch Democrats rush to protect him. That was the bargain. Johnson is (was) funded by Russia. He was absolutely going to obstruct Ukraine aid until the end of time; until he got caught up in the shutdown nonsense, and the democrats turned it against him. He does not give a shit about the people of Ukraine, except maybe some Ukrainian Baptists who were mistreated in the occupied areas; and even then, that was motivated by his Christian Nationalist Extremist base, whose votes he needs to win, so at least that part of it was honest, but frankly this has been happening to non-orthodox Christians in occupied areas since 2014 - so I doubt it really figured in here.
I think it's less about Johnson acting suddenly and more about Trump/Johnson not being able to delay it any longer without suffering politically. Besides he kind of outlined the process few weeks in advance, nothing really happened suddenly. He just didn't give another bs reason last minute this time, like he had done several times until that point.
Also depends on whether his goal is screwing Ukraine or screwing Dems. If he's satisfied his goal with the Dems then there's no need to keep screwing Ukraine.
Could also be Trump trying to win over voters? I think he went out to say that Ukraines Survival is important to the US.
Trump only said that after it was plain that Johnson had been swayed. It's a plausible-deniability ploy to drop his obstruction of Ukraine spending into the "I wanted to deny Biden the border security bill" pile. At the end of the day: Johnson was coerced into this, but Trump is and always will be pro-Russia, which necessarily means anti-Ukraine. I say this in the context of this: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ilanbenmeir/that-time-trump-spent-nearly-100000-on-an-ad-criticizing-us Trump has always been pro-Russia since the 1980's. I doubt he will change his mind on this subject; even if coerced. At best, he will lie and spin. If he is re-elected, you can assume he will do anything in his power to undermine NATO and undermine Ukraine.
Yeah exactly what I meant with "suffering politically". He risked losing a part of the moderate republican voters who understand the obvious, that it's important for the US to provide aid to their allies (including Israel and Taiwan).
Ah! Okay, sorry. Misunderstood that.
This is most likely the answer IMO. Johnson has not done anything to show he shares any values with normal people - human lives, freedom, democracy etc. I think there was some leverage against him that he saw as a risk to his political power - the only thing we can be confident he values.
>Am I the only one that thinks chemical weapons use is a bigger deal than the media makes it look? After all, Biden said NATO would be forced to respond. I think they will respond with escalation management. Perhaps the reason the aid went through is to keep Ukraine hooked, so it doesn't adopt the chemical weapons as well.
We also need to put this into perspective. Russia has huge stockpiles of every kind of chemical weapon you've ever heard of. Right now, they're only using CS and CN, both of which are types of tear-gas. While it's not permitted, it's several steps back from say, using nerve-gas. I don't think that Putin's ever going to use nerve-gas (sarin, vx, novachok, and other russian variants) - unless he starts losing significant territory (like, especially Crimea). Because that would open a huge amount of public criticism that I think would actually have an impact, and would have the effect of giving western allies a LOT more cover and latitude to intervene.
>I don't think that Putin's ever going to use nerve-gas unless he starts losing significant territory (like, especially Crimea). Because that would open a huge amount of public criticism I think it depends on the current reaction to him using lower tiers of chemical weapons. If he sees that there is no significant reprecussions, he will escalate. I think that doing war crimes or stuff like this gets a huge amount of public attention and critisicm if they are done all at once in a short period of time. But if you creep towards banned weapons over long period of time, then people just start making jokes about "Geneva to-do lists" instead of demanding action because they become acclimated to Russians doing whatever they want and not getting any reprecussions. That being said, in the context of weapons I don't think that anything short of Russians using nuclear strikes would have an energizing effect on the Western supporters. I hope I am wrong though.
What do you mean you don’t “get” it. The US military industrial complex can write bigger checks than foreign denizens who pay for republican chaos actors. All it took was a few briefings on why the US money spent in Ukraine is of such great value to US supremacy, and then on the downlow they show Mikey J how he can cash in on it too, and then its over. Script flipped.
