Ukraine

[WX]

Would it be too awfully much bother to leave that up to the Ukrainians ??

I can't see them saying yes to Putin's demands, can you?

[JayInOz]

The Ukrainians decided the goal is to kick the murderous bastards out of Ukraine. Not sure how he expects that to happen though- knitting competition at dawn?

[Nicholas Carey]

Four factories in four cities in Iran have … accidentally … caught fire and exploded.

Karaj, air force base
Isfahan, munitions factory
Karaj, air force base
Tabriz, military industrial plant.
Azarshahr, petrochemical plant.

It seems Iran’s air defence system, operated of course by the Revolutionary Guards, is excellent at shooting down a Ukrainian Boeing 737-800 that had just taken off from Tehran and killing 176 people but is not so good at hitting Ukrainian Air Force drones.

Isfahan is in the center of Iran.

Did we put Ukrainian commando teams ashore in the Persian Gulf? Or does Ukraine have friends in Iraq, Azerbaijan, Armenia or Turkmenistan?

And how do they gracefully exeunt the stage?

[sandtown]

The Ukrainians decided the goal is to kick the murderous bastards out of Ukraine.?\

As is the case in all wars, opinions in Ukr are divided . . .

lots of you here simplify the situation.

[Tom from Rubicon]

Four factories in four cities in Iran have … accidentally … caught fire and exploded.

Karaj, air force base
Isfahan, munitions factory
Karaj, air force base
Tabriz, military industrial plant.
Azarshahr, petrochemical plant.

It seems Iran’s air defence system, operated of course by the Revolutionary Guards, is excellent at shooting down a Ukrainian Boeing 737-800 that had just taken off from Tehran and killing 176 people but is not so good at hitting Ukrainian Air Force drones.

A link , even a paywall link is of interest ACB

[Nicholas Carey]

A link , even a paywall link is of interest ACB

Ask, and ye shall receive.

https://www.iranintl.com/en/202301282372

[Chip-skiff]

Four factories in four cities in Iran have … accidentally … caught fire and exploded.

Ukraine is nearer Iran than I thought, but still a bit of a stretch for the sort of drones used in battle so far. The one with the longest range is the Bayraktar TB2.

"The Turkish-made drones were initially seen as a game-changer for Ukraine when videos showed the Bayraktars destroying valuable Russian hardware with baseball-bat-sized "micromunitions" during the chaotic first days of the Russian invasion.

A song about the Bayraktars became a popular tune for buskers on the streets of Ukraine, and European civilians fund-raised to supply more of the aircraft to Ukraine. But as the Russian invasion slowed and layers of air defenses were established in occupied areas, the drones became increasingly vulnerable. The noisy, Cessna-sized aircraft are easily spotted with radar and slow enough to be sitting ducks for antiaircraft weapons.

As early as June, Ukrainian fighter pilots were describing the Bayraktars as “almost useless,” and they are reported to now be largely used for special long-distance reconnaissance missions."

https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-russ.../32132833.html

Given that, I'd guess either a covert surface attack or some sort of missile.

[WX]

As is the case in all wars, opinions in Ukr are divided . . .

lots of you here simplify the situation.

No we do not.

[Chip-skiff]

The story mentions "small drones" which would have to be launched in Iran.

Interesting.

[dutchpp]

The ISW Russian offensive campaign assessment, January 28.
https://www.understandingwar.org/bac...anuary-28-2023

