|
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. |
It appears a game of thrones in Russia has started. With Putin ally Ramzan Kadyrov believing he has been poisoned.
Chechen warlord Ramzan Kadyrov – a close ally of Vladimir Putin – is reported to be seriously ill with kidney problems amid fears of ‘poisoning’.
The fanatical pro-war zealot who has advocated using nuclear weapons against Ukraine is rumoured to have summoned a leading doctor from the United Arab Emirates because he ‘does not trust’ Moscow doctors.
Several opposition sources have claimed kidney illness accounted for Kadyrov’s surprising absence from Putin’s state of the nation speech on 12 February, and a recent ‘bloated’ appearance, as seen at a recent meeting in his palace in Chechen capital Grozny with Denis Pushilin, head of the invaded Donetsk People’s Republic.
The Chechen’s leader’s luxury private jet was known to have made several trips recently to the UAE, and he has been less visible than usual in recent weeks.
While Kadyrov, 46, is one of Putin’s closest allies, the Chechen strongman – reportedly a father of 14 with three current wives – has strongly attacked the running of the war, especially by the Russian defence ministry and certain generals.
The claims suggest Kadyrov may have been poisoned, a fate which reportedly befell his close ally Major-General Apti Alaudinov, 50, last month in an ‘attempted assassination’.
Kazakh journalist Azamat Maytanov citing his own sources claimed Kadyrov may be terminally ill, with poisoning the possible cause.
‘There is information that the chief nephrologist of the UAE, Dr. Yasin Ibrahim El-Shahat, a well-known doctor with 30 years experience, has arrived in Grozny [the capital of Chechnya],’ Maytanov wrote on his Telegram channel.
Source
Ukrainian pilots have arrived in the US for jet training... literally like how it was done albeit in Spain with certain Tanks alongside other training about half a year(?) before the Tank announcements took place.
Two Ukrainian pilots are currently in the United States undergoing an assessment to determine how long it could take to train them to fly attack aircrafts, including F-16 fighter jets, according to two congressional officials and a senior U.S. official.
The Ukrainians’ skills are being evaluated on simulators at a U.S. military base in Tucson, Arizona, the officials said, and they may be joined by more of their fellow pilots soon.
U.S. authorities have approved bringing up to 10 more Ukrainian pilots to the U.S. for further assessment as early as this month, the officials said.
The arrival of the first two pilots marks the first time Ukrainian pilots have traveled to the U.S. to have their skills evaluated by American military trainers. Officials said the effort has twin goals: to improve the pilots’ skills and evaluate how long a proper training program could take.
“The program is about assessing their abilities as pilots so we can better advise them on how to use capabilities they have and we have given them,” an administration official said.
Two administration officials stressed that it isn’t a training program and said that the Ukrainians will not be flying any aircraft during their time in the U.S.
These officials said the pilots will be using a simulator that can mimic flying various types of aircraft, and they emphasized that there are no updates on the U.S. decision to provide F-16’s to Ukraine beyond what the Pentagon’s top policy official said to Congress last week.
The official, Colin Kahl, told the House Armed Services Committee that the U.S. has not made the decision to provide F-16’s and neither had U.S. allies and partners.
Source
|
On March 04 2023 00:19 Oukka wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2023 23:59 Sermokala wrote:
It would depend on whatever the peace deal looks like in the end. Russia will need to "Promise" not to invade Ukraine again at the very least. Meanwhile, the EU will want to be the first in line to rebuild Ukraine and integrate it into the EU, doing that means EU membership. Ukraine brings a ton of potential for growth and resources to the table and can be an outlet for the dollars stuck at the fed every day. It would also end the refugee situation for Ukrainians by making them free moving residents of the Schengen.