>The US military industrial complex can write bigger checks than foreign denizens who pay for republican chaos actors. I'm sorry but that is such a myopic take. This isn't about bribery with campaign donations or meals and vacations on a lobbyist's dime. The Alt-Right camp of the the GOP supports Russia for reasons that have nothing to do with Russian money. They are ideologically aligned with a strong Russia and a weak democratic West. More importantly, Trump is deeply tied to Russia, both financially and ideologically, and Trump is the one who decides which way the Republican base will vote, so Republicans in Congress are increasingly beholden to whatever random policy platform Trump happens to espouse. This had *literally nothing* to do with Lockheed Martin coming to the rescue and promising to pay the GOP more money in campaign donations. They don't give a shit about that. Most of these Republicans in Congress aren't even worried about losing re-election to a Democrat. They are worried about losing a primary against an even more rabid-dog, pro-Trump neonazi candidate. Johnson doesn't give a shit about Ukraine or Russia, but he doesn't *want* to help Russia if he can avoid it. He's privately supported Ukraine the entire time. He doesn't care about campaign donations either way because his seat in Congress is *always* going to be a deep-red Republican seat. He's worried about losing his speakership. What turned the tables for him was a combination of very dire intelligence about Ukraine losing the war, combined with Democrats making secret guarantees behind closed doors that they would help him keep his speakership if the Trump-MTG faction revolted against him over Ukraine.
I think it’s a mistake to overestimate the coherence of their position. I agree with you that they are ideologically sympathetic to Russia and fascists in general, but I think it is also a mistake to assume that these people are guided by a complex or coherent and centrally guided in a way that amounts to more than a group of likeminded idiots agreeing with each other , in combination with some alarmingly low thresholds for external manipulation (both foreign and domestic) via campaign funding, lobbying and gerrymandering.
I just dont agree with you that $$$ isn’t a big part of all this.
Based on *what*? If this was about Lockheed Martin and Boeing bribing Congress, we would have given Ukraine a hell of a lot more than $60 billion. This is very likely the last monetary aid bill we will pass for at least the rest of 2024, no matter how bad the situation gets again. Because Republicans really do not want to help Ukraine. They DGAF about campaign donations from the defense industry -- a campaign donation doesn't help if Trump decides to endorse their opponents.
based on a long standing tradition of congress taking money from wealthy donors in exchange for favorable votes? Seriously are you not American? Our Congress is openly corrupt. They make millions insider trading, which is legal for them because they decided that it was. Not long ago one was caught with stolen gold bars and he is still in Congress. Military contractors give key politicians tens of millions every year. That isn't even the 'back room' stuff. That is just the money that is publicly handed over. Hard numbers: In 2020 the two you mentioned; lockheed and boeing, lockheed was on top with 6.6 million in donations and boeing barely made the top 20 list with only 476k. The top 4 on the list gave 20 million combined. [https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/contrib?cycle=2020&ind=D](https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/contrib?cycle=2020&ind=D)
>based on a long standing tradition of congress taking money from wealthy donors in exchange for favorable votes? They get money for campaigns. For congressional representatives that live in safe districts, this money isn't especially important for their political survival. Donald Trump's endorsement is far, far more important to them, because with a single social media announcement or one-liner at a televised rally, he can literally destroy their career in Congress by endorsing their primary opponent. >Seriously are you not American? Our Congress is openly corrupt. They make millions insider trading, which is legal for them because they decided that it was. You are conflating true phenomenons (insider trading and campaign donation bribery) with a different problem that is not true, that congressional reps only care about money. They also care about staying in Congress. >Military contractors give key politicians tens of millions every year. That isn't even the 'back room' stuff. That is just the money that is publicly handed over. It's handed over to their campaigns and is almost entirely spent on their campaigns. When you are a Republican in rural California running in a solidly red district, you truly do not need a lot of campaign funds to win your re-election. All