Key Takeaways

• Conventional Russian forces are likely replacing exhausted Wagner Group forces to maintain the offensive in Bakhmut after the Wagner Group’s offensive in Bakhmut culminated with the capture of Soledar around January 12.
• Russian forces are attempting to prevent Ukraine from regaining the initiative possibly ahead of a planned decisive Russian offensive in Donbas.
• Russian forces likely lack the combat power necessary to sustain more than one major offensive operation while fixing Ukrainian forces in western Donetsk and eastern Zaporizhia oblasts.
• The Russian military leadership may once again be planning an offensive operation based on erroneous assumptions about the Russian military’s capabilities
• The Russian military’s decreasing reliance on Wagner forces around Bakhmut is likely reducing Wagner Group financier Yevgeny Prigozhin’s influence.
• Russian forces reportedly continued limited counterattacks to regain lost positions along the Svatove-Kreminna line.
• Ukrainian forces continued to strike Russian rear areas in Luhansk Oblast.
• Russian forces continued offensive operations in the Bakhmut and Avdiivka-Donetsk City areas. Russian forces continued a localized offensive near Vuhledar in western Donetsk Oblast.
• Russian sources did not report any Russian ground attacks in Zaporizhia Oblast for the second consecutive day on January 28.
• Some Russian citizens continue limited efforts to sabotage Russian force generation efforts.
• Russian occupation officials continue to set conditions for the long-term forced deportation of Ukrainian children to Russia.

If Ukraine continues to intervene in Iran I will publish the relevant details of the daily ISW Iran update as well.

[Johan R]

Didn't you mean to write . . . "the far Right"?

I did, far extreme on Port or Starboard will always tend to end in a grounding. Someone is oblivious to the incremental gains of the party in its rise to power.

The Sweden Democrats or Swedish Democrats (Swedish: Sverigedemokraterna, SD) are a nationalist and right-wing populist political party in Sweden founded in 1988. The party describes itself as social conservative with a nationalist foundation. The party has been characterised by others as right-wing populist national-conservative, anti-immigration, or far-right.

[Johan R]

The ISW Russian offensive campaign assessment, January 28.
https://www.understandingwar.org/bac...anuary-28-2023

Key Takeaways

No report on the hospital hit in Luhansk?

Ukraine accused of killing 14 in targeted Himars attack on Luhansk hospital (msn.com)

[Johan R]

RAND report.

The authors argue that, in addition to minimizing the risks of major escalation, U.S. interests would be best served by avoiding a protracted conflict. The costs and risks of a long war in Ukraine are significant and outweigh the possible benefits of such a trajectory for the United States. Although Washington cannot by itself determine the war's duration, it can take steps that make an eventual negotiated end to the conflict more likely.The authors argue that, in addition to minimizing the risks of major escalation, U.S. interests would be best served by avoiding a protracted conflict. The costs and risks of a long war in Ukraine are significant and outweigh the possible benefits of such a trajectory for the United States. Although Washington cannot by itself determine the war's duration, it can take steps that make an eventual negotiated end to the conflict more likely.

A dramatic, overnight shift in U.S. policy is politically impossible—both domestically and with allies—and would be unwise in any case. But developing these instruments now and socializing them with Ukraine and with U.S. allies might help catalyze the eventual start of a process that could bring this war to a negotiated end in a time frame that would serve U.S. interests. The alternative is a long war that poses major challenges for the United States, Ukraine, and the rest of the world.

https://www.rand.org/content/dam/ran..._PEA2510-1.pdf

[heimlaga]

RAND report.

The authors argue that, in addition to minimizing the risks of major escalation, U.S. interests would be best served by avoiding a protracted conflict. The costs and risks of a long war in Ukraine are significant and outweigh the possible benefits of such a trajectory for the United States. Although Washington cannot by itself determine the war's duration, it can take steps that make an eventual negotiated end to the conflict more likely.The authors argue that, in addition to minimizing the risks of major escalation, U.S. interests would be best served by avoiding a protracted conflict. The costs and risks of a long war in Ukraine are significant and outweigh the possible benefits of such a trajectory for the United States. Although Washington cannot by itself determine the war's duration, it can take steps that make an eventual negotiated end to the conflict more likely.

A dramatic, overnight shift in U.S. policy is politically impossible—both domestically and with allies—and would be unwise in any case. But developing these instruments now and socializing them with Ukraine and with U.S. allies might help catalyze the eventual start of a process that could bring this war to a negotiated end in a time frame that would serve U.S. interests. The alternative is a long war that poses major challenges for the United States, Ukraine, and the rest of the world.

https://www.rand.org/content/dam/ran..._PEA2510-1.pdf

It is very easy to shorten the war. Russia would just have to withdraw behind it's own border. So easy. It would benefit us all even the Russians. The only ones who would loose anything would be Putin and a few others in his gang of thieves.

