Octopus Overlords

Yeah, that is very bad news. When the regular army is too sympathetic to civilians, you bring in mercenaries/foreign fighters.

YellowKing wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 10:53 am I thought this was a great piece re: the myth of Putin's strategic genius. Something I've been 100% guilty of indulging as well. Perhaps we stop looking at this as part of some hidden master plan that Putin has, and more as the desperate fumblings of a deranged fool.

I'm glad that others see there is no long game.
It worries me though, because irrational choices have a tendency to sping wildly out of control.

Holman wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:22 am

malchior wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:06 am

Dogstar wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 10:59 amTo be fair to Zelensky, he was probably holding out hope that this could be avoided. If he mobilized, Russia portrays Ukraine as a threat and convinces a few more people that their actions are justified. If he doesn't, maybe his country doesn't get invaded -- but he risks being behind the eight ball in terms of defense.

I'm sure that was the calculation. I'm just following the people talking about this and sort of surprised by his passivity. I'm also sure it plays into the Russian threat was ever present theme and maybe this is a consequence of Trump and loss of prestige in American intelligence. Maybe Zelensky was like...alright bros...but in any case it remains to be seen how the defense holds up.

Do we know that they *didn't* prepare? I thought I heard that reserves were called up and equipment was readied.

They didn't officially mobilize until the invasion began. Apparently the military and oppo parties were begging Zelensky to prepare. This article was just 2 days ago. It was obviously not zero preparation but they were facing an envelopment army and they weren't even mobilized. Hence the quick advance. In any case, this is the difference probably between delay versus quick capture as I've read it. It wasn't complete lack of preparation - the idea is that they underprepared considerably compared to the risk they faced.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has called up army reservists and ordered military exercises for volunteers in newly created territorial defense brigades, but senior opposition lawmakers and former ministers fear the country is ill-prepared for war with Russia — despite their pleas to the government to get organized.

With credible reports mounting of more Russian forces crossing into Moscow’s breakaway republics in Ukraine’s eastern Donbas region, a clamor is building from opposition parties in the Verkhovna Rada, the country’s parliament, for much more intensive war-planning. They are demanding the government start in earnest to draft civil defense orders and to mobilize Ukrainians.

Holman wrote:They certainly didn't have time to increase the size of their military, but they weren't caught with their tanks in storage and their troops on leave. Plus they were handing out thousands of firearms to willing civilians on the first day of the invasion, something that presumably takes a while to organize.

Not really. It requires an armory, trucks, and drivers. That's usually the *last ditch* effort. I saw the video of it. It was literally push crate onto street and let anyone run up and grab them.

My impression is that they are of course a much smaller military than what Russia has set against them, but they weren't caught with their pants down.

If what the Ukrainian Interior minister says this morning is true that they've inflicted approx. 2800 casualties, 500+ armored vehicles, 10 aircraft, 7 helicopters, and ~80 tanks) then they've done well but several experts seem skeptical of the reports. Though even half would be a good result.

Unagi wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 10:36 am

dbt1949 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 8:59 am I was surprised at how fast Russia is progressing.
Russians are already at Kyiv's doorstep. Media is treating that like it's going to be the end of organized fighting. We'll see.

Ok but what then do you mean about Afghanistan?

If I understand my history, Russia left there, more-or-less defeated. You wrote that Afghanistan didn’t put up a fight against the Russians

I didn't say that.
I was talking about the Afghan soldiers against the Taliban.

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:35 am Yeah, that is very bad news. When the regular army is too sympathetic to civilians, you bring in mercenaries/foreign fighters.

It's also could be a good sign in a sense. What isn't clear to me if they are at the front-line or being re-deployed. At the front-line is bad but
re-deployed would perhaps be an indication that resistance is expected to be much fiercer than predicted.

Kraken wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:17 amIt was a foregone conclusion that Russia would take Kiev and decapitate the government. Whether that takes a day or a week or even a month is immaterial except to those who have to suffer and die in the process. The big question is what happens after that. Does Putin try to garrison the country? How much power does he have to project, and for how long, to enforce his puppet regime? 200,000 troops to occupy a country the size of Texas isn't a lot, if that country is determined to resist and receiving outside help. Or does he install his minions, declare victory and go home, satisfied with expelling the pro-Western democracy on his doorstep? Or (unlikely) does he steamroll to the borders of the Baltics while Ukraine is still in chaos?

We don't know Putin's gameplan. Events probably won't follow it.

