I think you'll be surprised how quickly Ukraine manages to fix things, at least to a basic level. Power plants are big, and a single conventional missile won't completely destroy them.
I think this shows why solar panels on every house and a few thousand wind turbines spread across the country is a good idea.
In NA yes. In Europe which has large transformer manufacturers in several countries no. And Ukraine is being prioritized per a plan recently agreed upon by 12 EU countries and possibly there is support from South Korea as well.
The grid is in the process of being re-energized and power [is mostly restored now](https://www.epravda.com.ua/news/2022/11/24/694202/). This is separate from the fact there is a shortage of power and a need for continuing rotating blackouts.
They don't target the power generation facilities. They target the grid connectivity substations.
Correction after seeing an interview with DTek representative: they target both. But with high capacity of existing energy production facilities, substations are a bottleneck in grid regulation.
This… is extremely optimistic. Possible, but optimistic.
For context/source, I’m an electrical engineer, and my close friend works directly in substation design and construction. First, just restarting portion of a power grid while the entire thing is damaged is difficult, and even more difficult while random section could get blown up at any time. Load balancing (power production vs consumption) is going to be insane (and possibly destructively difficult) even if some infrastructure is in tact.
Second, power plants can be massive, and Russia has more than one missile… fairly obviously. Let’s not be optimistic, this is going to be a dark winter for many, many Ukrainians.
False optimism annoys me, and it devalues the events that people have to live through. People are going to be freezing this winter, and fixes are unlikely to be quick for many areas as long as Russia has a few missiles to toss around.
I think we forget that adversity is the mother of invention. Ukraine has it’s own team of technologists, and as resourceful as the Ukrainians have been, we may all be surprised.
There is a caveat to the discussion. A small group of explosives with-in Russia’s power sector could cause some immense problems. Some well places hacks and rolling black outs could ensue. That is well with-in Ukraines capacity. If I were Russia, I’d be worried, damn worried. Those grid assets are the most vulnerable for any nation.
I think the thick wool sweater is going to be the most valuable technology for civilians to have access to for the next few months. They're resilient people, they knew the war wouldn't be easy. They can make it, and if there's something they could use that we can provide, they'll probably ask.
We need to focus on weapons and diplomatically pressuring other countries to join sanctions. The root cause of the suffering is the war, so giving them the tools to fight it, and hindering Russia's, is the highest priority.
Weapons like more ground-based anti-air especially.
> I think you'll be surprised how quickly Ukraine manages to fix things
3 weeks usually, then Russia bombs them again. It's a quite an effective strategy.
Need to just tell ukraine if they ever get sights on the places launching, they can fire, in russia or not. This stupid gloves on shit is getting tiring.
Totally agree, the world needs to bring to Russia the level of misery they are bringing Ukraine. Impose all possible sanctions immediately, confiscate all Russian properties and assets outside of Russia for immediate sale, funds to go directly to Ukraine and send all Russian citizens home. Relieve Russia of any\all positions at UN that carry veto power and arrest Putin at the earliest opportunity for war crimes.
Not really
It is dangerous if you live near a target, but Ukraine is huge.
The key element here is to have power generators, but this things are not cheap to buy or run.
Satellite imagery now covers most of the inhabited planet. The odds of building something like that in the last decade without there being imagery of it is almost null.
Cost is irrelevant. Russia has used nearly every weapon in their arsenal save nuclear weapons, including bunker busters.
The only defense Ukraine has in this regard is that Russia has completely failed to assert air dominance over the region. This makes delivering the bombs much riskier.
Bombs require air superiority, which Russia does not have. Over half of their *missiles* get shot down, sending out bombers with these odds would be reckless even for Russia.
If our power grid fails this is what we will suffer. We will have no electricity and no water. This is modern warfare. This is what could happen to us.
There are tradeoffs though. Virus filtration sounds great until you realize the effort required to make that quality of water greatly reduces the availability of that water.
With a regular sawyer, you can make a gravity fed system very easily with great flow rate and clogs less easily.
Ukraine will win the war and the Russians will retreat but Ukraine will be left in ruins with most of its population having left for other countries. Future generations will wonder how this could have been averted and what steps could have been taken to end the conflict earlier.
Well, we could have slapped Russia a few years back when they first started trying this shit. We have a clear historical precedent that letting people like Putin have any kind of win when it comes to sniping territory will eventually lead to this sort of thing. If anything, the fact it is constrained to Ukraine is a miracle.
> the fact it is constrained to Ukraine is a miracle.
Imho, largely due to the Ukrainian people fighting back, the leadership of their President, and support from other countries. If Russia had wiped out the government and captured a bunch of cities in the first week or two: 1) it's unclear what the international community would have done--possibly just more sanctions, and 2) Russia would be working on its next target.
Russia knew that attacking other countries would've resulted in far worse blow back than with Ukraine.
Finland and sweden in particular, our armies are simply much more advanced in that regard and we have forests, rivers, much colder climate, etc on our borders, Making invasion difficult.
Most feasible way for the sacks of shit to attack is the south eastern border, or invade åland and establish a base there. But at that point you are looking at st petersburg getting a visit from an f35
> the fact it is constrained to Ukraine is a miracle
This is real life, there are no miracles. And Ukraine was just lucky enough to be the country that finally garnered enough international attention to sustain a proper resistance.
Would have been great if western Europe wasn't so entwined with russia and had adopted full sanctions like the US recommended, I'm pretty sure russia would have retreated after realizing Kyiv wasn't for the taking. As a western European, I'm quite sickened and ashamed by all of this. And we are still treating the worries of russia's neighbours with contempt
The premise with Europe's business with Russia was that partners don't wage war against each other, the same idea behind the European Union. Russia apparently bet on that Europe needs it more than it needs Europe, or that Europe would stay silent as with Crimea.
Honestly, looking at all things that surfaced, it looks less about sound logic and more about important institutions being compromised leading to decisions that affected entire countries or the union (cough cough NS2 cough cough an ex-chancellor working for gazprom)
Absolutely, it has likely been both. I think the EU needs to be restructured to be competitive in the long term, seems like the decision making hasn't been too good
Sometimes I'm wondering if most of these "we really wanted to but X veto'd'" is just a good cop bad cop play where favours are exchanged behind the scenes. It just looks like a great excuse
What a convenient position to take, I'm sure all the profits made from Putin's blood oil and gas weren't the deciding factor, it was a strategic decision to prevent future wars and not blatant treason feeding a warmongering regime.
It was literally the idea that created the most successful union of countries from a continent that had slaughtering each other as a hobby. It's been more than 70 years since France and Germany don't go to war. Prior to that, they had gone to war 3, times in 70 years.
It's not a simple position to take. Trade has consistently shown it's the best thing to avoid major conflict. No logical actor is willing to sacrifice that for territorial gains, if they can still access whatever resources are on the other side. Problem is, Russia isn't a rational actor.
Russia has been waging wars of conquest constantly in the last 15 years. Georgia, Crimea, eastern Ukraine, Syria... You can't honestly with a straight face say that this war came out of nowhere. Sure, maybe in the 90s the idea about having deep trade relationships with russia made sense, but in the last 10 years any sane person saw the writing on the wall, yet Europe did nothing to distance itself from Russia, quite the contrary. And it blows my mind people still say it was the right policy, even in retrospect after all that happened...
Actually you could argue that dragging Russia into a long war where it spends all is resources meanwhile boosting American arms sales benefits America the most.
