Russia Invades Ukraine. Volume 5

[jtremlett]

EddieSteadyGo said:

jtremlett said:

...
The Ukrainians know that they cannot agree to any kind of deal with Russia that, for example, cedes territory in return for peace because they know the Russians will just come back for more later.
...

Sorry for quoting a specific element of your post, but I see this statement repeated again and again.

I would argue it differently. Firstly, let's assume states are less interested in right vs wrong, and good vs evil, but more interested in their own national interests. There are enough examples from around the world of us getting cosy any with number of vile dictators, if it suits us, for this not to be contentious (even if it is unpalatable).

Secondly, deals get don't last if one side doesn't think it is fair on them, or doesn't suit them any longer. Deals which are inherently unbalanced can therefore not be expected to last. That is the same in work/business as it is in geopolitics.

Thirdly, whilst you don't trust Russia, I would argue that equally they don't trust you (not you personally, but 'you' as the Western world).

I don't disagree with what you say but I think the point is essentially the same. Which is to say that whilst the Ukrainians might negotiate with Putin, however unpalatable that may seem, it is difficult to conceive of any kind of deal that would actually last.

It is hard to know what Putin really thinks. I wouldn't be surprised if he assumes that we (as in the Western world) think like him and, therefore, can't be trusted to abide by any deal. In any case, those who would have to abide by it would be primarily Russians and Ukrainians and they may well be right not to trust one another. Ultimately, there will be different leaders in Russia and Ukraine who may very well have different views to their predecessors.

pingu393 said:

When was the last time land taken by an aggressor being kept by the aggressor?

Over what time frame? I suspect part of the answer is that aggressors are never actually satisfied with what they have so there comes a point where they overreach. It is an interesting topic for another thread as to whether there was a point where Hitler, for example, could have said "ok, that's enough" and thus kept what had been gained.

[Oilchange]

A bloody nose for Russia it is then…

[pingu393]

pinchmeimdreamin said:

borcy said:

https://x.com/DefenceU/status/1802671030093353075


I wonder how much bigger these turtle tanks are going to get

And rendering them totally useless as Tanks

It won't be long before we see this in Ukraine. The turret is in Russia at the moment...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer_VIII_Maus

[pingu393]

jtremlett said:

pingu393 said:

When was the last time land taken by an aggressor being kept by the aggressor?

Over what time frame? I suspect part of the answer is that aggressors are never actually satisfied with what they have so there comes a point where they overreach. It is an interesting topic for another thread as to whether there was a point where Hitler, for example, could have said "ok, that's enough" and thus kept what had been gained.

I don't think Hitler ever kept any of the land he captured, as there were no peace treaties or world-wide acceptance of the gains.

I am thinking that it may be northern Finland. It was taken by USSR in 1939-40, there has been peace there since 1945, and it is acknowledged by the UN as part of Russia.

[isaldiri]

jtremlett said:

I don't disagree with what you say but I think the point is essentially the same. Which is to say that whilst the Ukrainians might negotiate with Putin, however unpalatable that may seem, it is difficult to conceive of any kind of deal that would actually last.

It is hard to know what Putin really thinks. I wouldn't be surprised if he assumes that we (as in the Western world) think like him and, therefore, can't be trusted to abide by any deal. In any case, those who would have to abide by it would be primarily Russians and Ukrainians and they may well be right not to trust one another. Ultimately, there will be different leaders in Russia and Ukraine who may very well have different views to their predecessors.

Neither side would probably particularly be expecting any deal done now to be lasting in a particularly meaningful way or trusts the other side to keep to anything. Short of being able to regime change the other for a clear conclusion one way or the other, when or if both sides think there is no advantage to continue fighting, some kind of negotiation will have to be done to stalemate the whole mess and reduce the intensity of fighting such that the number of losses and attacks over the rest of the country gets down to a more tolerable level - probably along the lines of 2014-2022 spread over a much longer line of conflict as compared to the current unpleasantries.

pingu393 said:

When was the last time land taken by an aggressor being kept by the aggressor?