What I read is that Chechnya/Grozny cost them 10 years and the population was 1M versus 40M. Same rough troop levels. Hence the puzzlement about the end game. It also sort of puts to rest to the whole steamroll Europe idea people are throwing around. First nukes. Second it makes no sense with the size of their force.

dbt1949 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:47 am I didn't say that.
I was talking about the Afghan soldiers against the Taliban.

well, this is what you wrote, so forgive me for drawing the conclusion that you were speaking of Afghan/Russia

dbt1949 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 8:31 am Well, it looks to be a short war. At least they put up a fight unlike Afghanistan.

Assuming "unlike Afghanistan" spoke to Afghanistan's fight against Russia... which is way more analogous to this, vs the Taliban taking 'back' Afghanistan, IMHO.

carry on.

malchior wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:49 am

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:35 am Yeah, that is very bad news. When the regular army is too sympathetic to civilians, you bring in mercenaries/foreign fighters.

It's also could be a good sign in a sense. What isn't clear to me if they are at the front-line or being re-deployed. At the front-line is bad but
re-deployed would perhaps be an indication that resistance is expected to be much fiercer than predicted.

Well, if they're in Grozny now (as the tweet indicates), they'll be new to the fight. New Russian troops is bad for Ukrainians. If they are Chechen Kadyrov loyalists, it's even worse.

malchior wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:49 am

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:35 am Yeah, that is very bad news. When the regular army is too sympathetic to civilians, you bring in mercenaries/foreign fighters.

It's also could be a good sign in a sense. What isn't clear to me if they are at the front-line or being re-deployed. At the front-line is bad but
re-deployed would perhaps be an indication that resistance is expected to be much fiercer than predicted.

What I have been saying is that you have two groups that will historically fight to the last man - people that will have no problem dying if it means inflicting severe loss on your opponent. Historically. Just look at the Snake Island situation from yesterday. They had no chance at survival but they still told the Russians to get f-ed.

What I really haven't seen anything about the current state of the Russian army. If they're on board with what's happening, if they're motivated and prepared to do anything Putin orders, etc... I have no doubts Ukrainians will make the Russians fight for every inch. It's one thing to invade; it's another to be defending your homeland and by all accounts the Ukrainians seem motivated. I don't know if the Russian army is prepared (mentally, at large) for that. I'm not sure if Putin has units that are completely loyal mixed in with conscripted soldiers that are realizing it's not going to be a walk in the park. So my take was sending in the foreign fighters was a sign that it wasn't going well (Putin's perspective) and he needs some "shock troops" on the ground to demoralize the Ukrainians and punch through local resistance.

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:58 am

malchior wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:49 am

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:35 am Yeah, that is very bad news. When the regular army is too sympathetic to civilians, you bring in mercenaries/foreign fighters.

It's also could be a good sign in a sense. What isn't clear to me if they are at the front-line or being re-deployed. At the front-line is bad but
re-deployed would perhaps be an indication that resistance is expected to be much fiercer than predicted.

Well, if they're in Grozny now (as the tweet indicates), they'll be new to the fight. New Russian troops is bad for Ukrainians. If they are Chechen Kadyrov loyalists, it's even worse.

It's literally some guys clip and text. We have no idea if it is even real. My point still is that if Putin is re-deploying troops that is still possibly a good sign. Of course, it's bad that Putin has more troops in reserve but it's day 2 and he is throwing more people in? I see that as fairly positive.

malchior wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 12:01 pm

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:58 am

malchior wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:49 am

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:35 am Yeah, that is very bad news. When the regular army is too sympathetic to civilians, you bring in mercenaries/foreign fighters.

It's also could be a good sign in a sense. What isn't clear to me if they are at the front-line or being re-deployed. At the front-line is bad but
re-deployed would perhaps be an indication that resistance is expected to be much fiercer than predicted.

Well, if they're in Grozny now (as the tweet indicates), they'll be new to the fight. New Russian troops is bad for Ukrainians. If they are Chechen Kadyrov loyalists, it's even worse.

It's literally some guys clip and text. We have no idea if it is even real. My point still is that if Putin is re-deploying troops that is still possibly a good sign. Of course, it's bad that Putin has more troops in reserve but it's day 2 and he is throwing more people in? I see that as fairly positive.

Right, I acknowledged "if" it was true. We have no idea.

But assuming it is, we also have no idea if this was part of the plan. Did he plan on moving them in on day two? Are these for mop-up/civilian control?

I mean you may be right, it may signal unexpected losses/ineffectiveness in the main offensive. Even in that best-case scenario, he's about to replace the losses with these troops.

We don’t want to put US troops on the ground , but if Ukraine asked for it, I’d have no problem using our drones there.

I can’t think of a better use for them then in this type of situation.