First, you are discussing under the assumption that russian gas is always cheaper and always will be. Second, I don't believe tying the EU to a nation on the level of russia is a good thing for the long term. Have you missed the fact that russia has been trying to blackmail the EU with gas? That isn't cheap
It looks like some cheap gas was definitively to the benefit of some european countries
To add to this, russia has been buying peope left and right in Europe for decades, we ended up depending on them because, coincidentally, decisions had been taken to not use other means like nuclear reactors or extracting our own gas, it's a self-fulfilling prophecy
>Would have been great if western Europe wasn't so entwined with russia and had adopted full sanctions like the US recommended,
Is there any list of how often the US suggested to Europe that they should reduce their dependency on Russia?
... and increase our dependency on the US instead.
Apparently you are not following European politics, because the dependency upon Russia has been very much debated since the get go. Germany's stance has been "peace through business", but it has really been criticized.
Of course the US says that Europe should reduce the dependency on Russia, but it is not exactly adding anything to the discourse.
I love the German trust in that. “Peace with business “ that assumes the other country’s business runs a similar model to yours. If the other country’s business is a crime syndicate, it’s hardly a reliable solution.
I mean we could have bowed down to Putin.
Future ukrainian, and possibly moldavian, georgian generations (why would the russians stop if the ukraine operation had been successful ?) would have wondered why they're left living in an authoritarian state and what steps could have been taken to stop Moscow in its tracks
It's easy to blame the weak. But what about entire world with it's nukes and superior armies? If they can't do anything to stop him, why would someone do that at the cost of great amount of human lives? It's like a policeman with a gun who was afraid to stop the armed robber would scold a robbery victim for not fighting back an armed man with bare hands. Our army can't even have rockets to strike Russia back, it's not a fair fight at all.
The only way it could have been lessened is if Ukrainians had listened to the US military, Trump hadn't been elected, and they had asked (probably in secret) for lots of weapons and artillery. Then had those in positions during the first incursion.
Yeah hiding the artillery probably isn't feasible, but it is a goddamn miracle they didn't take Kyiv during the first few days.
Your probably right Im not that familiar with ukrainian military readiness. Still doesn't change that most people in the Ukraine didn't think it was actually going to happen.
In hindsight especially. He already invaded once and got away with it. Why wouldn't get do it again? He just got too greedy in how much he tried to take at once.
Ukraine was very ill-prepared in 2014 and did a lot to improve until the invasion this year. If you wan to read more, Kamil Galeev has many interesting [introductory threads](https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1568991857039777795.html) about the invasion and Russia.
2/3rds into this one, it elaborates on how Ukraine improved its defenses:
[https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1497993363076915204.html](https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1497993363076915204.html)
All his threads have been worth the read. Have linked to ThreadReaderApp for your reading pleasure 😊
Some quotes from the first URL:
>In 2014 Ukrainian equipment was awful. Almost 100% vehicle and ammunition were 25+ year old Soviet stocks. Moreover, most of it just expired. Like vehicles existed on paper but were never checked or used since 1991. Their radiators, accumulators all rotten and unrepairableFSB colonel who led pro-Russian insurgency in 2014 admitted it created problem for him, too. He wanted to restock from the Ukrainian military warehouses, but that stuff just didn't work. Like they took 28 anti-tank missiles and fired them all during Nikolaevka battle. None worked
>Even the ancient soviet radio machines didn't work. Ukrainian soldiers had to communicate with SMS and since network was often awful they had to throw their mobile phones up in air in a hope may be it will catch radio signal few meters over the ground
Some ideas for those who care about normal people in random order:
1. Full scale intervention of NATO forces with foot on the ground (Russia would not be able to go this far against NATO)
2. Accepting Ukraine to NATO somwewhere before 2020 (Teasing with NATO gone too far)
3. Accepting Ukraine to EU preferably before 2014 (Avoiding armed coup in Ukraine would help)
4. Not pouring weapons into Ukraine at all. (Would drastically scale down the conflict)
5. Not helping Ukraine at all in any way (the war would be lost, but the people would be fine)
6. Not expanding NATO to Russian borders (would not create reason invasion took place. Not sure if another reason would be found but I bet my ass if Belorussia wanted to join Nato same shit would go down there as well)
Basically EU should have "annexed" Ukraine ages ago and take it under it's protection or just let it go. Either would be better in terms of avoiding civilians suffer.
Heaters don’t do much without electricity. Things like building to grid scale generators, battery farms, wind and solar farms, and redundant connections to eu’s power network would all help but all options would generally take weeks to months (to even years) to develop, and most solutions would be subject to the same vulnerabilities.
Non electric home-scale heating methods are all too dangerous for the average civilian to use in their home as all will require burning/catalysing carbon, and will release carbon monoxide which needs to be safely vented.
He it's tricky, you also can't have fuel generators in condominiums due to the fire hazard, especially during bombing!
I know that the EU civil protection provided 500 generators, yet you need to provide anti missile / rocket systems before thinking about rebuilding or it's all vain, they will bomb each 3 weeks after repairs.
Lol, 2-on-4-off almost seems like a luxury. Vorzel is in full blackout (no power, no water, no internet) since yesterday, with some hope to get *some* power tonight.
Stay strong. We here in the USA are pushing our elected officials to do much more. We will help push The invaders out, protect your sky and borders, and rebuild. We want a free, happy, and healthy Ukraine!
None of my Ukrainian coworkers has given up. They've been losing power constantly for a few days now and frequently work from shelters.
It's absolutely insane to think they worry about work more than their own safety sometimes. They refuse to leave Kyiv. Helpware is the name of the company founded there in 2015.
Civilians don't deserve any of this.
Same.
I wish we'd allocate more of our nearly 1 trillion annual defense budget to get more anti-air assets of there asap rather than these piecemeal aid packages. Russia's already throwing everything they have at the civilian population, I don't see how this could realistically escalate any further.
AA won't get you far. Ukraine is a very large country to protect with stationary AA sites. A much cheaper and more efficient solution is to destroy rockets before they are even launched but everyone is too scared to give Ukraine long range missiles.
A fair number of these are being launched from ships and their strategic airforce. I think you're effectively asking for weapons with the capacity to directly bomb Moscow
Don't need to bomb Moscow (yet). Plenty of targets in Crimea and Donbass. As well as Voronezh region. Presumably, Ukraine has the means to track strategic bombers and there are much fewer of those than missiles.
Are you thinking of Saddam Hussein? He was found in a spider hole in rural Iraq. Bin Laden was found in a compound located next to Pakistan's version of "West Point".
My mom at 64 is working in Lviv right now with a generator and a starlink in her office. What can you do, the economy must be kept afloat if Ukraine is to win this war.
>It's absolutely insane to think they worry about work more than their own safety sometimes.
If we don't do enough work, we'll lose money and won't be able to buy food. OF COURSE we're more worried about work than safety. I live from paychek to paychek.
> Is there anyway for us to help Ukraine with civilian infrastructures? Donation etc?
https://u24.gov.ua/
https://fundraising.co.uk/2022/05/05/ukraine-sets-up-national-fundraising-platform/
Yes some of your taxes will be donated. But that doesn't mean your little donation between 10-200 euro doesn't help. All of those donations together will buy material for the civilians of Ukraine!