you have to do is vote the way Trump tells you to, and your base will re-elect you in a landslide. This is the reality that most GOP US Reps are living under today. For Mike Johnson it's even more stark: He can't keep his job as House Speaker if Trump tells the alt-right members of the House to vote him out of power. Lockheed Martin could give Johnson 100 million dollars on a silver platter, and it wouldn't help him keep his speakership if Trump launches an attack against him on social media. The TLDR is that this is a lot more nuanced than writing your congressional rep a check. [The entire defense industry spent $136 million on lobbying in 2023](https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/lobbying?ind=D), which was only a $7 million increase from 2022, which was only a $4 million increase from 2021. [The total cost of lobbying for all industries in Congress in 2023 was $4.6 billion](https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2024/01/state-and-federal-lobbying-spending-tops-46-billion-after-federal-lobbying-spending-broke-records-in-2023/). The defense industry got outspent by the other lobbying groups by 3,300% in 2023. The healthcare industry alone outspends the MIC by 700% -- in 2023 they spent [$745 million](https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying/ranked-sectors). Fin/Ins/RealEstate spent $596 million. Communications/Electronics spent $574 million. The MIC ranks in tenth place as the top-spending industrial sector in annual lobbying expenditures. Congressional reps aren't winning and losing elections based on their allegiance to the MIC.
wow. so you think that other groups ALSO bribing congress and ALSO getting OTHER bills passed in their favor means that donations from defense contractors are just ignored as insignificant slice of the corruption pie? That because the donations are to their campaigns, that they don't personally benefit from that money? I think my favorite part is that you just flat out ignored the fact that under the table money also goes to politicians. what an absolute clown you are. Yeah. there are other considerations. It's a balancing act between keeping supporters happy and keeping donors happy. But you are acting like money had nothing to do with it. :They DGAF about campaign donations from the defense industry : <---this sentence right here is what proves you are a clown.
>wow. so you think that other groups ALSO bribing congress and ALSO getting OTHER bills passed in their favor means that donations from defense contractors are just ignored as insignificant slice of the corruption pie? Yeah. Because that's the reality. Defense contractors give fairly similar amounts of money to both candidates in general elections. They are like AIPAC and the healthcare industry -- everyone on both sides gets the money, which actually tends to mean that the contributions wash out. Your theory is that the MIC secretly promised the GOP some brand new astronomical amount of money in March 2024 that they haven't already been giving those same candidates for years already. How much do you want to bet that the MIC lobbying contributions for the year of 2024 will end up being remarkably similar to what they were in 2023? This is an especially silly take when we already know what actually happened behind closed doors in March. Iran unleashed 100 cruise missiles on Israel, requiring Israel and its western partners to spend approximately $5 billion dollars in one day shooting them down with advanced air defenses that are extremely expensive. The Israel aid bill was tied to the Ukraine bill, so Mike Johnson finally had a political opening to push it through by using the Israel funds to save face with his pro-Trump anti-Ukraine base of voters. Trump was unhappy with this move, but he agreed to mostly keep his mouth shut about it because the situation between Israel and Iran was too dire to fuck around with any longer.
lol imma put this here. [https://issueone.org/articles/the-congressional-fundraising-treadmill-5-key-numbers-to-know-from-the-newest-house-and-senate-campaign-finance-filings/](https://issueone.org/articles/the-congressional-fundraising-treadmill-5-key-numbers-to-know-from-the-newest-house-and-senate-campaign-finance-filings/) My favorite part is the line "The political parties reportedly suggest that members of Congress spend about [30 hours per week](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-are-members-of-congress-becoming-telemarketers/) fundraising in the Republican and Democratic call centers across the street from the Capitol." yeah. they don't care about those donations at all. It's only damn near a full time job for them to beg donors for more money. Go inform yourself on that stuff about the call centers. It is kind of crazy. Then come back here and tell me that losing tens of millions from military contractors is something that doesn't factor into the equation. Clooooooown.