I suppose most recently, Azerbaijan took over Nagorno Karabakh and purged all the local ethnic armenians only a few years ago. A bit further back, Russia took over south ossetia and abkhazia from georgia. Then obviously Israel had massively extended their pre 1967 borders.

[Evanivitch]

hidetheelephants said:

pinchmeimdreamin said:

borcy said:

https://x.com/DefenceU/status/1802671030093353075


I wonder how much bigger these turtle tanks are going to get

And rendering them totally useless as Tanks

Most of the time they're being used as analogues for WW2 assault guns like the Sturmgeschutz, so the loss of gun traverse is tolerable. Not exactly stealthy though.

Stridsvagn 103 didn't care for a turret, let alone traverse. It was still a bona fide tank, but intended to move between pre-prepared defensive positions.

[ecsrobin]

pingu393 said:

It won't be long before we see this in Ukraine. The turret is in Russia at the moment...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer_VIII_Maus

So that’s why the tank museum have been refurbishing the FV4005 to running order (on working display next week)

(old image)

Makes the Maus’s 128mm gun look small

[paua]

Is the surface rust part of the cammo, so it looks like abandoned machinery prior to farm tractor recovery in a field?

[hidetheelephants]

It's because Bovington have had it sitting outside. It's an abomination.

[ecsrobin]

hidetheelephants said:

It's because Bovington have had it sitting outside. It's an abomination.

Its looking a lot better now

[RichFN2]

isaldiri said:

pingu393 said:

When was the last time land taken by an aggressor being kept by the aggressor?

I suppose most recently, Azerbaijan took over Nagorno Karabakh and purged all the local ethnic armenians only a few years ago. A bit further back, Russia took over south ossetia and abkhazia from georgia. Then obviously Israel had massively extended their pre 1967 borders.

Also add Transnistria and Kaliningrad to that list.

More recently would be Crimea, Luhansk and Donetsk in 2014. Unfortunately I don't see any of those being liberated.

So I don't appear completely anti Russian then the Turkish invasion of Northern Cyprus can also be included.

[sisu]

Considering Putin has installed relatives into his government to stop any insurrection. I would not be looking at long term Russian politics as a goal or 4d chess. This is very short term and within Russia they will be looking at a weak point now.

The idea of sending your 2018 sub to Cuba as a way to agitate the Americans thinking this is the Cuban Missile Crisis again.

Well no need for photos of launchers from 30,000ft. Just Diago in a rib showing panels missing and the rust as you send a diver in to check the bits underwater. Those yachts in Dubai are ok though.


Its going to be a messy summer for Russia both on the battle field and politically at home. The second level of sanctions have bitten and they won't be the last. There is no 1990s rock concert or Techno party in Berlin waiting for Russians after this, no helping hand to pull them out of communism.

[Evanivitch]

sisu said:

Well no need for photos of launchers from 30,000ft. Just Diago in a rib showing panels missing and the rust as you send a diver in to check the bits underwater. Those yachts in Dubai are ok though.

You can't really judge submarines on their aesthetic condition, they often get pretty minging and missing panels aren't unusual. The real test of quality will be how well they've been tracked all across the Atlantic. I'm sure NATO has a good idea.

[isaldiri]

RichFN2 said:

isaldiri said:

pingu393 said:

When was the last time land taken by an aggressor being kept by the aggressor?

I suppose most recently, Azerbaijan took over Nagorno Karabakh and purged all the local ethnic armenians only a few years ago. A bit further back, Russia took over south ossetia and abkhazia from georgia. Then obviously Israel had massively extended their pre 1967 borders.

Also add Transnistria and Kaliningrad to that list.

More recently would be Crimea, Luhansk and Donetsk in 2014. Unfortunately I don't see any of those being liberated.

So I don't appear completely anti Russian then the Turkish invasion of Northern Cyprus can also be included.