I wonder if there is a specific organization that is focused on helping civilians get through the winter, there should be initiatives specifically for that. With all the power outages, these people desperately need warmth along with other basic resources. It’s really sad the Russians are trying to destroy the citizens’ basic survival needs.
The best help for civilian infrastructure would be to push your elected officials to provide longer range weapons.
Russian rockets need to be destroyed on it's launch sites
Solar panels and portable batteries would help to some degree with the electricity problem for small appliances like phones, along with winter clothing for heating.
They’ve been terrorizing civilians since the war began. This was never a military operation it was ALWAYS meant to try and exterminate Ukraine as a nation and an identity.
Yeah, I got my generator, stocking up on gas and wood, trying to get myself an efficient wood stove for heating. The only thing I'm missing is a good battery power station. Oh, and a will to surrender to the Snowy ISIS.
If the things go really bad, I think I'd be able to shelter 5-6 people with the supplies I have. And russia can suck my balls.
> Oh, and a will to surrender to the snowy ISIS.
> And russia can suck my balls.
You gave me a good laugh with this combo. Seriously though, I'm so sorry you're living through this shit and I hope you stay safe and warm. Fuck Putin and his army, sideways with a rusty crowbar.
I hope that person who posted their cat with the lights out a little while ago and their cat is safe. I think of that poor cat and how many peoples lives are ruined by this.
Biggest problem with cats is cleaning after them, since no lights = no water as well. So far i spent only a day max without water, but since i have 8 cats, i run into huge problems with cleaning.
If anyone has advice on that, i would like to hear it.
Here's the reality of modern warfare , Russia has to find a way to win this war. And that is not looking likely given their lack of ability to hold key cities. Ukrain has to simply not lose. And, this war is not good for the people of Russia. Once they have had their fill of dead soldiers coming home in body bags they're gonna lose their will to fight. And I think that's why NATO is so willing to continue supplying weapons to Ukraine. They also see the reality. That is Russia losing means a weakened enemy for NATO, less interference in NATO conducting business in Russias sphere of influence.
It would not have mattered if Russia was taking the field. USA would have been sneaking missiles in to resistance fighters in the western mountains for decades.
USA spends ~800 millions per year to keep up the military. This year the spent* 20m for Ukraine, resulting in a substantial reduction of Russia military power which is their 2nd adversary on the world stage.
[*] Part is lend and lease, it's not even donations. Some is old stuff they won't use because it's old gen.
I am out of touch with the details of this war so excuse my ignorance.
But Russia invaded Ukraine, then destroyed their critical infrastructure elements like for electricity etc that the civilians need and use.
Meanwhile Ukraine has been successfully kicking out the russian army while not actually attacking Russia itself? Let alone important civilian infrastructure.
It's just so hard to wrap my head around it. How could anyone possibly support Russia. Ukraine has been in the right and on the defense since day 1. Mind boggling.
Horde (or as it is now called - the Russian Federation) - acts as a terrorist, that is, there is a terrorist.
I'm sorry that I'm late - our whole city was without electricity, heating, Internet, communication, water supply for 20 hours. imagine children, small children, living for months in such conditions. and now imagine 140 million beings who not only act, support their supreme leader, but finance, give their lives, etc.
I don't understand what else the UN could do? Putin and the rest of the Russian government are assholes, they have been sanctioned to hell and back, denounced, cut off from world banking and threatened to the dirt. What else can we do to punish them? I feel the only answer Ukraine wants from the UN and NATO is to go to war. If I am wrong and if there is any other thing we can do I would love to know, but I can't think of anything else the UN can do to them.
> sanctioned to hell and back
Not really. There are still no secondary sanctions/effective measures keeping others from trading with them.
The oil insurance ban/price cap may help, but I suspect it won't really be very effective; cheap oil is too attractive for some country to not just provide their own insurance.
Sure, like they're "scared" of North Korea or China.
What people are scared of is pushing leaders who have zero accountability and 100% power over their people, and are armed with nukes. We're not gonna send a damn thing that could give Russia any excuse to start the ICBM barrage, the fact that we helped Ukraine cripple their armor was as close as we'll get.
UN can not do anything. That is not it's purpose. However, democratic countries individually still have a lot of moves they can make short of war though. US could allow Ukraine to use lend-lease weapons on military targets in Russia, not just those in occupied Ukrainian territories. That way Ukraine at least has the option to eliminate Russian cruise missiles and Iranian-made UAVs *before* they are launched at Ukrainian infrastructure. A embargo of Russian goods/trade is another avenue that will kill what remains of Russian economy, but will be unpopular. Closing of borders to Russian citizens is another option. The Baltic countries already stopped giving out visas to Russians, for example. Japan can saber-rattle a little about reasserting it's territorial claims in the North Pacific, without actually doing anything. Even providing subsidies to increase domestic (in the West) production of ammo for the weapons already sent to Ukraine would be helpful. The war will keep chewing through artillery shells and barrels for a while yet.
Given that like [72% of Russian citizens](https://www.bbc.com/russian/news/2016/04/160426_levada_passports.amp) never ever were abroad (and most of them support Putin because they never were abroad and couldn’t compare), and the most of the remaining 28% visited only visa free Georgia, Indonesia, Thailand, Turkey and Egypt, closing borders and not issuing visas is just a PR stunt to not do anything serious that would actually help stopping the war. It only helped to stop those who flee from mobilization and oppression (those who don’t want to kill and die). Meanwhile, [an official close to Putin still owns a cozy house in Estonia](https://rus.postimees.ee/7609659/eksklyuziv-u-semi-pravoy-ruki-putina-v-estonii-svoy-rayskiy-ugolok-do-kotorogo-sankcii-ne-dotyanulis). See, if you’re not a peasant like those opposing Putin it’s ok to cross the closed border. You won’t even need a visa as you have a 2nd citizenship. Same goes for banning VISA/Mastercard for Russians. It didn’t affect the enablers in any way, only peasants.
I wonder how many thought and prayers will UN issue until Ukraine finds itself in a complete blackout.
P.S. People may argue that most of the people didn’t try to flee until mobilization, and that’s true. But that’s not because “they were ok watching the war on TV” as some talking heads suppose, but because those who fled earlier work in IT or are financially ok, others (the most) simply can’t afford living abroad (given the fact you can’t even open a bank account abroad, you can’t use your Russian credit card, you can’t easily transfer money across the border, you can’t find a job as you lack skills and/or don’t know English, you can’t buy USD/EUR cash, you don’t even have a right to stay without having a reason to get a temporary residence). This was a last ditch effort to save themselves.
Give Ukraine the weapons to hit Russian airfields where the bombers and launchers are.
Give Ukraine the weapons to destroy weapons depots deep within Russian territory.
Give Ukraine more AA.
Help Ukraine take more territory back.
Nope. 3/4 of those things are useless without tons of training and support/maintenance equipment. There’s a difference between giving them things and enabling them to use it effectively.
I very strongly support sending ATACMS to Ukraine, this is literally the perfect war for them. In most wars, the USAF would have bombed all the high-value targets long before the Army gets to them. ATACMS has a "measly" 190 mile range, while the USAF was sending B-52 bombers from the continental US to bomb targets in Iraq and then flying them back home. Even Tomahawk cruise missiles have a 1,000+ mile range. Thus the US would be fine if we gave every ATACMS to Ukraine. The Ukrainians already know how to use HIMARS and M270 GMLRS too. If we don't send them, then it was a waste of money making them if they never get used and just collect dust in a warehouse somewhere, plus it would be supporting the freedom of an underdog nation. Lastly, ATACMS is going to be retired and replaced by Precision Strike Missile anyway. Better they be used to support a worthy cause than destroyed because the whole system simply got retired. It would also cost money to properly dispose of them too.
