- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Posted on 9/22/22 at 9:50 am to OMLandshark
Posted on 9/22/22 at 9:50 am to OMLandshark
quote:
China warns West that Putin is in Life or Death struggle
This tells me that there is internal forces in Russia that are ready to pounce on Putin when he shows weakness. He has to start turning this war around in a short period of time.
Those same forces are not going to let Putin go over the top with a nuclear attack. If Putin starts going in that direction it will be seen as weak and the various factions (along with China) will take Putin up to a tall building to do some window cleaning.
2
Posted on 9/22/22 at 10:03 am to GOP_Tiger
LINK
https://t.me/dolgarevaanna/1964
Trying to hold Lyman was always going to fail, though I guess that Putin ordered it. Russian forces there now have to quickly try to escape east. We already know that they will leave good stuff behind.
quote:
Pro-Russian war correspondent Anna Dolgareva says that the Armed Forces of Ukraine broke through the Russian lines in the area of the settlements of Karpivka and Ridkodub in Donetsk Oblast, in an attempt to bypass Lyman defenses from the north.
https://t.me/dolgarevaanna/1964
Trying to hold Lyman was always going to fail, though I guess that Putin ordered it. Russian forces there now have to quickly try to escape east. We already know that they will leave good stuff behind.
This post was edited on 9/22/22 at 10:05 am
Posted on 9/22/22 at 10:23 am to GOP_Tiger
quote:
American leadership is why they can give what they are giving.
Weapons deliveries are too late, and the sanctions are too weak for anyone to say with a straight face that Biden is leading. Biden is reacting and following. He is ahead of France, Germany, and Italy etc, but he is not leading.
Ukraine’s ability to resist Russia is due to Ukraine’s will to fight and their ingenuity to not fight a war the way that Russia or the west expected. USA/NATO training has helped, but that cannot be attributed to Biden. Obama started the training and Trump vastly expanded it. The Biden administration actually cut most of the funding for the American training mission in Ukraine last year, but restored it when Russia started building up troops last fall. Even then most of the NATO trainers in Ukraine last year and prior to the invasion this year were British and Polish not American (per my sauces on the ground in the Ukrainian military). Even after the invasion, American advisers that helped Ukraine respond to Russia movements on a strategic and large scale level didn’t really roll into Ukraine until late July.
This post was edited on 9/22/22 at 10:39 am
Posted on 9/22/22 at 10:24 am to mmcgrath
quote:
This tells me that there is internal forces in Russia that are ready to pounce on Putin when he shows weakness. He has to start turning this war around in a short period of time.
Those same forces are not going to let Putin go over the top with a nuclear attack. If Putin starts going in that direction it will be seen as weak and the various factions (along with China) will take Putin up to a tall building to do some window cleaning.
Putin's speech was meant for internal audience. The Soviet Union had to develop a massive psychological operations just for internal control. Russia is still king of psyops both at home and abroad. Undoubtedly, ALL of the official news shows have scripted outrage regardless of point of view presented. Then they seek polling data on what has swayed the public viewers then take that tack or alter on air discussions to sway the public into supporting what it wants them to support.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 10:26 am to AGGIES
quote:
You’ve got to admit that with Blinken putting Russia on blast at the UN - and calling out their smokescreen moves before they invaded - that was leadership.
The UN is a useless organization so I would not call anything done there as leading. Anything done at the UN that doesn’t get a serious UNSC resolution is nothing more than an empty gesture and grandstanding.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 10:35 am to CitizenK
quote:Ok, great. Even more reason to remove Assad and put the Gulf - EU gas pipeline in. Qatar, Bahrain, UAE et al could share costs for tie-in. Yes, working with the Saudis is like working with four-year olds, but it can be done.
Saudi Arabia is finally developing its own tight shale natural gas formations which are enormous.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 10:40 am to Coeur du Tigre
quote:
Ok, great. Even more reason to remove Assad and put the Gulf - EU gas pipeline in. Qatar, Bahrain, UAE et al could share costs for tie-in. Yes, working with the Saudis is like working with four-year olds, but it can be done.
It's on the Egypt side, and pipeline via Egypt and the Med is very feasible or even Israel and the Med
Posted on 9/22/22 at 10:41 am to Coeur du Tigre
quote:
Ok, great. Even more reason to remove Assad and put the Gulf - EU gas pipeline in.
It would be much easier and cheaper in the long run to develop LNG export facilities in SA, build LNG tankers, and build LNG import facilities in Europe than it would be to try another regime change in the ME.
