|
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 June 20 2026 03:16 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2026 00:37 Billyboy wrote:On June 19 2026 23:13 Simberto wrote:On June 19 2026 23:08 Manit0u wrote:
Damn, watching video clips that people in Moscow upload really make me angry. They keep asking questions like "Why are they bombing us?", "This is a nightmare, when will it end? It's so scary..."
Good for them to feel a fraction of what Ukrainians have been living through for the past 4 years. This might put some pressure onto Putin to end the war maybe? I think pressuring him to mobilize is more likely. But with how unpopular that is and how it won’t solve their inability to deal with drones and logistics, and how unpopular it is that might push for them to get rid of Putin. But then you have the whole devil you know vs devil you don’t discussion. Hard to know if there is a “better” person in line to make Russia a contributing member of the world. Mobilization is likely to backfire, but this seems to be what they're doing. There's footage from a bunch of cities where they started rounding up people. At the same time, Putin has elections to deal with in September. They've been trying to delay any mobilization until then.
Lol. Elections. Putin knows how to do elections. They will give the result that Putin wants them to. What people put onto cards that they throw into ballot boxes isn't very related to the result of elections in Russia.
|
On June 20 2026 03:25 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2026 03:16 maybenexttime wrote:On June 20 2026 00:37 Billyboy wrote:On June 19 2026 23:13 Simberto wrote:On June 19 2026 23:08 Manit0u wrote:
Damn, watching video clips that people in Moscow upload really make me angry. They keep asking questions like "Why are they bombing us?", "This is a nightmare, when will it end? It's so scary..."
Good for them to feel a fraction of what Ukrainians have been living through for the past 4 years. This might put some pressure onto Putin to end the war maybe? I think pressuring him to mobilize is more likely. But with how unpopular that is and how it won’t solve their inability to deal with drones and logistics, and how unpopular it is that might push for them to get rid of Putin. But then you have the whole devil you know vs devil you don’t discussion. Hard to know if there is a “better” person in line to make Russia a contributing member of the world. Mobilization is likely to backfire, but this seems to be what they're doing. There's footage from a bunch of cities where they started rounding up people. At the same time, Putin has elections to deal with in September. They've been trying to delay any mobilization until then. Lol. Elections. Putin knows how to do elections. They will give the result that Putin wants them to. What people put onto cards that they throw into ballot boxes isn't very related to the result of elections in Russia.
While they may be rigged, Russia's system is what political scientists call competitive authoritarianism. It's more similar to Erdogan's Turkey than Nazi Germany or the USSR. The Kremlin relies on people playing along with the farce and being complicit. If the popular discontent grows substantially, at a certain point enough people stop being complicit. In 2022, Putin put off the partial mobilization until after the elections in early September.
|
On June 20 2026 02:18 Yurie wrote:
What is the calculus for using nukes for Putin vs ending the war without winning? For Russia it is clear but I don't really understand how secure Putin is in his seat.
It's pretty much impossible for them to use the nukes. Nukes are purely defensive tool as a deterrent.
First there's a question of what you really gain if you nuke Kyiv for example? Ukrainians might either surrender like the Japanese did in WW2 or it will galvanize them and the rest of the world against you, making your fight even harder. The outcome here is uncertain and even if you succeeded you then have to do decontamination of nuclear fallout before you can actually occupy Kyiv.
Now, if anything goes wrong - RU nukes are old and they have a track record of their tech failing - you're pretty much fucked because now you've advertised to the world that your nuclear potential is unreliable and thus no longer viable as a deterrent.
I don't really see a world where nukes do anything good for Russia in this war and I don't think they'd use them unless they're facing a real crisis like China invading them.
|
On June 21 2026 20:22 Manit0u wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2026 02:18 Yurie wrote:
What is the calculus for using nukes for Putin vs ending the war without winning? For Russia it is clear but I don't really understand how secure Putin is in his seat. It's pretty much impossible for them to use the nukes. Nukes are purely defensive tool as a deterrent. First there's a question of what you really gain if you nuke Kyiv for example? Ukrainians might either surrender like the Japanese did in WW2 or it will galvanize them and the rest of the world against you, making your fight even harder. The outcome here is uncertain and even if you succeeded you then have to do decontamination of nuclear fallout before you can actually occupy Kyiv. Now, if anything goes wrong - RU nukes are old and they have a track record of their tech failing - you're pretty much fucked because now you've advertised to the world that your nuclear potential is unreliable and thus no longer viable as a deterrent. I don't really see a world where nukes do anything good for Russia in this war and I don't think they'd use them unless they're facing a real crisis like China invading them.
I agree it is bad for Russia. I am raising the question on if it is good for Putin but bad for Russia. Continuing the Ukraine war is bad for Russia but something Putin wants/needs. If he feels the war must be won for the future of Imperial Russia and the ground war is proving to be impossible or at least too costly it would be the only way to "win". Nuke the large cities to cripple their logistics and the front collapses in 2 months unless other countries start operating inside of Ukraine.
