Here we go again-Ukraine once again

[Catfish]

Two videos (only in german unfortunately as of yet)

1st one about the Budapest memorandum (nuclear treaty), when Ukraine was promised never to be attacked, when it gave away their nuclear arsenal in 1994. Guaranteed and signed by Russia.




2nd one is from historian prof. Gestwa, proving eight theses wrong, that are hip among the right wing and left Putin-supporters.
Excellent explanations and thorough info.
If anyone finds a translation ?



00:00 - Intro - Prof Dr. Klaus Gestwa introduction

01:46 - Thesis 1 - The NATO has threatened Russia, Putin had to defend himself.

06:52 - Thesis 2 - Ukraine historically belongs to Russia.

13:38 - Thesis 3 - No one can say exactly what Putin wants.

18:53 - Thesis 4 - Ukraine is no democratic state, it is being guided by the west and oligarchs.

22:36 - Thesis 5 - Crimea and Donbas belong to Russia historically.

30:17 - Thesis 6 - Who delivers weapons extends the war.

36:56 - Thesis 7 - Russian media do not lie more than western ones.

41:56 - Thesis 8 - Ukraine and the west could already have stopped the war with negotiations.

Nope to all, and obviously so.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Russia has indirectly threatened Georgia with war. The Kremlin warns the country of a situation similar to the Maidan uprising that occurred in Ukraine in 2014. Thus, if citizens overthrow their government, there could be a declaration of war.


"The protests against the law on 'foreign agents' that have erupted in Tbilisi are leading to calls for the resignation of the government. We recommend the Georgian people to remember a similar situation in Ukraine in 2014 and what it eventually led to!" the Kremlin representation in Crimea tweeted back on March 10.

Protests against “foreign agents" bill, erupted in #Tbilisi🇬🇪, result in demands for the resignation of the government. We recommend to the georgian people to recall a similar situation in Ukraine🇺🇦 in 2014 and what it finally led to!#ThinkTwice pic.twitter.com/Ju5Y3p8pwh
— Russia's MFA in Crimea🇷🇺 (@PMSimferopol) March 10, 2023

I doubt Putin has the military capability atm.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

I doubt Putin has the military capability atm.

From Maidan 2014 to assault 2022 it took 8 years.

[mapuc]

Originally Posted by Skybird

From Maidan 2014 to assault 2022 it took 8 years.

Didn't Putin send troops to help/support the areas who had said they wanted independent from Ukraine-Didn't he send these unofficially during year 2014 to 2022 and didn't he send troops to Crimea to annex this ?

Markus

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Catfish

Two videos (only in german unfortunately as of yet)

1st one about the Budapest memorandum (nuclear treaty), when Ukraine was promised never to be attacked, when it gave away their nuclear arsenal in 1994. Guaranteed and signed by Russia.

Both videos can have bot-translated English subtitles.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by mapuc

Didn't Putin send troops to help/support the areas who had said they wanted independent from Ukraine-Didn't he send these unofficially during year 2014 to 2022 and didn't he send troops to Crimea to annex this ?

Markus

The voted president Yanukovich was elected on his promise to lead Ukraine to the EU. Once he was president he betrayed his voters by suddenly turnign towards Moscow. Provocations took place on the Maidan, snipers shoot around, Ruissian FSB commadoes tried to stir the situation and Yanukovich tried to blame the demonstratzors anbd Wetsern agitators. So, his people chased him away. Crimea, Donbass and Luhansk were and are parts of Ukraine and thus sovereign from Moscow, Russia had no claim to sent troops there. The only oblast in Ukraine where the last censurs from the early 2000-years, 2002 or 2003 I think, showed that only Crimea had a 50+% majpoirty of people originating for Russian roots. Still, the terriotry is not Russia'S share, but Ukraine's.