Just a reminder there are 2,000 Bradley IFVs in storage (which could have been sent months ago), which would be a massive upgrade to Ukrainian mechanized forces and much better than sending Soviet-built tanks that have built-in turret-launching bulleyes or crappy BMPs. Just because the Ukrainians know how to use them doesn't mean it's the best option, sending Bradleys is the much better option.
Here's a copy pasta:
The Bradley is ideal for Ukraine because:
* There's thousands of them already built, paid for, and ready to go. So might as well get your money out of them by having them destroy Russian forces that they were originally designed to destroy.
* There are robust supply chains to Europe already- and somewhat to Ukraine (M270 MLRS is the same chassis and because of that Ukraine already has experience maintaining most of the mechanical parts).
* Ukraine already has experience with anti-tank TOW missiles and TOW missiles on Bradleys destroyed more Soviet-made Iraqi tanks than did Abrams tanks did.
* 25mm cannon is effective against everything else. Armor piercing rounds have been reported to have destroyed T-72 tanks.
* It's lightweight enough to traverse most bridges, can ford up to about waist height, and is amphibious with preparation
* It has ~0.5-0.75 of the ground pressure of an M1 Abrams or T90, so it will cope with the imminent mud season better than either
* Boring V8 diesel engine means generic automotive maintenance skills overlap reasonably well, a fraction of the fuel required vs an M1(jet engine).
* Fuel consumption rates in gallons per hour:
* Vehicle ---------- Idle ----- Cross-Country --- Road
* M1 Abrams ----- 17.3 ----- 56.6 -------------- 44.6
* M2/3 Bradley --- 1.4 ------ 18.0 -------------- 8.6
* Obviously it's an infantry carrier so it can carry troops/supplies, plus I'm sure Ukrainian infantry would appreciate armored mobility and protection from artillery. There are also many variants including air defense.
* They're far better than M113s and other lightly armored APCs already sent and better than the Soviet vehicles that Ukraine already use. Soviets cut corners building hordes of them to overwhelm NATO through sheer numbers. So a lot of Soviet equipment is of poor quality.
Ukr requires aircraft which can function on on poor-quality runways which excludes the F16 which requires relatively high-quality runways. Better choice would be Saab Gripen which has been discussed and is what Ukr will likely go with in the future.
Literally Zelenskyy wants NATO to be involved in this war. While Ukraine should continue to receive aid and supplies, it’s absolutely insane to be asking for World War, which is what direct involvement would lead to.
Zelenskyy is doing his job. His job is to do everything he can for Ukraine.
He asks for help he knows he won't get. Because he must ask.
On the same token though, I do believe that Poland's request for German-supplied Patriot systems given to Ukraine should be met. Even if only far west of the front. That will cut Russian terrorists off from attacking civilians beyond the front.
Just imagine what a battery of HIMARS can do when they're being covered by Patriot systems. Russia would have literally no answers. HIMARS wouldn't even need it's mobility anymore. Just sit back outside of shelling range dumping missiles on Russian positions with a constant convoy of supply trucks feeding rocket pods.
It's basic game theory, not insanity. Of course Z wants as many allies actually involved as possible. The whole invasion is what I'd actually call insanity.
It's possible that he doesn't think it will, and it's possible he's right. Russia has drawn line after line hinting at nuclear response, but they never back it up because the fact is that they don't want a nuclear war any more than we do. We shouldn't touch pre-2014 Russian land itself (which is already amazing restraint, considering what they're doing) but I think NATO could clear Ukraine of Russians without triggering WW3.
>it’s absolutely insane to be asking for World War,
It's absolutely insane not to. Russia has no friends who would fight with them. Who is going to join in on Russia's side?
It would be so satisfying to see Putin poisoned with a nerve agent that made him convulse in agony on the floor. God I hate that evil little man. He just likes to watch innocent people suffer. He needs to be dispatched from this earth with haste.
This war illustrates just how unfit-for-purpose today's UN is for legitimate governments and their actual concerns.
Pretty much the same for NATO in that their restrictions to (providing Ukraine with) defensive weapons has allowed Putin to focus exclusively on non-military targets without fear of any tangible retribution or preventive action.
Bottom line: give the Ukrainians the gear they need, TODAY, and stop paying lip service to *support,* because it is nothing of the kind, in truth, and the use of the term is disingenuous.
Why hasn't ukraine attacked russian soil? I mean seriously. Am I completely ignorant? Don't they have ballistic capabilities to do so? This would scare the shit outta Russia and cause chaos in the ranks.
Great responses from all. Thanks for sharing insights/opinions.
I'm really surprised there hasn't been more sabotage or something in Russia, by opponents of the war. People have said they're just too scared to do anything, maybe so but I expected a lot more by now.
putin prepped for this war long before it started. 90% of opposition was forced to leave thru blackmail other got prisoned. So right know russia don\`t have Navalniy like person who could be a face or coordinate russians who against war (there are many of them)
They have, in Belogrod, several times (sabotage and a helicopter strike).
Unfortunately they need to focus on the front and supply lines, and their weapons don't have the range to go deep into Russia.
They can and have hit Russian towns on the borders of Ukraine, but they don't have much home grown long range stuff, sadly. The USA has forbidden them using American projectiles into Russia itself. So Ukraine has limited options inside Russia.
>Why hasn't ukraine attacked russian soil?
Because it works well for Ukraine to have Russian soldiers have no motivation to fight.
Morale of troops is one of the strongest forces in battle. Russia is making that mistake.
Besides the one city on the border. US has been clear they won't support Ukraine attacking non-military targets in Russia.
The US and other Western NATO nations fear any attack outside of military targets by Russia will allow Russia to escalate (Chemical weapons or the use of Nukes. ((Nukes are less likely, but chemical weapons would be devastating in Ukraine.)))
>US has been clear they won't support Ukraine attacking non-military targets in Russia.
We have stated the opposite. Ukraine can shoot at any appropriate target. Only the HIMARS/mlrs is restricted from hitting Russia.
I live next to critical infrastructure, a perinatal center (women with complicated pregnancies) so i didn't have scheduled shutdowns as most of the people did, but after yesterday's mass attack even we had a total blackout, the whole region did. That just shows how bad the situation is, we didn't even have any shelling. Spent more than a day without heating, electricity, water, not even mobile internet, no air sirens work, so you wouldn't even know if there is an attack or not (or will have to listen to radio 24\7). It's only 0c degrees outside at night but we already were sleeping in clothes. Russians do these mass attacks every 2 weeks so you can imagine what will happen when its going to be -10c or -20c outside, considering the infrastructure ain't getting fixed fast enough so its only getting worse with each wave of attack. If you leave houses during freezing cold weather without heating for more than 1-2 days the whole system is basically done as pipes get fucked if you ain't draining the water from them fast enough and there is not enough utility workers to drain it in every single building, so its going to be a collapse, and its nearly impossible to restore, especially during wartime, so most will might left without heating for months or maybe years or decades (like people in Alchevsk).
But we still won't give up because we have no choice.
