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.
On March 27 2022 06:25 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: I would be more surprised if France did not have at least two Nuclear Missile Submarines out at sea at all times.
I read about it when they increased it a few days ago and it was mentioned they normally keep 1 out of 4 out at sea. Now they increased it to 3 out of 4.
I'll be wary of taking any Russian statements of that kind at face value. That seems to be for a domestic audience but they will surely be aware that anything they tell their domestic audience will surely be analysed by other countries for signs of their plans. We simply don't know what Russia will plan next. They could try to fully mobilize to try occupy more of Ukraine, or try to wind down operations and try to get a more minor aim such as recognition of the Donbass and Luhask "republic" they say they recognise, to try to set up for a withdrawal that they can sell to their domestic audience, or buy time to reorganise and change the priority to the eastern and southern areas of Ukraine.
Btw, putting out nuclear submarines out of sea over a long period of time is not something that can be done consistently. There's a good reason why normally only minimal numbers are out at sea at any one time. To put out more means a price will have to be paid in readiness further down the line.
On March 27 2022 08:42 Dangermousecatdog wrote: I'll be wary of taking any Russian statements of that kind at face value. That seems to be for a domestic audience but they will surely be aware that anything they tell their domestic audience will surely be analysed by other countries for signs of their plans. We simply don't know what Russia will plan next. They could try to fully mobilize to try occupy more of Ukraine, or try to wind down operations and try to get a more minor aim such as recognition of the Donbass and Luhask "republic" they say they recognise, to try to set up for a withdrawal that they can sell to their domestic audience, or buy time to reorganise and change the priority to the eastern and southern areas of Ukraine.
At this moment Russia is really in no position to demand anything from anyone. If anything they're probably thinking real hard how to get out of Ukraine with minimal loss of face. There's some speculation that they're only retreating now to move the fight out of heavily populated areas so they can use chemical weapons against Ukrainian troops and minimize publicity damage but that's just wild assumptions for now. From all the reports it looks like they're pretty much getting beaten and pushed back on all fronts.
My only hope is that Ukrainians can reach Mariupol before everyone there is dead... These people don't deserve to die some horrible death or from starvation after they've been holding enemies for a month while being completely surrounded.
Edit: As I was writing that I can see that there's been a new video uploaded by this channel I started following recently. It's run by US combat veteran who's gathering all the info he can and trying to make the most accurate situation maps that he updates every 12 hours or so. Gives you a bit better view on the situation than the usual sources which all just use the same outdated and not very detailed maps.
On March 27 2022 17:28 SC-Shield wrote: Weren't they expected to default a week or two ago? How did they avoid that?
It was $117 Million, they probably had that money in a region not sanctioning them. Most of their debt is in the Ruble, thus they can always pay that. The problematic ones are the ones in foreign currency which has been somewhat locked down.
I assume the payments from Nordstream will be enough to cover most debts if they can just move the money around.
Although it's reported in a limited fashion, there are already rumours that Lugansk may hold a referendum to join Russia:
The head of Ukraine’s Lugansk separatist region said Sunday it may hold a referendum on becoming part of Russia, after Moscow sent troops into its pro-Western neighbor.
“I think that in the near future a referendum will be held on the territory of the republic, during which the people will... express their opinion on joining the Russian Federation,” Russian news agencies quoted Leonid Pasechnik as saying.
“For some reason, I am sure this will be the case,” he said.
Russia launched its military action in Ukraine in late February, saying it was acting in defense of the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Lugansk republics in the country’s east.
President Vladimir Putin had days earlier recognized the two regions as independent.
The industrial, mainly Russian-speaking regions broke from Kyiv’s control in 2014 in fighting that over the next few years claimed more than 14,000 lives.
Russia that year annexed Crimea from Ukraine after a pro-Moscow leader was ousted in a popular uprising and a referendum was held in the southern region on becoming part of Russia.