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

What the Kenyan Ambassador said, in February 2022.

[Johan R]

It is very easy to shorten the war. Russia would just have to withdraw behind it's own border. So easy.

You sound like Trump!

If your knowledge of Russian troll farms is so great, where they are and who owns them, why do you not send a link to this thread via your contacts direct to Putin? I am sure once he realises how upset the people of the bilge are, he will command an immediate withdrawal.

[skuthorp]

"The costs and risks of a long war in Ukraine are significant and outweigh the possible benefits of such a trajectory for the United States."
i should imagine that the biggest priority for the US at present is preventing a war between Russia and NATO. Keeping the present war on Ukranian territory would be a big part of that. Certainly cheaper than a pan-European/world war.

[gypsie]

Four factories in four cities in Iran have … accidentally … caught fire and exploded.

Karaj, air force base
Isfahan, munitions factory
Karaj, air force base
Tabriz, military industrial plant.
Azarshahr, petrochemical plant.

It seems Iran’s air defence system, operated of course by the Revolutionary Guards, is excellent at shooting down a Ukrainian Boeing 737-800 that had just taken off from Tehran and killing 176 people but is not so good at hitting Ukrainian Air Force drones.

Israel?

[George.]

I am sure once he realises how upset the people of the bilge are, he will command an immediate withdrawal.

The people of Ukraine are pretty upset.

[Canoez]

Four factories in four cities in Iran have … accidentally … caught fire and exploded.

Karaj, air force base
Isfahan, munitions factory
Karaj, air force base
Tabriz, military industrial plant.
Azarshahr, petrochemical plant.

It seems Iran’s air defence system, operated of course by the Revolutionary Guards, is excellent at shooting down a Ukrainian Boeing 737-800 that had just taken off from Tehran and killing 176 people but is not so good at hitting Ukrainian Air Force drones.

Hmmm. Someone removing the supply of missiles and drones used by Russia to terrorize the Ukrainian civilians through attacks on apartments and infrastructure? Well done by whomever is doing that.

[heimlaga]

"The costs and risks of a long war in Ukraine are significant and outweigh the possible benefits of such a trajectory for the United States."
i should imagine that the biggest priority for the US at present is preventing a war between Russia and NATO. Keeping the present war on Ukranian territory would be a big part of that. Certainly cheaper than a pan-European/world war.

It is very probable that the Putin government will continue expanding it's power as far as it can. Their propaganda for domestic consumtion also talks about resturning all land that has ever been under Russian rule to mother Russia. If they get something they will want more and we will have a war in another European country. Likely Finland or Estonia or Latvia or Lithuania or all theese countries at once.

[birlinn]

Yep.

Appeasement did not work in 1938; it will not now.
If Ukraine goes, Poland will be next. A re-play of 1939.

[sandtown]

I can't see them saying yes to Putin's demands, can you?

Who knows exactly what was in the April deal between Ukr and Russia that the US and UK blew up.

[sandtown]

RAND report.

The authors argue that, in addition to minimizing the risks of major escalation, U.S. interests would be best served by avoiding a protracted conflict. The costs and risks of a long war in Ukraine are significant and outweigh the possible benefits of such a trajectory for the United States.

I happened across another Rand study from the early 1990s in which they said that a demilitarized Eastern Europe was in the cards.

How times have changed.

[L.W. Baxter]

Who knows exactly what was in the April deal between Ukr and Russia that the US and UK blew up.

who knows if there was a deal to blow up.

putin was willing to negotiate because his drive to kiev had stalled. was this not during the time period when russian military and supply vehicles were parked on miles of ukrainian freeways?

in other words, the only thing that made negotiation even a possibility, was armed resistance to the invasion. who knows when that reality will change.

[Peerie Maa]

Who knows exactly what was in the April deal between Ukr and Russia that the US and UK blew up.

You referring to this?