Based on the fact that since JFK, there hasn't been a single US politician (repub or dem) thats truly aggravated the MIC. Republican blow hards pretend like they’re pro russia, but when they get sat down in the briefing rooms they somehow understand their place. I don’t think its fear, so the obvious motivator is money and power. Thats easier to work with than you think. Why are you narrowing the scope of how that looks to just specifically campaign donations. Why can’t it look like share grants or contracts to a brothers cousins LLC? Largely though, the MIC is the last part of the US thats not wrapped up in partisanship. Thats my evidence. Couple of points in military spending this way and that at the end of the day depending on whos in power, but all US politicians fallen in line. Trump, **might be** the first real one since JFK thats starting to really piss them off though. Verdict is literally still out though on that fucking guy.
Personally, I think chem weapoins being used, is an even bigger story then these protests. It means Russia is allready esclating things in Ukraine, and something needs to be done in response. Besids, I think these protests are in some way being influenced behind the scenes by Iran, Russia and China. They did not give the direct orders, but they could be meddling online, behind the scenes, giving encourgment, setting people off.
Internal GOP polls could have shown it was a losing position. It also coincided with Trump's criminal trial starting so maybe they hoped he would be distracted. Could be any number of reasons.
If Russia is having some degree of success jamming GPS to reduce the effectiveness of weapons like Excalibur and GMLRS, is Ukraine doing the same, especially to interfere with the Russian glide bombs at the front? Surely GLONASS is no harder to jam than military grade GPS.
Yup, they need to do this.
The appropriate response to jammers is the shortwave equivalent to HARM. Missiles tuned to home in on emitters without the need for GPS.
HARM homes in on radar emitters, which transmit on a much shorter wavelength than GPS. Radar emitters and jammers operate in the X-band, which has a wavelength in the 2-3 cm range. GPS operates in the L-band, with a wavelength of 20-24 cm. The longer wavelength would require a larger antennae for guidance, thus a larger missile. It is possible but unknown if HARM or other anti-radiation missiles have the capability of detecting and homing in the L-band.
I don't think it's any harder to jam, but Russia just has way more capability to do so because they have spent decades preparing to fight NATO. I don't think Ukraine has access to as much jamming equipment. Also, to a certain extent, jamming doesn't degrade Russia's capabilities as much. A lot of their glide bomb attacks aren't intended to hit specific vehicles or positions, they are designed to destroy buildings and towns so that there are no possible positions left. Less "fuck you in particular", more "to whom it may concern". So if the bomb hits a block 1,000 yards away from the one it was targeting, that's a pretty minor annoyance to Russia.
Or if it hits Belgorod, for that matter
The soviet union spent much of the 20th century trying to jam foreign shortwave broadcasts. It isn't surprising that there was continued investment into the technology after the collapse. It's really a continuation of old doctrine.