NATO membership is a different story but you don't need NATO membership to have NATO memberstate troops in your country. I don't belive Poland will let another war in the east happen without them. If Ukraine joins the EU within 10 years of the war ending, it'll be an insane surprise. Evenless than 15 years would be crazy fast. From my understanding corruption is much closer to Russian levels than that of EU standards, and the economy in general is somewhat oligarch-dominated. Even when these are solved and the necessary legal/political/economic reforms are implemented, current EU members will likely not be screaming in joy about entrance of a large net recipient of EU funds. Current recipients will see smaller share of the funds, and current net payers are going to face a bigger bill. Finally there will be all other politics. Someone will use their vote to twist arms on unrelated issues, similar to what happened with NATO and North Macedonia, or currently with Finland and Sweden.
Estonia, Lithuania & Latvia is in EU, not really any less corruption there tbh...
|
On March 05 2023 09:36 T0mken wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2023 00:19 Oukka wrote:On March 03 2023 23:59 Sermokala wrote:
It would depend on whatever the peace deal looks like in the end. Russia will need to "Promise" not to invade Ukraine again at the very least. Meanwhile, the EU will want to be the first in line to rebuild Ukraine and integrate it into the EU, doing that means EU membership. Ukraine brings a ton of potential for growth and resources to the table and can be an outlet for the dollars stuck at the fed every day. It would also end the refugee situation for Ukrainians by making them free moving residents of the Schengen.
NATO membership is a different story but you don't need NATO membership to have NATO memberstate troops in your country. I don't belive Poland will let another war in the east happen without them. If Ukraine joins the EU within 10 years of the war ending, it'll be an insane surprise. Evenless than 15 years would be crazy fast. From my understanding corruption is much closer to Russian levels than that of EU standards, and the economy in general is somewhat oligarch-dominated. Even when these are solved and the necessary legal/political/economic reforms are implemented, current EU members will likely not be screaming in joy about entrance of a large net recipient of EU funds. Current recipients will see smaller share of the funds, and current net payers are going to face a bigger bill. Finally there will be all other politics. Someone will use their vote to twist arms on unrelated issues, similar to what happened with NATO and North Macedonia, or currently with Finland and Sweden. Estonia, Lithuania & Latvia is in EU, not really any less corruption there tbh...
As far as I know, estonia is scoring pretty good across various corruption rankings, both in terms of perceived and measured corruption. Not sure about lithuania or latvia though.
|
I also find this comment simply wrong. According to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index
Estonia ranks 14 in the World, Lithuania 33 and Latvia 39. Above Poland which is 45 and believe me, corruption here is much lower than it was during PRL times and the nineties. Ukrainians and Russians who come here often note how different it is to their home countries in that regard.
Not saying we are corruption free, but we certainly made much progress in that regard from the Soviet times. Same is true for the Baltics.
|
"Russia's Wagner boss suggests 'betrayal' in Bakhmut battle"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64859780
It looks like the political positioning between Wagner and the Russian MoD is becoming even more bitter.
Prigozhin seems to believe that the whole Russian front would collapse without Wagner, which is a pretty extraordinary claim.
|
Very nice. More disfunction an rivalry in the Russian military is always a good thing. Maybe they'll eventually start shooting each other instead of other people.
|
Interesting that some of the newest mobilized soldiers are from the Kaliningrad region as I would think the Western Russia would be off limits, especially one so close to European neighbors.
|
|
|
On March 06 2023 23:21 plasmidghost wrote:
I had been seeing a lot of speculation that Ukraine would be withdrawing from Bakhmut, but the UA military leadership plans to hold the city. I am curious as to what they're seeing in terms of strategical objectives, whether it's killing more Russians, allowing Ukraine to prep for a counterattack in the south, or something else entirely
Russian troops have advanced more rapidly in the region during Jan/Feb. They're currently focusing most of their efforts on the city of Bakhmut and they've only had minimal successes in other regions much further out. I still suspect that it's meant as a distraction to relieve other areas. It's reminiscent of battles at choke points in SC, where losses on both sides are high but neither side considers withdrawing, each for their own reasons.