On 7 April, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that the peace deal Ukraine drafted and presented to the Russian government contained "unacceptable" elements. Lavrov said that the proposal diverged from the terms negotiators had agreed on. Mykhaylo Podolyak, a negotiator for Ukraine, said that the comments from Lavrov are a tactic to draw attention away from the war crime accusations against Russian forces. Lastly, Lavrov stated, "Despite all the provocations, the Russian delegation will continue with the negotiation process, pressing for our own draft agreement that clearly and fully outlines our initial and key positions and requirements."^[44]
On 11 April, the Chancellor of Austria, Karl Nehammer, visited and spoke with Putin in Moscow in 'very direct, open and hard' talks which were skeptical of the short-term peaceful resolution of the invasion.^[45] By 26 April, the Secretary General of the United Nations Antonio Guterres visited Russia for the purpose of speaking with Putin and Lavrov in separate meetings, and after the meetings with them indicating skepticism as to any short term resolution of differences between Russia and Ukraine largely due to very different respective perspectives on the circumstances of the invasion presently being adopted by each of the two nations.^[46]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_R...e_negotiations

[sandtown]

Is it attacking you to point out, for the umpteenth time, that you have no evidence for this.

If I show you otherwise, will you apologise ??

[Peerie Maa]

I am all ears. This is going to be good.

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

I see it differently.

I think the absolute priority is very, very simple and very hard at the same time.

Persuade China to continue to resist every attempt by Russia to drag China into Russia’s war.

Thats all that’s needed.

[JayInOz]

Listened to a Russian war monger on Youtube last night calling Olaf Scholz the second Hitler, saying that the west had shown their true faces as fascists and nazis and that Nato needs to be destroyed. Apparently what's happening in Ukraine is all our fault. JayInOz

[Osborne Russell]

The Germans then were Nazis. Therefore the Germans now are Nazis. I guess the Great Patriotic War was a uniquely painful defeat for Russia.

[sandtown]

I see it differently.

I think the absolute priority is very, very simple and very hard at the same time.

Persuade China to continue to resist every attempt by Russia to drag China into Russia’s war. .

Good luck with that - since the US has been organizing a face-off with China since the Obama admin - remember the "pivot to Asia"?

https://scheerpost.com/2023/01/26/ca...ovoking-china/

Excerpt - In a surprisingly decent Foreign Affairs article, “The Problem With Primacy,” Van Jackson argues that the U.S. is behaving in such a transparently aggressive manner toward China that it can’t possibly claim to be acting in the interests of preserving peace and stability in the region."

If that reminds you of the US/NATO run-up behavior in Europe, it should.

[skuthorp]

America needs a 'face off' with someone almost as much as China does. I both cases its a distraction from the internal situation.

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

A good youtube from Perun on the present state of the Russian military industrial complex:

https://youtu.be/V9xQf8LQgCU

[Tom Hunter]

Yesterday ACB posted his ideas about how Challengers will be employed in Ukraine. He said (correctly) that the Challenger was designed to engage large numbers of advancing Soviet tanks at a distance, shoot them up, change position and then do it again. (when Challenger was designed NATO and the Warsaw Pact were planning to send about 90,000 tanks into action if a war occurred, two thirds of them Warsaw Pact)

He then suggested that Ukraine would use Challengers to counter Russian advances in the way they were designed. This makes sense, but I think it’s wrong.

Reasons why:
Current Russian assaults do not involve large scale tank operations. They have not since the February offensives. Since summer the Russians have made small advances behind large artillery barrages. So there will not be a Russian armored thrust to counter.
Ukraine, on the other hand, has launched successful armored thrusts with light armor especially the Kharkiv offensive last fall.

In this war Challengers are most vulnerable to mines and artillery. If they are static to defend they can be knocked out by Russian artillery. If they are part of a mobile assault force it becomes very difficult for the Russians to hit them with artillery.
Ukraine has Bradleys’ and Marders that are going to get into service at roughly the same time as the Challengers. A brigade with 14 Challengers, a bunch of T-72/T-64s and 50 Bradleys would be very difficult for the Russians to stop. This is especially true if the Ukrainians pick a part of the front that Russia has garrisoned with troops using older Soviet equipment.

My guess is they will build a NATO armored brigade and use it as a fist. I am not certain this will work, but I think they will try.