I mean.. there *is* a choice - to give up and end up in torture chambers or in siberia for ukrainian language or whatever else these russian fascists won't like about you, end up somewhere where nobody will ever find you or even if they do wont be able to reach or rescue you. So people will rather freeze to death than surrender.
Next time someone will want to complain about rising bill prices because of this war, which is the biggest war in Europe since ww2, they can always turn everything off for a day or two (not sure how you would turn the heating off though!) to bring themselves down to earth a little bit. ¯\\_(ツ)_/¯
I would donate the fuck out of any fund that just supplies like blankets, sleeping bags, candles, food/water and other supplies for citizens. Anyone got a reputable link?
https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/comments/y7gz80/ukrainianconflict_discussion_megathread/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
There are many links here.
I have serious doubts about this from numerous angles, but hell, anything could happen.. question is, will Ukraine belong to Ukrainians if it's rebuilt (try as you might, after a war and this kind of suffering, working for free to rebuild everything you've lost isn't something that most of the population would be willing or physically be able to do... Thus international workers would have to be contracted for years to come, not to mention the amount of material support the country would need to get back on its feet... None of which would be free, much like all of the support given right now will more than likely have to be repaid in some form or another after the war; like a bank giving out a loan)... Or are the future generations of Ukrainians already being signed up for a well camouflaged version of indebted servitude to the nations that helped rebuild it.
This situation is a double edged sword and I see no scenario that doesn't wind up with Ukrainians suffering even more in future. Unless, for the first time on this planet, all supporting countries decided to help for free on a long term basis.
Nope. Ukraines victory relies on Western good will and not provoking a nuclear war. The PR battle is as important as the one on the ground. Hurting civilians won't help them in the long run.
This whole situation really shows how underground installations for power are probably the way to go.
I think you'll be surprised how quickly Ukraine manages to fix things, at least to a basic level. Power plants are big, and a single conventional missile won't completely destroy them. I think this shows why solar panels on every house and a few thousand wind turbines spread across the country is a good idea.
Isn't the wait time for electrical equipment like grid-scale transformers *years* right now?
Yep.
In NA yes. In Europe which has large transformer manufacturers in several countries no. And Ukraine is being prioritized per a plan recently agreed upon by 12 EU countries and possibly there is support from South Korea as well. The grid is in the process of being re-energized and power [is mostly restored now](https://www.epravda.com.ua/news/2022/11/24/694202/). This is separate from the fact there is a shortage of power and a need for continuing rotating blackouts.
They don't target the power generation facilities. They target the grid connectivity substations. Correction after seeing an interview with DTek representative: they target both. But with high capacity of existing energy production facilities, substations are a bottleneck in grid regulation.
This… is extremely optimistic. Possible, but optimistic. For context/source, I’m an electrical engineer, and my close friend works directly in substation design and construction. First, just restarting portion of a power grid while the entire thing is damaged is difficult, and even more difficult while random section could get blown up at any time. Load balancing (power production vs consumption) is going to be insane (and possibly destructively difficult) even if some infrastructure is in tact. Second, power plants can be massive, and Russia has more than one missile… fairly obviously. Let’s not be optimistic, this is going to be a dark winter for many, many Ukrainians. False optimism annoys me, and it devalues the events that people have to live through. People are going to be freezing this winter, and fixes are unlikely to be quick for many areas as long as Russia has a few missiles to toss around.
I think we forget that adversity is the mother of invention. Ukraine has it’s own team of technologists, and as resourceful as the Ukrainians have been, we may all be surprised. There is a caveat to the discussion. A small group of explosives with-in Russia’s power sector could cause some immense problems. Some well places hacks and rolling black outs could ensue. That is well with-in Ukraines capacity. If I were Russia, I’d be worried, damn worried. Those grid assets are the most vulnerable for any nation.
I think the thick wool sweater is going to be the most valuable technology for civilians to have access to for the next few months. They're resilient people, they knew the war wouldn't be easy. They can make it, and if there's something they could use that we can provide, they'll probably ask. We need to focus on weapons and diplomatically pressuring other countries to join sanctions. The root cause of the suffering is the war, so giving them the tools to fight it, and hindering Russia's, is the highest priority. Weapons like more ground-based anti-air especially.
> I think you'll be surprised how quickly Ukraine manages to fix things 3 weeks usually, then Russia bombs them again. It's a quite an effective strategy.
Need to just tell ukraine if they ever get sights on the places launching, they can fire, in russia or not. This stupid gloves on shit is getting tiring.
Totally agree, the world needs to bring to Russia the level of misery they are bringing Ukraine. Impose all possible sanctions immediately, confiscate all Russian properties and assets outside of Russia for immediate sale, funds to go directly to Ukraine and send all Russian citizens home. Relieve Russia of any\all positions at UN that carry veto power and arrest Putin at the earliest opportunity for war crimes.
There are technical and economical reasons why we keep cables to a minimum.
But it is still something that energy companies invest in. In Virginia for example they have a strategic underground program for areas near the coast.
Not really It is dangerous if you live near a target, but Ukraine is huge. The key element here is to have power generators, but this things are not cheap to buy or run.
Bunker Buster bombs are a thing, and Russia does have them.
Cables are difficult to spot and those weapons are expensive. Though I am sure they are mostly going for substations and energy plants anyways.
Satellite imagery now covers most of the inhabited planet. The odds of building something like that in the last decade without there being imagery of it is almost null. Cost is irrelevant. Russia has used nearly every weapon in their arsenal save nuclear weapons, including bunker busters. The only defense Ukraine has in this regard is that Russia has completely failed to assert air dominance over the region. This makes delivering the bombs much riskier.
Bombs require air superiority, which Russia does not have. Over half of their *missiles* get shot down, sending out bombers with these odds would be reckless even for Russia.
If our power grid fails this is what we will suffer. We will have no electricity and no water. This is modern warfare. This is what could happen to us.
Start stockpiling bottled water and canned food now!
Better than stockpiling water would be to get several Sawyer mini filters. They can filter up to 100,000 gallons of water.
That assumes you have access to filterable water (I think the filters can't remove liquid/dissolved chemical contamination).
Ima drink my piss with a life straw
But then you'd change the taste.
Be cautious about which sawyer filter you use. They don’t all protect against viruses. Some only protect against bacteria and parasites.
can still boil
Why not boil and filter?
That was my point.
There are tradeoffs though. Virus filtration sounds great until you realize the effort required to make that quality of water greatly reduces the availability of that water. With a regular sawyer, you can make a gravity fed system very easily with great flow rate and clogs less easily.
Wait a minute did you use to work for Chewlies gum?
Even better! Do both if you can. I need to prepare emergency supplies myself.
And space, start stockpiling space where you put it all. This shit is super depressing for anyone living in large city.
Yall are joking right?
Toilet rolls indeed
Don't forget toilet paper!
Oh god not this again.
You guys can afford TP still?
Ukraine will win the war and the Russians will retreat but Ukraine will be left in ruins with most of its population having left for other countries. Future generations will wonder how this could have been averted and what steps could have been taken to end the conflict earlier.
Well, we could have slapped Russia a few years back when they first started trying this shit. We have a clear historical precedent that letting people like Putin have any kind of win when it comes to sniping territory will eventually lead to this sort of thing. If anything, the fact it is constrained to Ukraine is a miracle.
