Russian invasion of Ukraine

[Draco-Onis]

Russia is being unethical by engaging in conquest but that doesn't mean they are terrorists who are trying to reduce Ukraine's civilian population. That's a bit over the top, imo.

They are purposely bombing civilian targets, what do you think bombs do?

[Shadowferal]

Russia is being unethical by engaging in conquest but that doesn't mean they are terrorists who are trying to reduce Ukraine's civilian population. That's a bit over the top, imo.

Are you wrong...again? Did you stop to think twice about what you're posting? It doesn't appear that way.

[Poopymonster]

Oh shit. It's on now.

[Breccia]

Russian oil isn't sanctioned yet, but it may as well be. Nobody wants it.

Oil supply was failing to keep up with demand long before Russia's invasion of Ukraine last week. The market is in no position to lose any barrels from Russia, the world's No. 2 producer of crude oil last year, yet that is exactly what has happened.

An estimated 4.3 million barrels per day of Russian oil is "missing from the market because Western buyers are refusing to buy it," JPMorgan head of global commodities Natasha Kaneva told Alison Kosik on CNN Business Markets Now Wednesday.

"It's increasingly clear that the Russian [oil] volumes are being ostracized," Kaneva said. "We are experiencing a shortage at the moment."

Industry analysts point to the de facto ban on Russian oil as a central catalyst behind the latest price spike.

"It's definitely crimping supply — at a time when supply does not need to be crimped," said Tom Kloza, global head of energy analysis for the Oil Price Information Service.

One of the biggest problems is that refiners are refusing to buy Russian oil. Lipow said refiners in the United States, Finland, Sweden and elsewhere are shying away from Russian barrels.

The same situation is playing out with energy trading companies. For example, Lipow said one such company offered a cargo of Russian crude oil for sale — at a huge discount of $18.60 below Brent, instead of the slight discount typically offered before the invasion. There have been no buyers.

At the same time, many banks are declining to provide the financing typically involved in buying oil. Lipow said banks including Credit Suisse, Societe Generale, ING, Rabobank and Bank of China are refusing to extend credit to anyone wanting to finance the purchase of Russian oil.

Some tankers are even refusing to load anything at all at Russian ports or carry Russian oil. The United Kingdom, Canada and other countries have banned Russian tankers.

"No buyers plus no credit plus no tankers equals no Russian oil and higher gasoline and diesel prices," Lipow wrote in a note to clients Thursday.

Will this hurt at the pump? Yes. Will it hurt Russia more? Da.

[Edge-]

Oh shit. It's on now.

Those poor cats don't deserve this, they can't even vote.

[StillMcfuu]

You say that's lame but I like their bravery. If there's tens of millions of people like them then they could make a difference.


That doesn't matter when the topic is about defending civilization.

They aren't brave, they are stupid, doing something they scarcely understand for ass-pats.

[Shadowferal]

We got some "Oath Keepers" we could ship out. Only stipulation is that they can't come back and they should stay in...Russia.

[Rasulis]

Russian oil isn't sanctioned yet, but it may as well be. Nobody wants it.



Will this hurt at the pump? Yes. Will it hurt Russia more? Da.

Even the Bank of China. The threat of Secondary Sanction is very powerful. Lenovo would rather get called names by Chinese netizens than export computers to Russia. Name calling may hurt feelings. Getting access to AMD and Intel chips cut off will bankrupt them. Didi still hasn't figured out how to restore services in Russia without access to electronic payment.

[Barzotti]

I thought Brexit was the biggest case of a country shooting himself in the foot with a bazooka for inane reasons in the recent history. Boy was I wrong. Putin has decided to condemn his country to death for outdated imperialism.

[Mihalik]

Oh shit. It's on now.

By Monday North Korea will have better global economic, political and cultural relations than Russia.

So if North Korea is the Hermit State...will Russia be the Hermiter State, the Hermitest State?

- - - Updated - - -

I thought Brexit was the biggest case of a country shooting himself in the foot with a bazooka for inane reasons in the recent history. Boy was I wrong. Putin has decided to condemn his country to death for outdated imperialism.

The 21st century...The first 22 years have been remarkably similar to the first 22 years of the 20th century. The death toll is lower...but the similarities are fucking eerie.