Watch the secnd video Catfish posted, the man talskl, aboput the claim tha Russian only takes back what is it sown. The Russian narration is a propagandistic nationalistic lie, like the Nazis' claim that the Poles started the war and German border guards only returned fire in self defence. In fact the Nazis shot men and put them into Polish uniforms and presneted these "polish soldiers" as evidence for the attack launched by Poland. Putins claim that the Russians in Ukriane were beign pout in danger by Kyiv and Russia had to rescue them,, is the same sort of lie. The whole narraiton of a "Russki Mir" is a megalomaniac fabulation form a very sick, imperialistic mind, and a distortion of historic truths and facts.


Lavrov recently was laughed in his face by journalists in india when he sat on the stage and seriously claimed that Ukraine had started the war by attacking Russia and that the war was enforced onto Russia. He is either mentally ill or the toxic, foul-smelling pus in the inflamed hemorrhoids in mankinds anus.



A comical Ali, just in Russian, and much less hilarious but dripping with blood.

[Skybird]

Colonel Reisner, ten days ago. In German, but you can switch on bot-translated English subtitles.




An aside from him made me curious. The man also is historian has a minor in history and has written several books that are listed on Amazon and have all received 4.5-5 stars.

[Rockstar]

Seems the Biden admin is leaking concerns to friendly press outlets. Might indicate they are worried necessity will compel a change of policy. Articles like this attempt to sway public opinion to be prepared for that eventuality.

‘Little fissures’: The U.S.-Ukraine war unity is slowly cracking apart
A tough week for U.S.-Ukraine news reveals an imperfect harmony.

By JONATHAN LEMIRE and ALEXANDER WARD
03/12/2023 07:00 AM EDT

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/0...00&nlid=630318

The United States and Ukraine have largely been in lockstep since President Joe Biden’s administration pledged support for “as long as it takes” in resisting Moscow’s relentless invasion.

But more than a year into the war, there are growing differences behind the scenes between Washington and Kyiv on war aims, and potential flashpoints loom on how, and when, the conflict will end.

“The administration doesn’t have a clear policy objective and a clear goal. Is it to drag this thing out, which is precisely what Vladimir Putin wants?” said Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. “Is it to just give them enough to survive and not to win? I don’t see a policy for victory right now, and if we don’t have that, then what are we doing?”

Publicly, there has been little separation between Biden and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, an alliance on full display last month when the American president made his covert, dramatic visit to Kyiv. But based on conversations with 10 officials, lawmakers and experts, new points of tension are emerging: The sabotage of a natural gas pipeline on the floor of the Atlantic Ocean; the brutal, draining defense of a strategically unimportant Ukrainian city; and a plan to fight for a region where Russian forces have been entrenched for nearly a decade.

Senior administration officials maintain that unity between Washington and Kyiv is tight. But the fractures that have appeared are making it harder to credibly claim there’s little daylight between the U.S. and Ukraine as sunbeams streak through the cracks.

For nine months, Russia has laid siege to Bakhmut, though capturing the southeastern Ukrainian city would do little to alter the trajectory of the war. It has become the focal point of the fight in recent weeks, with troops and prisoners from the mercenary Wagner Group leading the combat against Ukrainian forces. Both sides have suffered heavy losses and reduced the city to smoldering ruins.

Ukraine has dug in, refusing to abandon the ruined city even at tremendous cost.

“Each day of the city’s defense allows us to gain time to prepare reserves and prepare for future offensive operations,” said Col. Gen. Oleksandr Syrskyi, the commander of Ukraine’s ground forces. “At the same time, in the battles for this fortress, the enemy loses the most prepared and combat-capable part of his army — Wagner’s assault troops.”

Multiple administration officials have begun worrying that Ukraine is expending so much manpower and ammunition in Bakhmut that it could sap their ability to mount a major counteroffensive in the spring.

“I certainly don’t want to discount the tremendous work that the Ukrainians’ soldiers and leaders have put into defending Bakhmut — but I think it’s more of a symbolic value than it is a strategic and operational value,” said Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin.

Kyiv, for now, has ignored Washington’s input.

Meanwhile, an assessment by U.S. intelligence suggested that a “pro-Ukraine group” was responsible for the destruction of the Nord Stream natural gas pipelines last fall, shedding light on a great mystery. The new intelligence, first reported by The New York Times, was short on details but appeared to knock down a theory that Moscow was responsible for sabotaging the pipelines that delivered Russian gas to Europe.