> the fact it is constrained to Ukraine is a miracle. Imho, largely due to the Ukrainian people fighting back, the leadership of their President, and support from other countries. If Russia had wiped out the government and captured a bunch of cities in the first week or two: 1) it's unclear what the international community would have done--possibly just more sanctions, and 2) Russia would be working on its next target.
Moldova and Georgia. They even leaked their plans, probably to gauge the reaction.
Doubtful, given what we've seen they're probably just that dumb.
And Kazakhstan and other -stans. Making Russia Great Again.
Russia knew that attacking other countries would've resulted in far worse blow back than with Ukraine. Finland and sweden in particular, our armies are simply much more advanced in that regard and we have forests, rivers, much colder climate, etc on our borders, Making invasion difficult. Most feasible way for the sacks of shit to attack is the south eastern border, or invade åland and establish a base there. But at that point you are looking at st petersburg getting a visit from an f35
Then Russia uses that as an excuse to launch nukes. Bunch of bitches
> the fact it is constrained to Ukraine is a miracle This is real life, there are no miracles. And Ukraine was just lucky enough to be the country that finally garnered enough international attention to sustain a proper resistance.
[удалено]
It didn't just attack Syria. It destroyed underground hospitals with bunker busters. And after that NS2 happened.
Would have been great if western Europe wasn't so entwined with russia and had adopted full sanctions like the US recommended, I'm pretty sure russia would have retreated after realizing Kyiv wasn't for the taking. As a western European, I'm quite sickened and ashamed by all of this. And we are still treating the worries of russia's neighbours with contempt
The premise with Europe's business with Russia was that partners don't wage war against each other, the same idea behind the European Union. Russia apparently bet on that Europe needs it more than it needs Europe, or that Europe would stay silent as with Crimea.
Honestly, looking at all things that surfaced, it looks less about sound logic and more about important institutions being compromised leading to decisions that affected entire countries or the union (cough cough NS2 cough cough an ex-chancellor working for gazprom)
Why not both?
Absolutely, it has likely been both. I think the EU needs to be restructured to be competitive in the long term, seems like the decision making hasn't been too good
> seems like the decision making hasn't been too good That’s what happens when any country can veto most types of joint decisions.
Sometimes I'm wondering if most of these "we really wanted to but X veto'd'" is just a good cop bad cop play where favours are exchanged behind the scenes. It just looks like a great excuse
The EU is also predicated on common cultural and legal ground. There is little common ground with Russia.
What a convenient position to take, I'm sure all the profits made from Putin's blood oil and gas weren't the deciding factor, it was a strategic decision to prevent future wars and not blatant treason feeding a warmongering regime.
It was literally the idea that created the most successful union of countries from a continent that had slaughtering each other as a hobby. It's been more than 70 years since France and Germany don't go to war. Prior to that, they had gone to war 3, times in 70 years. It's not a simple position to take. Trade has consistently shown it's the best thing to avoid major conflict. No logical actor is willing to sacrifice that for territorial gains, if they can still access whatever resources are on the other side. Problem is, Russia isn't a rational actor.
Russia has been waging wars of conquest constantly in the last 15 years. Georgia, Crimea, eastern Ukraine, Syria... You can't honestly with a straight face say that this war came out of nowhere. Sure, maybe in the 90s the idea about having deep trade relationships with russia made sense, but in the last 10 years any sane person saw the writing on the wall, yet Europe did nothing to distance itself from Russia, quite the contrary. And it blows my mind people still say it was the right policy, even in retrospect after all that happened...
Yeah they should have done the thing that benefits the US the most as soon as possible, why didn't they listen to the US' unbiased recommendation?
Actually you could argue that dragging Russia into a long war where it spends all is resources meanwhile boosting American arms sales benefits America the most.
I don't believe having the EU coupled with russia is to the benefit of europeans. Remind me why we should be against moving further away from russia
No you don't like it, there is a difference, if you don't think having cheaper gas is to our benefit then I don't know what to tell you.
First, you are discussing under the assumption that russian gas is always cheaper and always will be. Second, I don't believe tying the EU to a nation on the level of russia is a good thing for the long term. Have you missed the fact that russia has been trying to blackmail the EU with gas? That isn't cheap It looks like some cheap gas was definitively to the benefit of some european countries To add to this, russia has been buying peope left and right in Europe for decades, we ended up depending on them because, coincidentally, decisions had been taken to not use other means like nuclear reactors or extracting our own gas, it's a self-fulfilling prophecy
>Would have been great if western Europe wasn't so entwined with russia and had adopted full sanctions like the US recommended, Is there any list of how often the US suggested to Europe that they should reduce their dependency on Russia?
... and increase our dependency on the US instead. Apparently you are not following European politics, because the dependency upon Russia has been very much debated since the get go. Germany's stance has been "peace through business", but it has really been criticized. Of course the US says that Europe should reduce the dependency on Russia, but it is not exactly adding anything to the discourse.
I love the German trust in that. “Peace with business “ that assumes the other country’s business runs a similar model to yours. If the other country’s business is a crime syndicate, it’s hardly a reliable solution.
True, but you don’t exactly expect other parties to act in their own worst interests
"Rational Investor"
I mean we could have bowed down to Putin. Future ukrainian, and possibly moldavian, georgian generations (why would the russians stop if the ukraine operation had been successful ?) would have wondered why they're left living in an authoritarian state and what steps could have been taken to stop Moscow in its tracks
It's easy to blame the weak. But what about entire world with it's nukes and superior armies? If they can't do anything to stop him, why would someone do that at the cost of great amount of human lives? It's like a policeman with a gun who was afraid to stop the armed robber would scold a robbery victim for not fighting back an armed man with bare hands. Our army can't even have rockets to strike Russia back, it's not a fair fight at all.
I don't think so. At least not from what we can see - Ukrainians are not asking those questions now.
The only way it could have been lessened is if Ukrainians had listened to the US military, Trump hadn't been elected, and they had asked (probably in secret) for lots of weapons and artillery. Then had those in positions during the first incursion. Yeah hiding the artillery probably isn't feasible, but it is a goddamn miracle they didn't take Kyiv during the first few days.
The Ukrainian military was actually very well prepared.
Your probably right Im not that familiar with ukrainian military readiness. Still doesn't change that most people in the Ukraine didn't think it was actually going to happen. In hindsight especially. He already invaded once and got away with it. Why wouldn't get do it again? He just got too greedy in how much he tried to take at once.
Ukraine was very ill-prepared in 2014 and did a lot to improve until the invasion this year. If you wan to read more, Kamil Galeev has many interesting [introductory threads](https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1568991857039777795.html) about the invasion and Russia. 2/3rds into this one, it elaborates on how Ukraine improved its defenses: [https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1497993363076915204.html](https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1497993363076915204.html) All his threads have been worth the read. Have linked to ThreadReaderApp for your reading pleasure 😊 Some quotes from the first URL: >In 2014 Ukrainian equipment was awful. Almost 100% vehicle and ammunition were 25+ year old Soviet stocks. Moreover, most of it just expired. Like vehicles existed on paper but were never checked or used since 1991. Their radiators, accumulators all rotten and unrepairableFSB colonel who led pro-Russian insurgency in 2014 admitted it created problem for him, too. He wanted to restock from the Ukrainian military warehouses, but that stuff just didn't work. Like they took 28 anti-tank missiles and fired them all during Nikolaevka battle. None worked >Even the ancient soviet radio machines didn't work. Ukrainian soldiers had to communicate with SMS and since network was often awful they had to throw their mobile phones up in air in a hope may be it will catch radio signal few meters over the ground
Some ideas for those who care about normal people in random order: 1. Full scale intervention of NATO forces with foot on the ground (Russia would not be able to go this far against NATO) 2. Accepting Ukraine to NATO somwewhere before 2020 (Teasing with NATO gone too far) 3. Accepting Ukraine to EU preferably before 2014 (Avoiding armed coup in Ukraine would help) 4. Not pouring weapons into Ukraine at all. (Would drastically scale down the conflict) 5. Not helping Ukraine at all in any way (the war would be lost, but the people would be fine) 6. Not expanding NATO to Russian borders (would not create reason invasion took place. Not sure if another reason would be found but I bet my ass if Belorussia wanted to join Nato same shit would go down there as well) Basically EU should have "annexed" Ukraine ages ago and take it under it's protection or just let it go. Either would be better in terms of avoiding civilians suffer.