History isn't quite repeating itself, but it sure as shit rhymes.

[Rasulis]

By Monday North Korea will have better global economic, political and cultural relations than Russia.

So if North Korea is the Hermit State...will Russia be the Hermiter State, the Hermitest State?

Quoting Tim Mullaney.

Russia economy is the equivalent of US economy consisting of Exxon Mobil at the top, and the next biggest company being Kingsford, proud enabler of backyard barbecues since 1920. Kingsford isn’t even a company – it’s a division of Clorox, accounting for a whopping 9 percent of Clorox’s revenue. To be slightly fair, Russia sells a lot more charcoal briquettes than Kingsford does, but really. No Google or Facebook, no Amazon or Apple, no Home Depot or Wal-Mart, no Intel or AMD – you get the picture.

Or to quote the late Senator John McCain, "Russia is a gas station masquerading as a superpower."

[Jastall]

I thought Brexit was the biggest case of a country shooting himself in the foot with a bazooka for inane reasons in the recent history. Boy was I wrong. Putin has decided to condemn his country to death for outdated imperialism.

I wouldn't go so far as to claim Russia's on its deathbed anytime soon, but yeah it's hard to see a great outcome for it now. Of course militarily they'll win in Ukraine, but after how long and at what cost, both internally and externally? And what, to inherit a country that increasingly seems like it'll have damaged infrastructure and a persistent partisan problem due to a population motivated to resist and invaders with low morale across the board?

If Putin's objective was increasing internal stability, he's done the opposite. If it was to scare off his other neighbors, he's doing it too well and they're now flirting with NATO more than ever before. If it was to prop up Russia's economy via seizing Ukrainian resources and eliminating competition, again he seems to have done the opposite for at least the medium term as it'll take a long ass time for Russia to actually benefit from its new colony, if it ever does, with mounting costs in the meantime.

[Mihalik]

If it was to scare off his other neighbors, he's doing it too well and they're now flirting with NATO more than ever before. I

Putin has single handed done more to revitalize and motivate NATO in the history of the organization than anyone and anything else since WW2, he also comes a close second after Osama Bin Laden for propping up the US military industrial complex.

The CEOs of Raytheon etc must have jizzed themselves the moment Putin sent his troops across the border. That's why Boeing gleefully cancelled all their Russian contracts...they are literally laughing themselves to the bank in defense contracts now.

[Easo]

So the second round of talks ended and... nothing, really. Aside from possible ceasefire to allow civilians to leave via humanitarian corridors (Mariupol as the primary target, no doubt).
Honestly, that is not exactly great.

Putin finally gave speech and invasion is "going according to plan and timetables". I have a feeling he is in until the end, because there is no way back for him.

Sometimes, it's the little things.

The mayor of Vilnius has renamed the street on which the the Russian embassy is located.

It's stupid and petty. Still, I like it.

Jesus Christ, can you stop embarrassing yourself already....


https://www.jpost.com/international/article-698895

Since when do we count some general news journalist's editorial without any analysis and without any statistics a proof of something? You seem to be jumping around trying to find the "proof".

Armour in general has been out of date since Hellfire and TOW missiles, which have been kicking around for decades as well.

They’re using T-84s, insofar as tanks go, it’s not that those are bad. It’s just tanks themselves just aren’t what they were and why most of NATO has moved away from using massed numbers of them.

It’s kind of interesting though how effective the AAA has been, the idea that helicopter gunships are ‘better tanks’ hasn’t worked for Russia either, since their air losses haven’t been sustainable either with them ceding air supremacy and leaving it contested.

Infantry with various kinds of missile launchers is a weird kind of future.

Ah yes, armor is out of date. Yet all major players keep working on new and upgraded tanks.

T-84's? I suggest you research that model, first. The chance of it appearing in this war is basically zero. Unless Ukrainians drag the 1 or 2 prototypes out of storage.

Infantry with missile launchers is not going to be the future, unless you want them unprotected from artillery strikes and moving very slowly without mechanized vehicles aka armor, from APC's to MBT"s.

(hint: 5 days later, they still haven't really entered that region)

Hint: south is gone, south-west looks to have little in way of solid Ukrainian forces, north-east is looking fucked and Donbas frontline consists of Ukrainians slowly pushed/retreating towards Dnipr. So if Ukraine holds Kiev for another week, does it matter if rest of the country is gone? Glorious last stands in capital are for movies.