ETA: Plus developing LNG imports to replace imports from pipelines gives the USA a chance to get some of the market. Regime change and a pipeline brings no economic benefits for the USA and cares the risk of another decade or longer troop deployments to the ME. No thanks.
This post was edited on 9/22/22 at 10:45 am
Posted on 9/22/22 at 10:52 am to WeeWee
Is there a more useless organization??? What is the purpose of the UN these days? Wasn't it originally formed in the aftermath of WW2 to prevent a world war from happening again?
Posted on 9/22/22 at 10:54 am to WeeWee
While it may not be viable long term, it seems to me the EU could produce enough LNG to sustain 1 winter if they truly wanted...
Posted on 9/22/22 at 10:59 am to Tigeralum2008
Had the EU chosen to develop alternative energy sources other than Russia, they wouldn't be in this bind. Thanks, Merkel.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 11:02 am to WeeWee
quote:
Ukraine’s ability to resist Russia is due to Ukraine’s will to fight and their ingenuity to not fight a war the way that Russia or the west expected.
No doubt. I am not taking one thing away from Ukraine. Not a bit. But bravery without weapons doesn't win.
Without the US, they would have run out of ammo for their Soviet-era weapons many months ago, and Russian troops would not have stopped at taking the Donbas. The cities of Kryvyi Rih, Zaporizhzhia, and Kharkiv would all have fallen by now.
President Biden decided that Russia was going to lose this war, and then we led our allies in ensuring that happened. The turning point was when the decision was made to give Ukraine 155mm guns and the ammo to fire them. That's when we went all-in on a Ukrainian victory.
And if Poland and the other Eastern Europeans were really leading in weapons deliveries, then why didn't Poland give Ukraine the MiGs that it announced early in the conflict.
Poland said, "We will give MiGs to the US, and then the US will give them to Ukraine." The US said, "No, Poland, you can give Ukraine the MiGs directly if you like, but we aren't playing that game." And then, Poland decided that it wanted the US to lead and shut up about the MiGs, while the US eventually found a way to dismantle 20 MiGs and ship them to Ukraine to be rebuilt there.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 11:02 am to CitizenK
quote:
t's on the Egypt side, and pipeline via Egypt and the Med is very feasible or even Israel and the Med
That might work, but there currently are no connections from Egypt to Europe that don’t involve Syria. So a new pipeline across the Mediterranean would be required.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 11:06 am to GOP_Tiger
quote:
President Biden decided that Russia was going to lose this war, and then we led our allies in ensuring that happened. The turning point was when the decision was made to give Ukraine 155mm guns and the ammo to fire them. That's when we went all-in on a Ukrainian victory.
I agree with you almost 100%, but I don't think we've gone all in on a Ukrainian victory, we COULD be giving them stuff that we aren't (ATACMS, Drones, Patriots, etc.)
If we were all in, we'd be providing those.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 11:08 am to mmcgrath
quote:Again, this is a bad problem within the Russian military - a wide range of special units originating from different spheres of influence, with no unified command structure. Rushist Nationalists, OMON, GRU, Kadirovs, FSB, and Rosgvardya are thrown in with Muslim troops from Eastern Russia. Add to this soup a growing number of Private Military Contractors, who take orders only from their controlling oligarchs. Prigozhin's well known Wagner Group is only one of many of these mercenary groups, the formation of which were all encouraged by Putin.
This tells me that there is internal forces in Russia that are ready to pounce on Putin when he shows weakness.
So none of these non-Army groups take orders from the Russian Army command. They are all commanded by leaders that take their orders directly from Putin. You can imagine how that works out.
Oh, someone mentioned the events of 1917 that led up to the Revolution - bringing large numbers of conscripted troops to Moscow, arming them and then telling them they were to be sent to fight the Germans. We know what happened next.
My point? Many of the oligarchs commanding Private Military Contractors have decided to not send them to Ukraine but to keep them in Moscow...
Posted on 9/22/22 at 11:20 am to GOP_Tiger
quote:
Without the US, they would have run out of ammo for their Soviet-era weapons many months ago,
Biden didn’t get Romania and Bulgaria to restart their Soviet wra ammunition production until June. Ukraine requested it back in February before the invasion. However, Biden thought Zelinsky should flee instead of fight. Even after it was obvious that Ukraine was going to stand and fight it still took Boris Johnson calling out the USA and NATO during one of his trips to Kyiv before the Biden administration actually decided to persuade Romania and Bulgaria to produce ammo from Ukraine.
quote:
President Biden decided that Russia was going to lose this war, and then we led our allies in ensuring that happened. The turning point was when the decision was made to give Ukraine 155mm guns and the ammo to fire them. That's when we went all-in on a Ukrainian victory.