You might as well add Turkey's much more recent land grab (albeit not officially recognised but for all intents and purposes it quacks like a duck) in north Syria under the guise of 'crushing the rebel militants' - who were the kurds (ie our allies in the fight against Isis.

[Mannginger]

Evanivitch said:

You can't really judge submarines on their aesthetic condition, they often get pretty minging and missing panels aren't unusual. The real test of quality will be how well they've been tracked all across the Atlantic. I'm sure NATO has a good idea.

Agreed, you definitely can't give them flack for that. Subs get damaged on long tours.

See these pics of a Vanguard coming home last year:

https://www.twz.com/vanguard-submarine-arrives-hom...

[Digga]

sisu said:

There is no 1990s rock concert or Techno party in Berlin waiting for Russians after this...

That re-triggered something I'd pondered a few times since the start of the invasion.

I have watched in awe the size and enthusiasm of concerts in Moscow. Metallica's in 1991 was utterly epic in scale and reception from the fans. This concert, part of the "Monsters of Rock" festival, this concert happened a few months before. the official dissolution of the Soviet Union. Moscow to an exceptional crowd of 1.6 million people. Slightly smaller, but equally well-received were the Prodigy, a few years later.

I cannot square the Russian public's love for Western music, not to mention fashion, cars etc. etc. with the low-level, anti-Western drip of their state propaganda.

[BikeBikeBIke]

Digga said:

That re-triggered something I'd pondered a few times since the start of the invasion.

I have watched in awe the size and enthusiasm of concerts in Moscow. Metallica's in 1991 was utterly epic in scale and reception from the fans. This concert, part of the "Monsters of Rock" festival, this concert happened a few months before. the official dissolution of the Soviet Union. Moscow to an exceptional crowd of 1.6 million people. Slightly smaller, but equally well-received were the Prodigy, a few years later.

I cannot square the Russian public's love for Western music, not to mention fashion, cars etc. etc. with the low-level, anti-Western drip of their state propaganda.

Which extends to the leadership. They claim to despise the west; we're all Nazis and yet they all want they kids to live here.

Vranyo.

[Talksteer]

pingu393 said:

jtremlett said:

pingu393 said:

When was the last time land taken by an aggressor being kept by the aggressor?

Over what time frame? I suspect part of the answer is that aggressors are never actually satisfied with what they have so there comes a point where they overreach. It is an interesting topic for another thread as to whether there was a point where Hitler, for example, could have said "ok, that's enough" and thus kept what had been gained.

I don't think Hitler ever kept any of the land he captured, as there were no peace treaties or world-wide acceptance of the gains.

I am thinking that it may be northern Finland. It was taken by USSR in 1939-40, there has been peace there since 1945, and it is acknowledged by the UN as part of Russia.

Contentious but Israel.....

[pingu393]

Evanivitch said:

sisu said:

Well no need for photos of launchers from 30,000ft. Just Diago in a rib showing panels missing and the rust as you send a diver in to check the bits underwater. Those yachts in Dubai are ok though.

You can't really judge submarines on their aesthetic condition, they often get pretty minging and missing panels aren't unusual. The real test of quality will be how well they've been tracked all across the Atlantic. I'm sure NATO has a good idea.

It would be quite amusing if NATO published the tracked path of the submarine as it crossed the Atlantic.

A photo of it's propeller taken in Cuba would be quite fun, as well.

Photo of the Kiev's propeller taken by a British sub during a Soviet exercise in 1977...

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarshipPorn/comments/1t1j...

[Evanivitch]

pingu393 said:

It would be quite amusing if NATO published the tracked path of the submarine as it crossed the Atlantic.

A photo of it's propeller taken in Cuba would be quite fun, as well.

Photo of the Kiev's propeller taken by a British sub during a Soviet exercise in 1977...

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarshipPorn/comments/1t1j...

Submariners are just trying to sniff each other's butt's!