Isn't he completely boned without Putin's support though? I thought he burnt all the bridges with everyone else in 2020.
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.
He is, for sure. Letting Russia invade Ukraine through Belarus is going to come back on him, even if all the rest didn't.
All the May 9 speculation feels very clickbaity.
Italy seems to be pussying this one out.
Can we call the French intelligence services to get rid of this appropriately? I'm sure they sure know a thing or two about blowing up boats.
This is an interesting theory and not as crazy as it may sound initially. Would explain a lot of things that have been perplexing with regards to Belarus' involvement (or lack of it to some degree) in the current war.
600 missiles have been fired from Belarus towards Ukraine since the invasion has begun. World needs to sanction his regime to the ground.
He’d have boots on the ground in Ukraine by now.
A long-form style Reuters article.
It's pretty hard to imagine the amount of intel the US gets either from the air or with undercover operators. It seems they pretty much know where everybody is and when.
US intelligence has been absolutely incredible. I do wonder what part of it was signals intel, imagery intel and human intel.
This conflict certainly raised the standing of the US IC, after Iraq it really had gotten a very bad rep.
It's different situations though, sneaking US operators in Russia has pretty been a national sport since the 50's. And since there's far less turnover at the top of the state, it's easier to keep people in place for a while.
I'm really surprised by all the reports about international and foremost US intelligence.
It seems like not only the Russian weapons, equipment and strategies are far worse than expected, but also their capabilities regarding communication and information technology.
With all the reports about (successful) Russian cyber attacks in recent years I would've guessed that they could compete with the US in that regard.
It seems like not only the Russian weapons, equipment and strategies are far worse than expected, but also their capabilities regarding communication and information technology.
With all the reports about (successful) Russian cyber attacks in recent years I would've guessed that they could compete with the US in that regard.
That's no joke! He'd be there himself.
I think the Russians are good at capitalizing on low-hanging fruit. But not as good at defending against other countries' cyber capabilities.
One also has to remember that Iraq was not because the US IC gave bad intelligence but because the Bush administration (Rumsfeld in particular) pressured the top guys at CIA to produce reports that would support their case to strike Iraq. A lot of reporting has been done about how many in the US IC doubted the guy behind much of the info, Ahmed Chalabi, but that once war was inevitable people shut up and got colored by war fervor. Not too dissimilar one could argue to what is happening with Russia at the moment.
Bully!
From what Ive seen, I'm pretty sure the RAF alone could wipe out the Russian Federation airforce, and that is with the RAF's depleted nature right now, we have fewer planes, but far, far advanced on Russian aircraft, combine that with the United States Navy Airforce, and that by the way disregards the USAF, in all reality Russia is completely fecked. The UK has 3 trident submarines, each capable of destroying Russia on its own, add that to any other NATO country that wants to help, I dont see where Putin can go. He is a massive cnut, he's fecked himself into a corner and I personally hope he dies a slow, and very, very painful death. Like the last scene in Braveheart, he hears a Ukrainian shout FREEDOM...
We have four ... not that it makes much difference, nuclear deterrence-wise.
I understand the part about Gerasimov being leaked since it could be used as a way to try to sow suspicion within the Russian leadership of the US is deliberately protecting Gerasimov. The broader issue is that, while the Russians know that we are helping Ukraine to some degree, publicly bragging about it is more likely to pressure Russia into some type of response. Openly humiliating Putin just seems more dangerous than humiliating him privately.
The subsequent story that we confirmed the Moskva's location seems somewhat gratuitous, but I can also see the benefit in conveying to the Russians that they can't operate in the Black Sea freely given our intel capabilities. We could do that privately though.
But what sort of response does Putin realistically have at his disposal at this point ? He’s getting humiliated in conventional war by a military one tenth Russia’s size and doesn’t have the luxury of using a nuke because it would isolate him from any countries who have previously abstained at the UN. He’s in a lose lose situation with dwindling options to work with. The US and Nato position is clearly to grind down his military resources to the point where he is forced to negotiate to stop the bleeding.
Honestly my two favorite historical individuals to study.
I agree that his ability to respond is tightly constrained, but I don't know the benefit of publicly spiking the football on this. There's no reason to confirm it for specific cases since similar stories about targeting assistance have come out recently. Assuming Putin wants to use this as more ammunition for his propaganda machine, giving specific examples, namely the Moskva since I'm sure the officer strike won't be mentioned there, makes it easier to sell to the Russian people. He can say, "Look, America is helping Ukraine murder your boys, and they're bragging about it in their own media!" It can help refine the talking point into something more digestible than nebulous and ubiquitous claims that the US is helping kill Russian soldiers.
It's similar to the British officials last week saying that they had no problem with the Ukrainians using their donated British weapons to strike Russia.
Fair point, you've got me thinking the US has intentionally turned up the aggression on it's posture and language, in order to match a coming increase in assistance. A lot of the US weapons are getting into the battlefield now, US made artillary will be out distancing Russian artillary, the intensity on the ground is higher. It also signals to other countries what will happen if they try a similar move.
Those won't mean jack when Trump is back in 2024. At that point the US will probably invade Ukraine from the east to help Russia
Those won't mean jack when Trump is back in 2024. At that point the US will probably invade Ukraine from the east to help Russia
The risk of Trump (or his clone) winning in 2024 is exactly why the EU and UK need to rapidly ramp up defence spending and military cooperation, so the Europe can be adequately defended against Russia even without the U.S. Having Sweden and Finland as part of the club will help with this.
These assurances are about the period of time between an application and being accepted as a full member of Nato. By 2024 Both Finland and Sweden will be full Nato members.Those won't mean jack when Trump is back in 2024. At that point the US will probably invade Ukraine from the east to help Russia
The way things are going for them I fear they’ll false flag attack their own victory parade to justify declaring ‘war’