Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
The BBC reports:
"Russia has lost more than three times as much military hardware as Ukraine in the first 40 days of the war, according to a military analysis site.
Relying on video and photographic evidence of equipment destroyed, abandoned or captured, Oryx found Russia lost 2,406 pieces of military equipment – including tanks, armoured vehicles and military aircraft - compared with only 677 losses for Ukraine.
To some extent the scale of the losses reflect the larger size of Russia’s military. But they also suggest that Ukrainian forces have, so far, proved to be more effective in combat.
Russian losses appear to be significantly higher right across the board – from combat aircraft to artillery pieces and armoured vehicles.
However, the Oryx tally also suggests Russia has had some success in targeting Ukraine’s air defences. There’s visual confirmation that Ukraine has lost 36 air defence systems, just slightly fewer than the Russian number of 42. These figures don't include shorter-range portable systems, known as Manpads.
Oryx says the amount of equipment destroyed in the war is likely to be significantly higher than its team has documented."
"Russia has lost more than three times as much military hardware as Ukraine in the first 40 days of the war, according to a military analysis site.
Relying on video and photographic evidence of equipment destroyed, abandoned or captured, Oryx found Russia lost 2,406 pieces of military equipment – including tanks, armoured vehicles and military aircraft - compared with only 677 losses for Ukraine.
To some extent the scale of the losses reflect the larger size of Russia’s military. But they also suggest that Ukrainian forces have, so far, proved to be more effective in combat.
Russian losses appear to be significantly higher right across the board – from combat aircraft to artillery pieces and armoured vehicles.
However, the Oryx tally also suggests Russia has had some success in targeting Ukraine’s air defences. There’s visual confirmation that Ukraine has lost 36 air defence systems, just slightly fewer than the Russian number of 42. These figures don't include shorter-range portable systems, known as Manpads.
Oryx says the amount of equipment destroyed in the war is likely to be significantly higher than its team has documented."
Seems like a bit of a flawed methodology, no? I'm sure they have access to a lot more Ukrainian footage than Russian footage.
I don't know, but I think they try to take things like this into account when making their assessments. But you'd have to visit the Oryx website to check out the details of their approach.
As you said, in the end it comes down to the rather philosophical question how much of one's character you interpret as a product of external influences. It's a really difficult topic because chances are we'd be just as indoctrined as they are if we weren't brought up to be self critical and questioning what we're being told. Yet on the other hand this sort of fatalism frees basically everybody from any blame, even Putin.
One way or another, I'm an optimist so I haven't given up hope that the Russian people play their part in eventually overthrowing Putin
Let's not forget that there is a significant number of Russians who were so heavily against this war that they proested despite the drastic consequences they have to fear. And the cynic in me also believes that people are naturally egotistical creatures of habit and the sanctions hitting Russia will take a huge toll on Putin's support. Because at some point, cognitive dissonances will start working against him. Precisely when people no longer want to believe his propaganda because his "truth" goes along with a detoriation of their standards of living. Especially should his support in the military and FSB weaken and severe punishments become less likely to be actually executed. Psychologically, it's probably easire to support an autocrat than accepting you're being oppressed. It's a way to avoid the inner conflict of "I'm not free and should do something about it but I can't because I may lose everything".Thought they would have more to be honest.
Belarus defectors cripple Russian supply lines:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/belarus-defectors-cripple-russian-supply-lines-t5qvrq2g9
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/belarus-defectors-cripple-russian-supply-lines-t5qvrq2g9
HACKING group Anonymous claims it has released the details of 120,000 Russian soldiers in Ukraine, in the latest cyber attack on Putin's forces.
Names, dates of birth, addresses, and even passport numbers were included in the major hack of Russian data.
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/8663777/anonymous-russia-leak-soldiers-putin-ukraine-war/
Names, dates of birth, addresses, and even passport numbers were included in the major hack of Russian data.
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/8663777/anonymous-russia-leak-soldiers-putin-ukraine-war/
Stumbled across this interview with Sergey Karaganov, a Russian foreign policy thinker that allegedly has some standing with Putin:
https://www.newstatesman.com/world/...-victory-sergey-karaganov-on-what-putin-wants
Always interesting to read what the opponent might be thinking, even when it's borderline delusional.
https://www.newstatesman.com/world/...-victory-sergey-karaganov-on-what-putin-wants
Always interesting to read what the opponent might be thinking, even when it's borderline delusional.
Well, they are not claiming anything about the total numbers of equipment lost. They just say "these numbers can be verified based on footage and we don't know how much else was lost/destroyed". So you shouldn't draw to many conclusions from those numbers, except that they are the definite bottom line.
They don't give any estimates on the effectiveness of the two armies and the unknown numbers. That is purely the interpretation of their numbers done by the BBC, not by the Oryx team.
What do we think Russia's aim in this war is now? They have presumably given up all hope of taking Kyiv or regime change.
Taking and holding Luhansk & Donetsk Oblasts, Mariupol, Melitopol & maybe Kherson (the land bridge to Crimea), but probably giving up on Kharkiv, Odesa, Zaporizhzhia and any other territory.
That’s what I believe their aim is shifting towards, and if they’re able to establish it and then get a peace deal, they’ll claim glorious victory. That said, with recent events, I doubt Ukraine will accept a peace deal. I fully expect Ukraine to turn their military south to break the sieges of Kherson and Mariupol.
Taking territory of some value in the South East, generally causing more attrition to Ukraine's military, population and infrastructure, putting themselves in a favorable situation for a peace deal that leads to recognition of Crimea as theirs + guarantees of Ukranian neutrality (no NATO) and maybe some limitations to size and equipment of Ukraine's military.