Again that was too late. IIRC the M777s were not supplied until May, but they were requested before the invasion. Thanks for providing 2 more examples of Biden following instead of leading.
quote:
And if Poland and the other Eastern Europeans were really leading in weapons deliveries, then why didn't Poland give Ukraine the MiGs that it announced early in the conflict. Poland said, "We will give MiGs to the US, and then the US will give them to Ukraine." The US said, "No, Poland, you can give Ukraine the MiGs directly if you like, but we aren't playing that game." And then, Poland decided that it wanted the US to lead and shut up about the MiGs, while the US eventually found a way to dismantle 20 MiGs and ship them to Ukraine to be rebuilt there.
Wrong. Poland wanted to give the Migs to Ukraine in exchange for F16s to replace them. The USA said no. Poland started dismantling its fighters and sending spare parts to Ukraine despite the USA’s objections. Biden still refused to supply Poland with F16s so it turned to South Korea. It bought billions of dollars worth of military equipment for SK over the summer including 50 fighter jets and up 1000 K2 Black Panther MBTs and howitzers ( LINK). Which reminds me that your comment about the KREB howitizers Poland gave Ukraine was wrong. It only supplied them to Ukraine after it secured the SK arms deal because the Biden administration was refusing to replace them with western equipment.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 11:22 am to Chromdome35
quote:
Had the EU chosen to develop alternative energy sources other than Russia, they wouldn't be in this bind. Thanks, Merkel.
The EU would not be in this mess if Germany hadn’t convinced the EU to abandon nuclear and coal. Merkel f**ked the EU bigly.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 11:24 am to Chromdome35
quote:Exactly. Pipelines are cheaper than LNG tankers and multiple pipelines are cheaper than one. Even the Germans have learned that lesson now. Add LNG tanker gas from the US to a pipeline from the Gulf fields added to a separate pipeline from the fracking gas fields of Western Saudia Arabia, plus additional pipelines from Libya and Norway. That's a lot of work and will take many years, but it's the best solution.
Had the EU chosen to develop alternative energy sources other than Russia, they wouldn't be in this bind. Thanks, Merkel.
As long as we're imaging perfect outcomes
, let's add the post war newly-formed countries of the former Russian Federation. They can continue sending gas through the Nord Streams and paying Russia (what's left of it) only a pipeline transit fee. More gas, lower prices. Posted on 9/22/22 at 11:25 am to Chromdome35
quote:
President Biden decided that Russia was going to lose this war, and then we led our allies in ensuring that happened. The turning point was when the decision was made to give Ukraine 155mm guns and the ammo to fire them. That's when we went all-in on a Ukrainian victory. I agree with you almost 100%, but I don't think we've gone all in on a Ukrainian victory, we COULD be giving them stuff that we aren't (ATACMS, Drones, Patriots, etc.) If we were all in, we'd be providing those.
That is a fact and we would be providing Ukraine with the weapons they request and need within a timely manner of when they requested and needed them instead of months laters.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 11:35 am to WeeWee
The early days of the invasion was a messy time. I'm certain that Washington, London, me and probably everyone else through that Russia would roll into Kiev and this would be over. If the US had shipped a bunch of advanced weapons systems at that time we would have been donating them to Russia.
As the Ukrainian resistance evolved from idealism to plausible, it seemed "safer" to supply a large amount of weapons. As this has evolved on the battlefield, arming Ukraine with increasingly modern weapons has become a safe bet.
The underlying reasons for the evolution of military support has not been publicly discussed, so it's all speculation at this point. It has appeared to me that the evolution has been driven by the demonstrated commitment of the Ukrainians to the defense of their country and the demonstrated weakness of Russia's invading force.
As the Ukrainian resistance evolved from idealism to plausible, it seemed "safer" to supply a large amount of weapons. As this has evolved on the battlefield, arming Ukraine with increasingly modern weapons has become a safe bet.
The underlying reasons for the evolution of military support has not been publicly discussed, so it's all speculation at this point. It has appeared to me that the evolution has been driven by the demonstrated commitment of the Ukrainians to the defense of their country and the demonstrated weakness of Russia's invading force.
Page 1768 of 5046
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News