I'm sorry, but how do you see that happening without occupation and counter-insurgency? You think installing a puppet government is as simple as changing a hat?

You go on and on about people being naive about the reality of a protracted invasion and troop movements and increasing Russian brutality. Then asked about end goals and you trot out this overly simple idea that the country just changes hands when they reach their destination? Now you sound like the naive one.

Ukraine has about half a million military personnel. They are actively and passionately fighting the Russians. You think they will all just bow to Putin, after Russia has invaded their country, bombed their cities, killed their neighbors? You think it will easily change hands to some separatist groups and everyone will fall in line, and Russians can return home?

Be realistic, how long do you think Russian troops will have to remain in Ukraine as "peacekeepers" after the invasion? You don't want to compare it to Afghanistan? Fine, how about Iraq? It took a month to capture Baghdad, effectively 2 years to install a pro-US government, and 8 years of counter-insurgency operations.

Most people won't care who is in charge, as long as they are fed and goverment leaves them alone. This "PARTISANS!" hype is overrated. You forget that eastern half of the country will be much easier to control as well. "Republics", remember?

[DarkTZeratul]

I wouldn't go so far as to claim Russia's on its deathbed anytime soon, but yeah it's hard to see a great outcome for it now. Of course militarily they'll win in Ukraine, but after how long and at what cost, both internally and externally? And what, to inherit a country that increasingly seems like it'll have damaged infrastructure and a persistent partisan problem due to a population motivated to resist and invaders with low morale across the board?

If Putin's objective was increasing internal stability, he's done the opposite. If it was to scare off his other neighbors, he's doing it too well and they're now flirting with NATO more than ever before. If it was to prop up Russia's economy via seizing Ukrainian resources and eliminating competition, again he seems to have done the opposite for at least the medium term as it'll take a long ass time for Russia to actually benefit from its new colony, if it ever does, with mounting costs in the meantime.

Back when the invasion first started, I asked myself what Putin could possibly be trying to achieve. I've seen some answers, but none of them seemed like they were realistically viable for reasons that your post has made all too clear.

[Elegiac]

Most people won't care who is in charge, as long as they are fed and goverment leaves them alone.

Which, given Russia historical treatment of Ukraine and current stated goals as per Putain's little Nuremberg redux, is far from a given.

It's also a pretty silly thing to say when one of the main reasons this entire circus is happening is because Ukrainians already pushed out a puppet government, and that wasn't with the sheer level of material support that they're likely to continue to receive from the West despite what the Putinista trolls like to say about Euromaidan being a Western-backed coup.

[PhaelixWW]

A 3D-chess move to bankrupt the Ukrainian government and flood them with refugees? Plus adding even more Russian speaking civilians to be "protected"?

Except the gear/vehicles that the surrendering soldiers would bring with them would be worth far more than the "signing bonus" Ukraine is offering. A win/win for Ukraine.

Oh shit. It's on meow.

FTFY.

[Shadowferal]

Back when the invasion first started, I asked myself what Putin could possibly be trying to achieve. I've seen some answers, but none of them seemed like they were realistically viable for reasons that your post has made all too clear.

One of my first posts I said something similar; That said, I find the situation baffling. I don't believe we're seeing the big picture.

I concede that the big picture was likely all in Putin's imagination.

[Makabreska]

One of my first posts I said something similar; That said, I find the situation baffling. I don't believe we're seeing the big picture.

I concede that the big picture was likely all in Putin's imagination.

I mean, he took Crimea for free, he calculated he could repeat it with entire Ukraine. Boy was he bad at math.

[Easo]

Which, given Russia historical treatment of Ukraine and current stated goals as per Putain's little Nuremberg redux, is far from a given.

It's also a pretty silly thing to say when one of the main reasons this entire circus is happening is because Ukrainians already pushed out a puppet government, and that wasn't with the sheer level of material support that they're likely to continue to receive from the West despite what the Putinista trolls like to say about Euromaidan being a Western-backed coup.

This is Ukraine, it is different. No one is really going to touch Ukrainians and they are highly unlikely to actually go hungry. I have fears regarding militia from "republics", though. There will be excesses from them for sure.