I would imagine something along those lines, but honestly Russia at this point is fighting not to lose. They've staked the existence of their State in its current form on this conflict. If they were to somehow be militarily pushed out of their current positions in Ukraine and left just with military control of Crimea (but no recognition) then I think things could get very tumultuous internally.
The cynical answer is that the aim is for the current regime in Moscow to survive (perhaps in a literal sense as well). In a strategic sense, probably that land bridge and therefore full control of the Sea of Azov. Also, to destroy as much of Ukraine as possible so that the EU/US has to fund a massive rebuilding of infrastructure.
When talking about Russian aims we slowly have to take a certain date into consideration: 9th of May. The day of victory (over Nazi Germany) and one of the most important and defining national holidays Russia has. This might be the deadline for Putin to present some kind of win to keep the public opinion on his side. When the invasion started it seemed unthinkable that the fight would still be ongoing by that time, but now we now that this is absolutely possible.
Knowing what happens to civilians, surely there is no way Ukraine will allow Russia any territorial gains beyond Donbas/Crimea?
But then what would Russia have gained in the end? Some neutrality agreement and recognition of the Donbas and Crimea? Can Putin sell that domestically as a success?
But then what would Russia have gained in the end? Some neutrality agreement and recognition of the Donbas and Crimea? Can Putin sell that domestically as a success?
Funnily enough this guy (the article's author) had served as a campaign manager for Arseniy Yatsenyuk's presidential campaign in Ukraine in 2010. One of those politicians in-between right and far-right. Before that he had worked for Kuchma & Yanukovich which is more understandable as those were more Russian-oriented presidents.
He can sell anything as a success. Most people are totally brainwashed and ready to believe any nonsense spouted by authorities.
Don’t think the guy had much sleep since the war broke out.
That’s very true.
"We're going to denazify Ukraine".
"Oh I'm sorry, we couldn't topple the nazi regime in Kyiv so they'll stay in power. And we gained pretty much no more land than we already controlled anyway".
Some serious sorrow and pain in the eyes of that second photo. Can't imagine what it would be like seeing your people butchered and killed en masse.
Sprinkle with some top-noth propaganda and even that would work, because I've never seen Russian society so full of hatred and so lack of common sence.
fecker looks like Kyle Rittenhouse.
So it seems there is still a sizeable amount of civilians stuck in Mariupol.
Sorry, there’s still a Park Inn in the DNR?!
I reckon so. I dunno if that’s a big deal or not though
I should find this all sorts of things, but really after dealing with how folks here denied Covid being a thing, I'm not surprised.
I'm wondering, what's holding back Ukrainian civilians (who are close to war areas) from fleeing? For example, those in Bucha, why were they still there when Russia invaded? No resources to flee? No transportation methods?
It's also a bigger question in itself as it relates to all other wars. How come there are always civilians who stay behind and get occupied?
I don't mean to ask the question in a 'victim blaming', I'm just trying to understand how these things happen.
It's also a bigger question in itself as it relates to all other wars. How come there are always civilians who stay behind and get occupied?
I don't mean to ask the question in a 'victim blaming', I'm just trying to understand how these things happen.
I have personal experience unfortunately of in-laws reacting in a similar way. Admittedly no-one likes their country being slagged off and portrayed as the bad guy but, in this case, the level of cognitive dissonance is off the scale. I think it goes back to the whole WWII mythology that has been vigorously promoted, particularly in the last 20 years. The idea of Russian soldiers behaving like the bogeyman of 1941-1945 (ignoring the horrendous crimes that took place from 1944 onwards when they reached East Prussia) is simply too much to compute. The most you’ll get is that, if it’s true, they are not Russian but rather Chechen, Dagestani, Syrian etc. If you are being an optimist, I suppose self-delusion is better than actively endorsing such behaviour.
Well, on a personal level I can offer one account. My wife’s parents are in Lviv still and have never had plans to flee unless they truly have to. My father-in-law is a triage radiologist and feels a duty to do all he can, even though he is of an age where he can leave Ukraine. My mother-in-law’s parents are close to bedridden: her father had a stroke and can barely move, whilst her mother has had a number of falls. They need care and there’s no social care system in Ukraine to speak off. They are of an age where they will never leave Lviv again. My in-laws leaving Lviv would mean leaving my wife’s grandparents to their fate.
Aside from that, virtually everything my in-laws own and know is in Lviv: property, business etc. They are middle class in Ukraine, but their money wouldn’t stretch far here, and don’t speak anything bar Ukrainian or Russian. It’s understandable they probably wouldn’t want to leave lightly.
It depends on quite a lof of things, like where they are and what their situation is, age group? Bucha, given it’s location, is obviously problematic. Mass evacuation isn’t easy, especially without proper coordination. Being on the road could easily lead them straight into major conflict zones, they’ll have to stop somewhere to rest, get fuel. Perhaps they didn’t really think the Russians would be killing a shitload of innocent people, and that they would be safer at home.
Thanks, much appreciated for the personal accounts.
Yep. I was suprised when I read today that around 140k people are still stuck in Mariupol.
Elder people not wanting/not being able to leave their homes; pets; disbelief at what’s happening and, again, the lack of belief that soldiers would harass civilians (obviously it’s not the case anymore but many thought so in the early days); the dangers of fleeing — instead of sitting in your house you’re riding off to the unknown with enemy checkpoints and a very real possibility of getting shot on the way.
It’s how it was for Bucha (based on the accounts that are already available), it’s how it was in Mariupol (especially there since they’ve lived 8 years with artillery shells and bombs flying nearby), Kherson etc.
Everything happened too quickly, the whole situation was too surreal — and nobody knew just how inhumane (I can’t even find a word) Russian soldiers would end up behaving.