The long term consequences for Russia and the world are very bad. But we assume Putin to be a rational actor which the war against Ukraine proves he isn't on all topics.
|
https://bsky.app/profile/antongerashchenko.bsky.social/post/3mosqfpcepk22
People are starting to flee from Crimea as the fuel shortages worsen. Let's see how serious this gets.
If Ukraine manages to successfully besiege Crimea and fully cut off the land bridge with their drones, this could collapse the southern front for Russia and force them to abandon Crimea. This would have huge implications for the war.
|
Further to your post. They can now canceled civilian gas sales in Crimean, only government and service vehicles. Ukraine hit 4 s400 radar and two panaltir missile air defences ON the Kerch bridge. They also took out a ferry and two more oil refineries.
Taking out the air defences directly in the bridge, which was the 3rd most well defended target in all of Russia is huge! And I wonder what’s coming next? 😉
|
On June 21 2026 22:37 Yurie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2026 20:22 Manit0u wrote:On June 20 2026 02:18 Yurie wrote:
What is the calculus for using nukes for Putin vs ending the war without winning? For Russia it is clear but I don't really understand how secure Putin is in his seat. It's pretty much impossible for them to use the nukes. Nukes are purely defensive tool as a deterrent. First there's a question of what you really gain if you nuke Kyiv for example? Ukrainians might either surrender like the Japanese did in WW2 or it will galvanize them and the rest of the world against you, making your fight even harder. The outcome here is uncertain and even if you succeeded you then have to do decontamination of nuclear fallout before you can actually occupy Kyiv. Now, if anything goes wrong - RU nukes are old and they have a track record of their tech failing - you're pretty much fucked because now you've advertised to the world that your nuclear potential is unreliable and thus no longer viable as a deterrent. I don't really see a world where nukes do anything good for Russia in this war and I don't think they'd use them unless they're facing a real crisis like China invading them. I agree it is bad for Russia. I am raising the question on if it is good for Putin but bad for Russia. Continuing the Ukraine war is bad for Russia but something Putin wants/needs. If he feels the war must be won for the future of Imperial Russia and the ground war is proving to be impossible or at least too costly it would be the only way to "win". Nuke the large cities to cripple their logistics and the front collapses in 2 months unless other countries start operating inside of Ukraine. The long term consequences for Russia and the world are very bad. But we assume Putin to be a rational actor which the war against Ukraine proves he isn't on all topics.
Thankfully Putin doesn't control the nukes so I wouldn't be particularly worried about this scenario. In the past Russian commanders have shown they have the mettle to not launch nukes on a whim.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanislav_Petrov
|
Ukraine has published a website called Trophylab that have their analysis on Russians military vehicles and technology to approved users.
https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2026/06/19/8040134/
Pretty interesting move, I can't imagine these are extremely valuable though.
There's definitely a lot of negative press on russia recently.
But russia has made quite a few deals with Asia: Malaysia, Laos, Vietnam, Indonesia and China.
Some if not all of them will be settling payment via their local currency, surprised they are accepting ruble at all, perhaps the gold backed currency give them a bit more confidence.
These aren't small deals neither, energy and security both.
As for my opinion, without much expertize, it's looking more like Ukraine is not winning as much as the reports are. And all the russian social media is being dramatic, it's their first time seeing more attacks live.
|
On June 22 2026 11:40 ETisME wrote:Ukraine has published a website called Trophylab that have their analysis on Russians military vehicles and technology to approved users. https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2026/06/19/8040134/Pretty interesting move, I can't imagine these are extremely valuable though. There's definitely a lot of negative press on russia recently. But russia has made quite a few deals with Asia: Malaysia, Laos, Vietnam, Indonesia and China. Some if not all of them will be settling payment via their local currency, surprised they are accepting ruble at all, perhaps the gold backed currency give them a bit more confidence. These aren't small deals neither, energy and security both. As for my opinion, without much expertize, it's looking more like Ukraine is not winning as much as the reports are. And all the russian social media is being dramatic, it's their first time seeing more attacks live.
Russia is still the stronger party in the war. They are without a doubt losing badly in the south region and slowly pushing in the eastern front. For Russia to win Ukraine has to run out of people or equipment, at the current rate Russia will run out of total population before they get to Kiev, even their current goals of a few regions will probably cost them 1M casualties more. They lose too many people advancing and there are a lot of fortifications remaining.
Long term prospects aren't fun for Russia if Ukraine manages to cut oil exports. Right now they are reducing processing mostly. But if they can cut it off Russia likely has too little foreign trade to cover the import needs for the war.