Weeks/months ago Zelensky has apologized to the troops fighting in Bakhmut. It is conceivable that already back then he and his command predicted that this was going to end in a loss. I don't believe that it was a miscalculation because that would imply an absurd level of incompetence.
|
|
|
The fact that Bakhmut is costing Russia so much in men and material is, imo, probably the main reason Ukraine wants to keep the fight going for as long as they can. Starve Russia of equipment and leave them more susceptible to a spring counter attack as opposed to retreating to another defensive line and giving Russia an excuse to sit and rest with a 'victory'.
|
United States44450 Posts
Cites are expensive. Every shell that falls in the ruins of Bakhmut is one fewer landing in a city that is still mostly intact. If the Russians want to fight in a ruin then it may be preferable to hold them there.
|
So what exactly are the implications of the current Bakhmut situation? From my perspective, it appears to be primarily an attempt by Russia to improve morale rather than win the war. My impression is that fighting in Bakhmut is extremely inefficient for Russia. But since Russia benefits from being the least concerned with human life, they don't mind the loss of life as long as they eventually take and control the city.
It does beg the question: Is the bag of humans infinite for Russia? Is the idea here that in order to keep digging into the jar of human lives, Putin needs to make sure people don't just flat out revolt? And taking Bakhmut is a way to gain time to gain other ground by throwing tons of bodies at it?
I imagine most of my news sources are pretty biased, but from what I read, it looks like Russia is burning through their equipment/vehicle reserves faster than the west. So in a war of attrition, the west will always win. Its just that Russia is hoping Bakhmut will discourage the west and that Russia can convince the west to force Ukraine to give up Bakhmut and maybe Putin just calls it there.
The thing is, it seems deeply unlikely Biden will ease up at all. It seems like the US understands this is too juicy an opportunity to permanently cripple Russia forever. If Russia were to be downgraded in terms of military might/perception, it would solidify the west as the major power in the world and almost entirely confine China. IMO Russia losing here means it is impossible China will ever overtake the West because China benefits enormously from Russia being a bit of a human shield from a cultural/military perspective.
That being said, I don't think China will ever yolo into this fight. If they support Russia, it will be in a way that they can always continue to have relations with the West. I don't think China is dumb enough to hope for an actual world war and to actually win one.
So this is my long way of saying my perception is that Russia doesn't really have an exit ramp here. And so we are just kind of witnessing the slow, final hoorah of the Russian empire. They aren't 100% screwed, but it is hard to see a mechanism of recovery or victory here.
|
China definitely won't help Russia. Even though some Russians are literally begging for a Chinese equivalent of Lend-Lease Act I think it's outside of the realm of possibility at the moment. China has enough problems as is and is facing some major crisis after crisis, if they'd get hit with sanctions it'd be over for them (although as history shows the CCP doesn't really have a problem with 60 million of its citizens dying of starvation).
|
On March 07 2023 05:55 Manit0u wrote:
China definitely won't help Russia. Even though some Russians are literally begging for a Chinese equivalent of Lend-Lease Act I think it's outside of the realm of possibility at the moment. China has enough problems as is and is facing some major crisis after crisis, if they'd get hit with sanctions it'd be over for them (although as history shows the CCP doesn't really have a problem with 60 million of its citizens dying of starvation).
Quality of living might decrease but I don't really see a large issue since Russia is a large food exporter, see simplified example below. Chinese people would not be happy but food, water and housing would be there. Thus unlikely to spark any major revolutions.
+ Show Spoiler [Food Tangent] +
|
On March 07 2023 05:55 Manit0u wrote:
China definitely won't help Russia. Even though some Russians are literally begging for a Chinese equivalent of Lend-Lease Act I think it's outside of the realm of possibility at the moment. China has enough problems as is and is facing some major crisis after crisis, if they'd get hit with sanctions it'd be over for them (although as history shows the CCP doesn't really have a problem with 60 million of its citizens dying of starvation).