Then you have Putin getting mad and attacking bases that house the drones,probably the Baltic states and Poland,NATO members.

Unagi wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 12:11 pm We don’t want to put US troops on the ground , but if Ukraine asked for it, I’d have no problem using our drones there.

I can’t think of a better use for them then in this type of situation.

No problem? Wow, want to escalate to WW3 faster much?

There's a BIG difference between airstrikes on non-nuclear powers, and nuclear powers.

Yeah it strikes me that people still don't get the hard boundary on conflict between nuclear powers. Putin *lied to his own people* when we killed Russian mercs in Syria. Sending civilian volunteers? Possible. Sending arms? Probable. Drone strikes? Not happening.

Edit: Anecdotally I can even say we're very cautious about probing each others critical infrastructure with cyberattacks. The Russians use cut outs for this that are well-known (and are largely the same folks who attacked the 2016 election).

Smoove_B wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:59 am
What I have been saying is that you have two groups that will historically fight to the last man - people that will have no problem dying if it means inflicting severe loss on your opponent. Historically. Just look at the Snake Island situation from yesterday. They had no chance at survival but they still told the Russians to get f-ed.

When you grow up with family stories like the Holodomor, I doubt anyone is in a hurry to surrender to the Soviets Russians.

Tongue-in-cheek/
We don’t know who had control of those drones. It could be the US, but it could also be China. It could also be lots of other people. It also could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds, OK? You don’t know who controls those drones.

Or maybe Putin is getting vig from U.S. arms manufacturers.

Unagi wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 12:11 pm We don’t want to put US troops on the ground , but if Ukraine asked for it, I’d have no problem using our drones there.

I can’t think of a better use for them then in this type of situation.

This is purely conjecture on my part but I suspect we have a small number of personnel with a special skill set responsible for coordinating the secure flow of intelligence from NATO and the US to the Ukrainian command. Perhaps some cybersecurity experts as well. These are the sort of deployments that shouldn’t get mentioned in the media…

The good news is slower than expected. The bad news is they've only gotten 1/3 of their troops in country so they'll possibly be able to keep piling on pressure on Kyiv.

Washington Post wrote:Russian offensive on Ukraine has lost momentum, Pentagon says

The Russian military has lost momentum in its offensive on Ukraine, a senior U.S. defense official said Friday, cautioning that could change in coming days.

The assessment came amid signs that Russia has struggled to move on the capital, Kyiv, as outgunned Ukrainian forces dig in and put up a fight. Roughly one-third of the Russian forces committed to the assault now are in Ukraine, which would amount to more than 50,000, the official said.

“They have not achieved the progress that we believe they thought they would,” the official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity under ground rules set by the Pentagon.

The invasion continued with an amphibious landing of Russian naval forces west of the city of Mariupol and with Russia continuing to launch missiles into Ukraine. As of Friday morning in Washington, more than 200 missile strikes had occurred, the official said, up from 160 as of Thursday. Some of the missiles landed in residential areas.

If I were them (Pentagon) , I wouldn’t promote any ‘good news’, as it will only be used against you a little later when that news is no longer relevant.

$iljanus wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 12:57 pm

Unagi wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 12:11 pm We don’t want to put US troops on the ground , but if Ukraine asked for it, I’d have no problem using our drones there.

I can’t think of a better use for them then in this type of situation.

This is purely conjecture on my part but I suspect we have a small number of personnel with a special skill set responsible for coordinating the secure flow of intelligence from NATO and the US to the Ukrainian command. Perhaps some cybersecurity experts as well.

Even if or when Kyiv falls the war will go on. Capturing a capital to conquer a country is so 20th century.

I thought Colbert's monologue last night calling out the former president and Fox News was not only entertaining but spot on.

Zelensky is calling for European volunteers and more military aid. Looks like they are split between survival mode and hunkering down for a long fight.

Honest question, what is the difference ?

Now would be a good time for Chechnya and anyone else who hates Russia to hit the Russians from behind.

stessier wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 2:31 pm I thought Colbert's monologue last night calling out the former president and Fox News was not only entertaining but spot on.

Went looking for it found this instead.

malchior wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:55 am

Kraken wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:17 amIt was a foregone conclusion that Russia would take Kiev and decapitate the government. Whether that takes a day or a week or even a month is immaterial except to those who have to suffer and die in the process. The big question is what happens after that. Does Putin try to garrison the country? How much power does he have to project, and for how long, to enforce his puppet regime? 200,000 troops to occupy a country the size of Texas isn't a lot, if that country is determined to resist and receiving outside help. Or does he install his minions, declare victory and go home, satisfied with expelling the pro-Western democracy on his doorstep? Or (unlikely) does he steamroll to the borders of the Baltics while Ukraine is still in chaos?