Intelligence analysts do not believe Zelenskyy or his aides were involved in the sabotage, but the Biden administration has signaled to Kyiv — much like it did when a car bomb in Moscow killed the daughter of a prominent Russian nationalist last year — that certain acts of violence outside of Ukraine’s borders will not be tolerated.

There has also been, at times, frustration about Washington’s delivery of weapons to Ukraine. The United States has, by far, sent the most weapons and equipment to the front, but Kyiv has always looked ahead for the next set of supplies. Though most in the administration have been understanding about Kyiv’s desperation to defend itself, there have been grumblings about the constant requests and, at times, Zelenskyy not showing appropriate gratitude, according to two White House officials not authorized to speak publicly about private conversations.

“I do think the administration is split, the National Security Council split” on what weapons to send to Ukraine, said McCaul, who’s in constant touch with senior Biden officials. “I talk to a lot of top military brass and they are, in large part, supportive of giving them the ATACMS.”

The administration hasn’t provided those long-range missiles because there are few to spare in America’s own arsenal. There’s also fear that Ukraine might strike faraway Russian targets, potentially escalating the war.

A recent report that the Pentagon was blocking the Biden administration from sharing evidence of possible Russian war crimes with the International Criminal Court also put another dent in the unity narrative. White House officials were dismayed when the New York Times story came out, fearful it would damage the moral case the U.S. has made for supporting Ukraine against Russian war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The administration definitively declared the alliance between the United States — and its allies — and Kyiv remained strong, and that it would last as long as the war raged.

National Security Council spokesperson Adrienne Watson said the White House is “in constant communication with Ukraine as we support their defense of their sovereignty and territorial integrity.” She added that with Putin showing no signs of ceasing his war, “the best thing we can do is to continue to help Ukraine succeed on the battlefield so they can be in the strongest possible position at the negotiating table for when that time comes.”

But the growing disconnects may foreshadow a larger divide over the debate as to how the war will end.

Though Biden has pledged steadfast support, and the coffers remain open for now, the U.S. has been clear with Kyiv that it cannot fund Ukraine indefinitely at this level. Though backing Ukraine has largely been a bipartisan effort, a small but growing number of Republicans have begun to voice skepticism about the use of American treasure to support Kyiv without an end in sight to a distant war.

Among those who have expressed doubt about support for the long haul is House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who has said that the U.S. would not offer a “blank check” to Ukraine and rejected Zelenskyy’s invitation to travel to Kyiv and learn about the realities of war.

“There is always some friction built in,” said Kurt Volker, a special presidential envoy for Ukraine during the Trump administration. “Zelenskyy also stepped in it a bit with McCarthy — coming across as needing to ‘educate’ him, rather than work with him.”

But many observers credit remarkable transatlantic unity, praising the alliance holding firm despite the economic and political toll the war has taken.

“I see the little fissures, but those have existed with points of disagreement and varied views between the U.S. and Ukraine even before the big February invasion, and since then,” said Shelby Magid, deputy director of the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center. “Zelenskyy has made pointed remarks before toward the U.S., and the White House has expressed disagreement with him — publicly and privately — on specific aspects, but that hasn’t shifted or eaten away at the overall U.S. support and partnership.”

Points of crisis still hover on the horizon. Zelenskyy’s insistence that all of Ukraine — including Crimea, which has been under Russian control since 2014 — be returned to Ukraine before any peace negotiations begin would only extend the war, U.S. officials believe. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has signaled to Kyiv that Ukraine’s potential recapture of Crimea would be a red line for Putin, possibly leading to a dramatic escalation from Moscow.

Moreover, the Pentagon has consistently expressed doubts whether Ukraine’s forces — despite being armed with sophisticated Western weapons — would be able to dislodge Russia from Crimea, where it has been entrenched for nearly a decade.

For now, Biden continued to stick to his refrain that the United States will leave all decisions about war and peace to Zelenskky. But whispers have begun across Washington as to how tenable that will be as the war grinds on — and another presidential election looms.