I think it all depends on how high and how firm China's aspirations are. I think that if Russia ends up reduced to an annoyance more like North Korea, China will never have a path towards being a world leader. They will cap out at being an equal, if even that. Chinese culture may not allow for the Chinese government to allow for that. Their only path to being a world leader is through Russia.
|
On March 07 2023 06:29 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2023 05:55 Manit0u wrote:
China definitely won't help Russia. Even though some Russians are literally begging for a Chinese equivalent of Lend-Lease Act I think it's outside of the realm of possibility at the moment. China has enough problems as is and is facing some major crisis after crisis, if they'd get hit with sanctions it'd be over for them (although as history shows the CCP doesn't really have a problem with 60 million of its citizens dying of starvation). I think it all depends on how high and how firm China's aspirations are. I think that if Russia ends up reduced to an annoyance more like North Korea, China will never have a path towards being a world leader. They will cap out at being an equal, if even that. Chinese culture may not allow for the Chinese government to allow for that. Their only path to being a world leader is through Russia.
Xi aspires to be the leader of the world one day. It is his conviction that China will inevitably replace the US as the master of the world order.
To that end, Russia is simply a pawn - a friendly vote in the UN Security Council, a cheap source of energy, a provider of military technology, and a way to waste the West’s attention and resources. I think China wouldn’t be too sad if the war continued for another ten years.
Xi knows he can’t defeat the rest of the world at once. His plan is to isolate America while Europe and the other US allies stay neutral.
|
On March 07 2023 06:24 Yurie wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2023 05:55 Manit0u wrote:
China definitely won't help Russia. Even though some Russians are literally begging for a Chinese equivalent of Lend-Lease Act I think it's outside of the realm of possibility at the moment. China has enough problems as is and is facing some major crisis after crisis, if they'd get hit with sanctions it'd be over for them (although as history shows the CCP doesn't really have a problem with 60 million of its citizens dying of starvation). Quality of living might decrease but I don't really see a large issue since Russia is a large food exporter, see simplified example below. Chinese people would not be happy but food, water and housing would be there. Thus unlikely to spark any major revolutions. + Show Spoiler [Food Tangent] +
China is unable to feed itself, nor can it provide enough energy to keep things running themselves. If sanctions hit there wouldn't just be starvation, half the country would be without power (they already had problems with it last year, where even in major cities they had to shut off traffic lights and completely shut down industry in some regions to conserve energy). The biggest problem for China in general is that it's not self-sufficient (far from it) and it relies very heavily on imports for some most basic stuff to keep things running (in some areas imports cover as much as 40% of their domestic needs). Sanctions would absolutely murder China.
If anything I'd expect China to actually attack Russia now that it's been weakened and take the juicy and empty eastern parts.
|
|
|
On March 07 2023 09:23 gobbledydook wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2023 06:29 Mohdoo wrote:On March 07 2023 05:55 Manit0u wrote:
China definitely won't help Russia. Even though some Russians are literally begging for a Chinese equivalent of Lend-Lease Act I think it's outside of the realm of possibility at the moment. China has enough problems as is and is facing some major crisis after crisis, if they'd get hit with sanctions it'd be over for them (although as history shows the CCP doesn't really have a problem with 60 million of its citizens dying of starvation). I think it all depends on how high and how firm China's aspirations are. I think that if Russia ends up reduced to an annoyance more like North Korea, China will never have a path towards being a world leader. They will cap out at being an equal, if even that. Chinese culture may not allow for the Chinese government to allow for that. Their only path to being a world leader is through Russia. Xi aspires to be the leader of the world one day. It is his conviction that China will inevitably replace the US as the master of the world order. To that end, Russia is simply a pawn - a friendly vote in the UN Security Council, a cheap source of energy, a provider of military technology, and a way to waste the West’s attention and resources. I think China wouldn’t be too sad if the war continued for another ten years. Xi knows he can’t defeat the rest of the world at once. His plan is to isolate America while Europe and the other US allies stay neutral. I think the economic turmoil from the war is a much bigger downside for China then the upside of having the West send material they had lying around anyway to Ukraine.
They were fine with a quick 3 day operation with a minimal global impact. They have absolutely no desire in this protracted war.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