We don't know Putin's gameplan. Events probably won't follow it.

What I read is that Chechnya/Grozny cost them 10 years and the population was 1M versus 40M. Same rough troop levels. Hence the puzzlement about the end game. It also sort of puts to rest to the whole steamroll Europe idea people are throwing around. First nukes. Second it makes no sense with the size of their force.

Plus Putin must not have expected unity amongst the allies under Biden's leadership. Putin's boy had four years to ruin that, and had seemed to leave NATO splintered and demoralized. Biden earns praise for that. And the accuracy of US intel must have surprised Putin as well.

Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 12:37 pm

Smoove_B wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:59 am
What I have been saying is that you have two groups that will historically fight to the last man - people that will have no problem dying if it means inflicting severe loss on your opponent. Historically. Just look at the Snake Island situation from yesterday. They had no chance at survival but they still told the Russians to get f-ed.

When you grow up with family stories like the Holodomor, I doubt anyone is in a hurry to surrender to the Soviets Russians.

This.

Unagi wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 2:40 pm Honest question, what is the difference ?

If directed at my post - a steady stream of volunteers is needed to survive the initial invasion. Can they field enough people and do enough damage to bog down the offensive.

Whereas the military aid is lagging support. It takes time to arrive, get distributed, and molded into a reliable supply chain. A supply line from outside the country is likely going to be more stable and support long-term efforts.

stessier wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 2:31 pm I thought Colbert's monologue last night calling out the former president and Fox News was not only entertaining but spot on.

I think that's this (the stuff about Trump is towards the end but the whole thing is worth listening to):

malchior wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 2:55 pm

Unagi wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 2:40 pm Honest question, what is the difference ?

If directed at my post - a steady stream of volunteers is needed to survive the initial invasion. Can they field enough people and do enough damage to bog down the offensive.

Whereas the military aid is lagging support. It takes time to arrive, get distributed, and molded into a reliable supply chain. A supply line from outside the country is likely going to be more stable and support long-term efforts.

I assumed it was the other one:

Looks like they are split between survival mode and hunkering down for a long fight.

Survival mode is kind of lasting the long fight. They're not getting any NATO help.

malchior wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 1:13 pm The good news is slower than expected. The bad news is they've only gotten 1/3 of their troops in country so they'll possibly be able to keep piling on pressure on Kyiv.

Washington Post wrote:Russian offensive on Ukraine has lost momentum, Pentagon says

The Russian military has lost momentum in its offensive on Ukraine, a senior U.S. defense official said Friday, cautioning that could change in coming days.

The assessment came amid signs that Russia has struggled to move on the capital, Kyiv, as outgunned Ukrainian forces dig in and put up a fight. Roughly one-third of the Russian forces committed to the assault now are in Ukraine, which would amount to more than 50,000, the official said.

“They have not achieved the progress that we believe they thought they would,” the official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity under ground rules set by the Pentagon.

The invasion continued with an amphibious landing of Russian naval forces west of the city of Mariupol and with Russia continuing to launch missiles into Ukraine. As of Friday morning in Washington, more than 200 missile strikes had occurred, the official said, up from 160 as of Thursday. Some of the missiles landed in residential areas.

I think the big picture good news is that Ukraine is showing a will to fight and that the Russian "de-Nazification" efforts are not at all welcome. There's really no question that without active NATO intervention (which is not happening), Ukraine is not going to withstand a Russian invasion. But if the Ukrainian people show they are far from ambivalent about having a Russian-puppet government forced on them, it really spells trouble for Putin and Russia long term.

The tragic part is, the more the Ukrainians fight, the higher the toll will be on them.

Dont think a lot of Russian troops are happy to be there. They consider Ukraine to be brothers.

Kurth wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 3:12 pm

I think the big picture good news is that Ukraine is showing a will to fight and that the Russian "de-Nazification" efforts are not at all welcome.

Putin's goodwinization is particularly galling, what with Zelensky being Jewish and all.

You guys see the Bond villain plot regarding the international space station. The head of Russian space agency implied letting it crash into India or China

IceBear wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 4:02 pm You guys see the Bond villain plot regarding the international space station. The head of Russian space agency implied letting it crash into India or China

He also mentioned Europe and the US as possible crash sites. I don't believe he was referring to deliberately crashing it, but rather that the ISS is dependent on Russian vehicles for propulsion in order to maintain a stable orbit, and if the Russian space program is crippled by sanctions then there would be consequences to the ISS if they can't launch missions.