“There has never been a war in history without setbacks and challenges,” said Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.), an Army veteran and HFAC member. “The question is not whether Ukrainians have setbacks, but how they respond and overcome them. Ukraine will overcome, defeat Russia and remain free.”

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Seems the Biden admin is leaking concerns to friendly press outlets. Might indicate they are worried necessity will compel a change of policy. Articles like this attempt to sway public opinion to be prepared for that eventuality.

‘Little fissures’: The U.S.-Ukraine war unity is slowly cracking apart
A tough week for U.S.-Ukraine news reveals an imperfect harmony.

By JONATHAN LEMIRE and ALEXANDER WARD
03/12/2023 07:00 AM EDT

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/0...00&nlid=630318

Reisner in the video before your post answers the topic from 38:40 on. And has said often before that the Ukraine never gets what it needs to win the war, because a win would provoke the Russians to us nukes, and so one only gives Ukraine what it needs to neutralise any Russian advantage they may have gained, this is extending the war and drags it on in the hope that a pedagogic learning experience will set in and the Russians will learn, kindly all by themesleves, that they cannot win this war, and thus will agree to end it.

Cute.

Of course that is naive because different to what many Western media blindly and cluelessly parrot from each other, the Russins reserves are much stronger than many assume and allow the Russians to continue the war for YEARS. Not only do they refurbish their 10.000+ old tanks (even if they must scrap 4-5 tanks to win one functional tank, this gives them 2000-2500 operational tanks, but they have switched to war production and build brandnew T-90s by a number of 20 per week. Compare that to KMW saying they currently need two weeks to build one new Leopard. The Russians have 10 million rounds of artillery rounds left from a stock of 17 million when they started the war - and rebuild new rounds with a quota of 1.5-3.4 million per month now Reisner says.

I repeatedly heard in our media the artillery ammo in Germany lasts for 1-2 days of fighting as seen in Ukraine.

We now form one tank batallion, or two. One tank batallion for a frontline of around 1000 km. Go figure. There are three Patriot batteries where several dozens would be needed. The ukrian is alway sonyl given a tiony fraction opf what it needs to operate successfully and win the war. To little to win, to much to die.

And the Russians seem to have an infinite supply of bodies to throw into battle.

War means logistics and supplies, and while the Russians do what they must, the West explicitly refuses to do what it must to honour this old truth. The way we avoid getting tough and going "all in" and refuse to give the Ukraine what it needs to win, we extend the war and by that allow the Russians to win it. 75% of the critical infrastructure is destroyed, the 16th mobiklizaitoin wave has taken place in the Ukraine, they now drafted old men near the 60s and 15 and 16 year old as well.

In a way we deny reality itself. We simply deny that in principle we all are at war. And shoulds do what in war must be done. Switching to war production, for exmaple. We wage mighty words.

The way it is going now, thanks to Western indifference and lacking resolve and rejecting to go to war production, Ukraine is loosing. My expectation for the Ukrainian offensive is muted. The russians are now deeply dug ion. They will bog it down, with heavy losses for the ukrainians. The Russians will suffe rlosses, too, but they can afford it, and they will adapt. They have bigger reserves.

And another thing the Colonel is very clear on, since weeks and months. Our media report propaganda, but by the military's sources and info, the Russians in many fields perform much better than is being told to the public, ad the ukrianians losses are much higher thna we are being told, too. They adapt faster, they learn faster, their logistic functions better and their air war is more effective than we are made believing. Reisner says we currently set up the Ukrainian army for the third time, and we already need to seek under the linoleum in our garages to find equipment we can hand over. There are no more T-72 we could give them. There is no artillery ammo we could give them in needed quantity. While the Russians have switched to full wartime production.

And I bet there are many politicians in Europe who just wait for the Russians to get what they wanted and then doing business as before with them again.

We betray ourselves, and we betray the Ukrainians.