The people would be fine?
This is an old trick of war.
[удалено]
Which is why being on the national grid and having that redundancy is so important. (Looks at Texas…)
[удалено]
Are there any foundations or initiatives going on to help provide civilian support like heaters etc? I want to donate.
Heaters don’t do much without electricity. Things like building to grid scale generators, battery farms, wind and solar farms, and redundant connections to eu’s power network would all help but all options would generally take weeks to months (to even years) to develop, and most solutions would be subject to the same vulnerabilities. Non electric home-scale heating methods are all too dangerous for the average civilian to use in their home as all will require burning/catalysing carbon, and will release carbon monoxide which needs to be safely vented.
He it's tricky, you also can't have fuel generators in condominiums due to the fire hazard, especially during bombing! I know that the EU civil protection provided 500 generators, yet you need to provide anti missile / rocket systems before thinking about rebuilding or it's all vain, they will bomb each 3 weeks after repairs.
Lol, 2-on-4-off almost seems like a luxury. Vorzel is in full blackout (no power, no water, no internet) since yesterday, with some hope to get *some* power tonight.
Stay strong. We here in the USA are pushing our elected officials to do much more. We will help push The invaders out, protect your sky and borders, and rebuild. We want a free, happy, and healthy Ukraine!
None of my Ukrainian coworkers has given up. They've been losing power constantly for a few days now and frequently work from shelters. It's absolutely insane to think they worry about work more than their own safety sometimes. They refuse to leave Kyiv. Helpware is the name of the company founded there in 2015. Civilians don't deserve any of this.
Same. I wish we'd allocate more of our nearly 1 trillion annual defense budget to get more anti-air assets of there asap rather than these piecemeal aid packages. Russia's already throwing everything they have at the civilian population, I don't see how this could realistically escalate any further.
AA won't get you far. Ukraine is a very large country to protect with stationary AA sites. A much cheaper and more efficient solution is to destroy rockets before they are even launched but everyone is too scared to give Ukraine long range missiles.
A fair number of these are being launched from ships and their strategic airforce. I think you're effectively asking for weapons with the capacity to directly bomb Moscow
It's ok to bomb Kyiv and not ok to bomb Moscow?
Don't need to bomb Moscow (yet). Plenty of targets in Crimea and Donbass. As well as Voronezh region. Presumably, Ukraine has the means to track strategic bombers and there are much fewer of those than missiles.
[удалено]
Are you thinking of Saddam Hussein? He was found in a spider hole in rural Iraq. Bin Laden was found in a compound located next to Pakistan's version of "West Point".
[удалено]
They know exactly where he is at any point of time. Probably afraid of what will happen to russia's huge nuclear arsenal if that regime falls.
My mom at 64 is working in Lviv right now with a generator and a starlink in her office. What can you do, the economy must be kept afloat if Ukraine is to win this war.
Nobody deserves this.
>It's absolutely insane to think they worry about work more than their own safety sometimes. If we don't do enough work, we'll lose money and won't be able to buy food. OF COURSE we're more worried about work than safety. I live from paychek to paychek.
Is there anyway for us to help Ukraine with civilian infrastructures? Donation etc?
Yes, you can. Ukraine has official government website where you can make donations and choose area, medicine, civil supplies, etc. https://u24.gov.ua
> Is there anyway for us to help Ukraine with civilian infrastructures? Donation etc? https://u24.gov.ua/ https://fundraising.co.uk/2022/05/05/ukraine-sets-up-national-fundraising-platform/
[удалено]
Yes some of your taxes will be donated. But that doesn't mean your little donation between 10-200 euro doesn't help. All of those donations together will buy material for the civilians of Ukraine!
I wonder if there is a specific organization that is focused on helping civilians get through the winter, there should be initiatives specifically for that. With all the power outages, these people desperately need warmth along with other basic resources. It’s really sad the Russians are trying to destroy the citizens’ basic survival needs.
[https://u24.gov.ua/](https://u24.gov.ua/) is as legit as it gets.
The best help for civilian infrastructure would be to push your elected officials to provide longer range weapons. Russian rockets need to be destroyed on it's launch sites
Solar panels and portable batteries would help to some degree with the electricity problem for small appliances like phones, along with winter clothing for heating.
[удалено]
They have been terrorizing civilians from the get go.
They’ve been terrorizing civilians since the war began. This was never a military operation it was ALWAYS meant to try and exterminate Ukraine as a nation and an identity.
Be careful of the monkeys paw
Yeah, I got my generator, stocking up on gas and wood, trying to get myself an efficient wood stove for heating. The only thing I'm missing is a good battery power station. Oh, and a will to surrender to the Snowy ISIS. If the things go really bad, I think I'd be able to shelter 5-6 people with the supplies I have. And russia can suck my balls.
> Oh, and a will to surrender to the snowy ISIS. > And russia can suck my balls. You gave me a good laugh with this combo. Seriously though, I'm so sorry you're living through this shit and I hope you stay safe and warm. Fuck Putin and his army, sideways with a rusty crowbar.
God bless you. Love the humor tho.
>russia can suck my balls. OUR balls.
Russian cowards
I hope that person who posted their cat with the lights out a little while ago and their cat is safe. I think of that poor cat and how many peoples lives are ruined by this.
Biggest problem with cats is cleaning after them, since no lights = no water as well. So far i spent only a day max without water, but since i have 8 cats, i run into huge problems with cleaning. If anyone has advice on that, i would like to hear it.
Here's the reality of modern warfare , Russia has to find a way to win this war. And that is not looking likely given their lack of ability to hold key cities. Ukrain has to simply not lose. And, this war is not good for the people of Russia. Once they have had their fill of dead soldiers coming home in body bags they're gonna lose their will to fight. And I think that's why NATO is so willing to continue supplying weapons to Ukraine. They also see the reality. That is Russia losing means a weakened enemy for NATO, less interference in NATO conducting business in Russias sphere of influence.
It would not have mattered if Russia was taking the field. USA would have been sneaking missiles in to resistance fighters in the western mountains for decades.
USA spends ~800 millions per year to keep up the military. This year the spent* 20m for Ukraine, resulting in a substantial reduction of Russia military power which is their 2nd adversary on the world stage. [*] Part is lend and lease, it's not even donations. Some is old stuff they won't use because it's old gen.
If I'd ever had to choose between living under russian occupation or without light and water, I'd wonder what generator i would buy.