While it's still not reported by BBC and others, it looks like expected retreat for Russians to cut their losses and to call it a victory at home. I suspect Ukrainians won't allow that. Maybe there are 2 paths from there, 1) Ukrainians will do counter-offensive or 2) peace treaty will be negotiated where Russia wants to still have their "aces" (Lugansk and Donetsk)
Fun thing is that Lugansk referendum doesn't even have to involve cheating to be pro Russia. I assume a large fraction of the people that would vote against it has already moved out.
Ukraine going on the offensive would be much harder than the current fighting. Right now they are fighting poorly supplied units far from the railheads. If they want to go on offensive they have to cut the trains inside Russia, which might force an all out war on the Russian side.
On March 27 2022 17:28 SC-Shield wrote: Weren't they expected to default a week or two ago? How did they avoid that?
It was $117 Million, they probably had that money in a region not sanctioning them. Most of their debt is in the Ruble, thus they can always pay that. The problematic ones are the ones in foreign currency which has been somewhat locked down.
I assume the payments from Nordstream will be enough to cover most debts if they can just move the money around.
They paid that 117 million USD from frozen assets in the US. So pretty much they made a deal with the US circumventing the US sanctions.
Ukraine said Saturday that the United States does not object to the transfer of war planes to Kyiv to help it fend off the Russian invasion, after the Pentagon previously rejected an offer from Poland.
Officials in Washington "have no objections to the transfer of aircrafts. As far as we can conclude, the ball is now on the Polish side. We will look further into this matter in our conversations with Polish colleagues", Ukraine Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba said in written comments to AFP
His comments come shortly after a meeting in Poland with Defence Minister Oleksii Reznikov and US President Joe Biden, who was visiting the NATO member to shore up US support for the country bordering Ukraine.
The Pentagon earlier this month conclusively rejected as too "high risk" a plan to transfer fighter jets from Poland to Kyiv to battle Russian forces, pouring cold water for now on Ukraine's bid for more firepower in the skies.
"Ukraine is in a critical need for more combat aircraft," Kuleba said in the comments, saying Kyiv needed them to "strike a balance in the sky" and prevent Russia from "killing more civilians".
Warsaw had expressed support for a plan in which Poland would have sent its Soviet-era MiG-29s to Kyiv via a US air base in Ramstein, Germany.
It's amazing how clueless certain European leaders have shown themselves to be. Germany before the invasion, now Macron is claiming labeling certain names might prevent a ceasefire. How many times do you have to be played before you realize you are not talking to someone who wants peace?
The Russian Defense Ministry gave their "month in review" briefing two days ago and released an English-language transcript of the same. Bits and pieces from the same were cited throughout the past few pages, but original sources have always been an important part of reading the news. Interpret what they say with whatever level of skepticism or whatever context you want - I provide the source with no commentary beyond this intro blurb.
On March 28 2022 04:53 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: It's amazing how clueless certain European leaders have shown themselves to be. Germany before the invasion, now Macron is claiming labeling certain names might prevent a ceasefire. How many times do you have to be played before you realize you are not talking to someone who wants peace?
Whether he wants peace or not, making it even less likely he can accept compromise, and giving Putin the soundbyte to make his nonsense about how American imperialism is encroaching on Russia's sovereignty ring true is bad diplomacy. Macron is right in pointing that out. Hell, even the Boris Johnson criticized that and he's about as diplomatic as the toilet brush he resembles.
I think it should be clarified that most commentators had problems only with the "this man cannot remain in power" line. Calling Putin "a killer, a pure thug, a war criminal and a butcher" is fine, but saying he should be deposed was a mistake.
On March 28 2022 06:16 Sent. wrote: I think it should be clarified that most commentators had problems only with the "this man cannot remain in power" line. Calling Putin "a killer, a pure thug, a war criminal and a butcher" is fine, but saying he should be deposed was a mistake.
"War criminal" coming from someone who doesn't recognize the ICC and could "legally" invade the Netherlands if the ICC tried to hold them accountable for the countless war crimes the US has been/is engaged in was seen as a bit rich also.