The US has started to prepare for produce 90000 artillery rounds per month. The Europeans so far did not manage to do even this. Insiders at NATO insist on that no binding orders of significant ammounts for anything have been placed, different to politician's claims. They tell the industry it should produce stuff at its own risk in advance so that they can get it quickly when they want it, but they do not want to place binding orders that forces them to buy it. BTW, producing war material in advance wihtout rodered by the government in Germany is a criminal offence, the industry is not even allowed to do so, if you follow by the paragraphs' rules.

The reason is clear to me. The EU's "Green Deal" and the energy "transformation" cost so incredibly much more than they initially imagined that they want to not pay for defence and instead waste the money on these absurdities.

How can one seriously expect the Russians will learn all by themselves that they cannot win if we set up a freak show like this by ourselves? They will carry on for 1 or 2 years and if needed for longer. That will do what the yneed to make sure they cna do it and I am sure they can do it indeed.

Sorry, but so far there is nothing that could convince me that the Ukriane is not loosing the war. It will take time, but the trend now is: it is loosing. Because the West is not serious enough. And as long as this attitude does not significantly change, this negative trend will not change.

[Jimbuna]

No quarter given by either side apparently.

Heavy losses reported as battle for Bakhmut rages.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64935449

[Jimbuna]

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

No quarter given by either side apparently.

Bachmut obviously is a battle of attrition, and so for Ukraine it only makes sense to stick to Bachmut if it can inflict signficantly higher losses on the Russians than the Russians can inflict on the Ukrainians - because the Russians have the higher reserves in men they can throw into the meat grinder, and sitll more ammo as well.

However, it has also been reported there were differeces between Zelensky and many of his generals, including Salushnyi. One commander was removed when he suggested that Ukraine should fall back to elevated positions west of the city. I hope that this is not some one-stubborn-president-shows-his-super-ego kind of thing. Currently the Ukrainians burn through those units they had once prepared and held back for an offensive against Melitopol. While the Russians used those 30,000 fighters that they were allowed to evacuated unharmed from Cherson to consolidate the defences in the vicinty of Bachmut, and in that region. Two facts that do not spell well for Ukraine.

I really hope that Zelensky does not interfere too much with the military. But I fear that this is the case. And I wish that I am wrong.

[Aktungbby]

This AM's WSJ: Ukraine is making an effort to change Russia"s name to Muscovy! That'll piss off the Kremlin fer sure!

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Bachmut obviously is a battle of attrition, and so for Ukraine it only makes sense to stick to Bachmut if it can inflict signficantly higher losses on the Russians than the Russians can inflict on the Ukrainians - because the Russians have the higher reserves in men they can throw into the meat grinder, and sitll more ammo as well. [...]

The ukrainian holdout in Bakmuth is a strategic rather than a a tactical decision. Ukrainian troops are well dug in and there is not much Putin or this Prigozhin can do other than lose soldiers at a rate of 6 to 1 since weeks.
Even at that rate Russia can win when Putin begins to mobilize in Moscow and St. Petersburg, or even goes for a general mobilisation.
However i guess when he does that, it will be his (personal) end.
Which again will not necessarily end the war. The only thing to end it is either Russia or Ukraine winning.

As Gestwa made clear we should do all to make Ukraine win, any other scenario will lead to Russia's next aggression in a few years.
Maybe Georgia will become a problem, maybe China does something.
I would not build on these ideas, in fact the only outcome that really ends the war in Europe will be a crushing defeat for Russia as a military power.
And i do not mean Ukraine winning back their territory.


B.t.w. russian tank and other "hardware" losses are higher than expected:

"The Russian Army Is Running Out Of T-72 Tanks—And Quickly"

" [...] the Russians had 6,900 old T-72s in storage, around a third of which might’ve been recoverable after decades of corrosive exposure to rain, snow and cycles of hot and cold.

The problem, for the Kremlin, is that @partizan_oleg’s February count was off. Double-checking their numbers on Tuesday, @partizan_oleg realized that, in fact, the Russians probably only have 1,500, not 6,900, old T-72s in storage. “And many of them are probably not in good shape,” "

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidax...h=11f677506099

[Jimbuna]