To be honest I doubt Russia survives long term as a state if they let the war run at high intensity for another 2 years. They were facing demographic collapse before the war and this is worsening it. They would have to somehow make young people want to have 3+ kids again (they have tried and failed)
|
On June 22 2026 13:24 Yurie wrote:
They were facing demographic collapse before the war and this is worsening it. They would have to somehow make young people want to have 3+ kids again (they have tried and failed)
Hard to repopulate when you've sent most of your young men to die. Especially that it was mostly men from rural regions, where they typically have more kids.
|
Maybe we'll be able to stack the Indians there once South Asia becomes inhabitable, heh.
|
On June 22 2026 20:35 Manit0u wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2026 13:24 Yurie wrote:
They were facing demographic collapse before the war and this is worsening it. They would have to somehow make young people want to have 3+ kids again (they have tried and failed) Hard to repopulate when you've sent most of your young men to die. Especially that it was mostly men from rural regions, where they typically have more kids.
An interesting idea would be that only 3rd child and onward can get a passport, join university or hold a public office. So the focus shifts from making things good for the first kid if you want a legacy. Would probably work decently in Korea/Japan etc if they could pass it.
|
On June 22 2026 23:14 Yurie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2026 20:35 Manit0u wrote:On June 22 2026 13:24 Yurie wrote:
They were facing demographic collapse before the war and this is worsening it. They would have to somehow make young people want to have 3+ kids again (they have tried and failed) Hard to repopulate when you've sent most of your young men to die. Especially that it was mostly men from rural regions, where they typically have more kids. An interesting idea would be that only 3rd child and onward can get a passport, join university or hold a public office. So the focus shifts from making things good for the first kid if you want a legacy. Would probably work decently in Korea/Japan etc if they could pass it.
That's some insanely bad policy. Even for North Korea...
|
That's the first time I've heard someone suggest tertiogeniture as a policy.
|
On June 23 2026 01:51 LightSpectra wrote:
That's the first time I've heard someone suggest tertiogeniture as a policy.
Well it seems a better idea than the only proven working method that I know of (religious fundamentalism especially including suppression of women's rights). Russia is approach the population setup where they have to try insane stuff to fix their population to continue being an imperialistic nation.
|
On June 23 2026 03:48 Yurie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2026 01:51 LightSpectra wrote:
That's the first time I've heard someone suggest tertiogeniture as a policy. Well it seems a better idea than the only proven working method that I know of (religious fundamentalism especially including suppression of women's rights). Russia is approach the population setup where they have to try insane stuff to fix their population to continue being an imperialistic nation.
And why pray tell would Russia shy away from religious fundamentalism? Their church is already pretty tightly embedded with the government. And suppressing any human rights is also not an issue for Russia as they've been doing it for decades.
Tertiogeniture in Russia would probably take the form of "we kill the first two kids and raise the third one because that's the most optimal way." Human life has no value in Russia.
|
Russian Federation193 Posts
On June 23 2026 06:33 Manit0u wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2026 03:48 Yurie wrote:On June 23 2026 01:51 LightSpectra wrote:
That's the first time I've heard someone suggest tertiogeniture as a policy. Well it seems a better idea than the only proven working method that I know of (religious fundamentalism especially including suppression of women's rights). Russia is approach the population setup where they have to try insane stuff to fix their population to continue being an imperialistic nation. And why pray tell would Russia shy away from religious fundamentalism? Their church is already pretty tightly embedded with the government. And suppressing any human rights is also not an issue for Russia as they've been doing it for decades. Tertiogeniture in Russia would probably take the form of "we kill the first two kids and raise the third one because that's the most optimal way." Human life has no value in Russia.
The first paragraph is highly true, but the second is strange at least. Anyways, what's your perspective about the war after the latest ukraine actions (polish honor rewards)
|
Seems like a non-issue. Ukraine did it because it deemed it worthwhile for internal morale/PR reasons. Poland did not like it due to historical reasons. Poland did a diplomatic rebuke towards Ukraine. Ukraine accepted it and things moves on as before.
A more interesting topic is if Ukraine can keep Crimea isolated long enough that people start wanting to leaving in droves. Would be a major PR success to prove that Crimea is a pointless holding as long as the war continues and gives a great negotiation point. Not having fuel could lead to a lack of fresh water as the infrastructure isn't setup for it.
|
People are already leaving in droves. There is also starting to be lots of social media about how bad it is. And the rate people are falling out windows is not higher ( I mean it’s still higher by a factor of a 1000 over the rest of the world. Do Russians have really bad engineering?). It’s actually crazy how the tone has changed from both sides of war bloggers. It is also crazy how people in Russia are mad enough that they are no longer scared to post videos of what is happening.
Those not on the internet have no idea though. The TV is still pretending nothing is coming back into Russia. But there is only so much you can hide when there is no gas to buy and the sky is black with smoke.
|
At this point they might not drop the bridge just to allow so many russians to leave and to keep farming the AA equipment being moved to defend it.
Zelensky said that there would be a 40 day "influence campaign" that he signed off on. The drone swarms and the flamingo strikes are ramping up somehow. If they hit the moscow fuel refinery and isolate crimera this early I wonder what comes at the end of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