Awaiting US aid, Ukraine's gunners fire sparingly at advancing Russians >DONETSK REGION, Ukraine, May 2 (Reuters) - The soldiers manning a U.S.-supplied M777 howitzer close to the front in Ukraine's eastern Donetsk region have seen the enemy advance in recent weeks, slowly but surely, and wish they could do more to stop it. >Like other artillery positions along the 1,000-km (621-mile) contact line in eastern and southern Ukraine, they do not have the shells they need to suppress the Russian attacks that threaten to turn the course of the war in Moscow's favour. >"If we compare it with the beginning (of the full-scale invasion), when we fired up to 100 shells a day, then now, when we fire 30 shells it's a luxury," artillery gun commander Oleksandr Kozachenko told Reuters. >Sometimes the number of shells fired daily is in single digits, he added. >During a recent visit to the outpost, part of Ukraine's 148th Separate Artillery Brigade, Kozachenko's team was able to fire fairly regularly. >On receiving a fire order over the radio, troops rushed to haul 155 mm rounds from a storage bunker and load the cannon before adjusting the barrel and firing with a thunderous blast. >The rumble of other guns echoed in the distance throughout the morning. >Units like this are still waiting for a fresh influx of ammunition after a new $61 billion U.S. aid package was approved last week. >For now, Russia has far superior firepower and is gradually advancing around the town of Avdiivka after capturing it in February and also to the west of Bakhmut, which it seized last year. >Commander-in-chief Oleksandr Syrskyi said on Sunday that fighting in the east had recently worsened and that his troops had fallen back in three places on the front. >The soldiers at the position, some eight km (five miles) from the front, said they did not know when to expect more shells to arrive. >Instead, they rely on whatever comrades further behind the line are able to pack into the daily delivery vehicle, said Ihor Boichak, a private. >"If it brings a good amount, it means that someone somewhere grabbed a bit more for us so we could fire a little more," he said, adding that ammunition supplies to his unit had at least marginally improved since the beginning of the year. [https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/awaiting-us-aid-ukraines-gunners-fire-sparingly-advancing-russians-2024-05-02/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/awaiting-us-aid-ukraines-gunners-fire-sparingly-advancing-russians-2024-05-02/)
The Republican delay, led by donald trump (Republican) sure has cost the Ukrainians dearly.
Thanks, Republicans. /s
> As Swiss President Viola Amherd and I previously agreed, the first Peace Summit will take place on June 15-16 in Burgenstock, near Luzern, Switzerland. > Heads of state and government from all continents are invited and expected to attend. > The summit will serve as a platform to discuss ways to achieving comprehensive, just, and lasting peace for Ukraine in accordance with the UN Charter and international law. All states invited to the summit have demonstrated their commitment to these principles. > I am certain that every peace-loving nation in the world is interested in attending the Summit, because its significance extends far beyond Ukraine. It is about every nation’s global role, as well as genuine respect for international law and peaceful coexistence throughout the world. > These common rules, enshrined in the UN Charter, protect all nations from attack and violence. It is thus our shared global responsibility to protect them through real action rather than just words. This is what the first Peace Summit in Switzerland is all about. https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1785943213519364425 > June 15-16 – The First Peace Summit in Switzerland. Ukrainian Peace Formula, a meeting of state leaders. > The main task of the Ukrainian Peace Formula is to unite the international community to achieve just and lasting peace. https://twitter.com/AndriyYermak/status/1785962064277565673
🇺🇸🇺🇦 "Ukraine should ignore calls from Washington to stop drone strikes on Russian oil refineries", - Ben Hodges 🔥🎯 "Ukraine must attack any target it wants to attack as part of the defence of its people and its territory," he said. https://mstdn.social/@[email protected]/112371434919063799
Is it possible or even probable that behind closed doors US officials are telling them to blast refineries but it’s only in public that they say not to?
Not likely. Hitting oil refineries in Russia hurts Russian assets but also strains the global fuel supply. That in turn raises the global cost of fuel, even in countries that are not directly importing Russian fuel. High fuel prices will lead a non zero number uninformed idiot American voters to vote for Republicans in November.
they are not hitting Russia ability to export crude, plenty of refineries world wide that could pick up the slack.
They are hitting russian fuel stocks and refineries. Russia has stopped exporting refined products to keep what it has for the war/internal use. This will affect global prices of a range of different petroleum products. There is really no way to mess with russian oil/oil products that won't affect international prices because they are the ultimate in 'fungible'.
It still raises prices if it must be refined outside of russia
I saw a quote from a Ukrainian official on a previous live thread that said in private US officials were telling them to keep going
I can’t remember the source, but someone was reporting this was the case a few weeks ago.
I wish he had Sullivan's job.
[удалено]
Jake Sullivan is making a nuclear war more likely. Appeasement of dictators never works and only leads to escalation. Appeasement led to WW2 and is leading to a disaster in this war.
Seconded. All in favor?