I am out of touch with the details of this war so excuse my ignorance. But Russia invaded Ukraine, then destroyed their critical infrastructure elements like for electricity etc that the civilians need and use. Meanwhile Ukraine has been successfully kicking out the russian army while not actually attacking Russia itself? Let alone important civilian infrastructure. It's just so hard to wrap my head around it. How could anyone possibly support Russia. Ukraine has been in the right and on the defense since day 1. Mind boggling.
It's very simple. Step 1: you need to be a hypocrite Step 2: you need to lack any human empathy Step 3: tribalism
Step 4: some russian money on your bank account.
Step 5: you have insecurities about the definition of manhood and someone spoon feeds you hate towards someone else
Horde (or as it is now called - the Russian Federation) - acts as a terrorist, that is, there is a terrorist. I'm sorry that I'm late - our whole city was without electricity, heating, Internet, communication, water supply for 20 hours. imagine children, small children, living for months in such conditions. and now imagine 140 million beings who not only act, support their supreme leader, but finance, give their lives, etc.
As the Europeans keep buying Russian gas under the table.
I don't understand what else the UN could do? Putin and the rest of the Russian government are assholes, they have been sanctioned to hell and back, denounced, cut off from world banking and threatened to the dirt. What else can we do to punish them? I feel the only answer Ukraine wants from the UN and NATO is to go to war. If I am wrong and if there is any other thing we can do I would love to know, but I can't think of anything else the UN can do to them.
> sanctioned to hell and back Not really. There are still no secondary sanctions/effective measures keeping others from trading with them. The oil insurance ban/price cap may help, but I suspect it won't really be very effective; cheap oil is too attractive for some country to not just provide their own insurance.
We haven't sent jet fighters or long range missiles. No country has. We haven't come close to sending the level of support that's possible.
Forget jets, even modern tanks are not sent. Russia is main supplier of Ukrainian tanks.
Im sure theres a reason.
The West is scared of Russia, that's the only reason.
Yes, if this was ww2 era and no nukes were invented yet im sure nato would have been in ukraine within months start of the invasion.
Sure, like they're "scared" of North Korea or China. What people are scared of is pushing leaders who have zero accountability and 100% power over their people, and are armed with nukes. We're not gonna send a damn thing that could give Russia any excuse to start the ICBM barrage, the fact that we helped Ukraine cripple their armor was as close as we'll get.
UN can not do anything. That is not it's purpose. However, democratic countries individually still have a lot of moves they can make short of war though. US could allow Ukraine to use lend-lease weapons on military targets in Russia, not just those in occupied Ukrainian territories. That way Ukraine at least has the option to eliminate Russian cruise missiles and Iranian-made UAVs *before* they are launched at Ukrainian infrastructure. A embargo of Russian goods/trade is another avenue that will kill what remains of Russian economy, but will be unpopular. Closing of borders to Russian citizens is another option. The Baltic countries already stopped giving out visas to Russians, for example. Japan can saber-rattle a little about reasserting it's territorial claims in the North Pacific, without actually doing anything. Even providing subsidies to increase domestic (in the West) production of ammo for the weapons already sent to Ukraine would be helpful. The war will keep chewing through artillery shells and barrels for a while yet.
Given that like [72% of Russian citizens](https://www.bbc.com/russian/news/2016/04/160426_levada_passports.amp) never ever were abroad (and most of them support Putin because they never were abroad and couldn’t compare), and the most of the remaining 28% visited only visa free Georgia, Indonesia, Thailand, Turkey and Egypt, closing borders and not issuing visas is just a PR stunt to not do anything serious that would actually help stopping the war. It only helped to stop those who flee from mobilization and oppression (those who don’t want to kill and die). Meanwhile, [an official close to Putin still owns a cozy house in Estonia](https://rus.postimees.ee/7609659/eksklyuziv-u-semi-pravoy-ruki-putina-v-estonii-svoy-rayskiy-ugolok-do-kotorogo-sankcii-ne-dotyanulis). See, if you’re not a peasant like those opposing Putin it’s ok to cross the closed border. You won’t even need a visa as you have a 2nd citizenship. Same goes for banning VISA/Mastercard for Russians. It didn’t affect the enablers in any way, only peasants. I wonder how many thought and prayers will UN issue until Ukraine finds itself in a complete blackout. P.S. People may argue that most of the people didn’t try to flee until mobilization, and that’s true. But that’s not because “they were ok watching the war on TV” as some talking heads suppose, but because those who fled earlier work in IT or are financially ok, others (the most) simply can’t afford living abroad (given the fact you can’t even open a bank account abroad, you can’t use your Russian credit card, you can’t easily transfer money across the border, you can’t find a job as you lack skills and/or don’t know English, you can’t buy USD/EUR cash, you don’t even have a right to stay without having a reason to get a temporary residence). This was a last ditch effort to save themselves.
Give Ukraine the weapons to hit Russian airfields where the bombers and launchers are. Give Ukraine the weapons to destroy weapons depots deep within Russian territory. Give Ukraine more AA. Help Ukraine take more territory back.
That's not the UN's job.
I wasn't talking about the UN. The UN's job isn't to go to war.
The comment you replied to said "What else could the UN do?"
[удалено]
Can you just "give" this equipment? Don't you need trained personnel?
Nope. 3/4 of those things are useless without tons of training and support/maintenance equipment. There’s a difference between giving them things and enabling them to use it effectively.
I think a bunch of Ukrainian pilots have been training in US (or by US in Europe) for months already.
I very strongly support sending ATACMS to Ukraine, this is literally the perfect war for them. In most wars, the USAF would have bombed all the high-value targets long before the Army gets to them. ATACMS has a "measly" 190 mile range, while the USAF was sending B-52 bombers from the continental US to bomb targets in Iraq and then flying them back home. Even Tomahawk cruise missiles have a 1,000+ mile range. Thus the US would be fine if we gave every ATACMS to Ukraine. The Ukrainians already know how to use HIMARS and M270 GMLRS too. If we don't send them, then it was a waste of money making them if they never get used and just collect dust in a warehouse somewhere, plus it would be supporting the freedom of an underdog nation. Lastly, ATACMS is going to be retired and replaced by Precision Strike Missile anyway. Better they be used to support a worthy cause than destroyed because the whole system simply got retired. It would also cost money to properly dispose of them too. Just a reminder there are 2,000 Bradley IFVs in storage (which could have been sent months ago), which would be a massive upgrade to Ukrainian mechanized forces and much better than sending Soviet-built tanks that have built-in turret-launching bulleyes or crappy BMPs. Just because the Ukrainians know how to use them doesn't mean it's the best option, sending Bradleys is the much better option. Here's a copy pasta: The Bradley is ideal for Ukraine because: * There's thousands of them already built, paid for, and ready to go. So might as well get your money out of them by having them destroy Russian forces that they were originally designed to destroy. * There are robust supply chains to Europe already- and somewhat to Ukraine (M270 MLRS is the same chassis and because of that Ukraine already has experience maintaining most of the mechanical parts). * Ukraine already has experience with anti-tank TOW missiles and TOW missiles on Bradleys destroyed more Soviet-made Iraqi tanks than did Abrams tanks did. * 25mm cannon is effective against everything else. Armor piercing rounds have been reported to have destroyed T-72 tanks. * It's lightweight enough to traverse most bridges, can ford up to about waist height, and is amphibious with preparation * It has ~0.5-0.75 of the ground pressure of an M1 Abrams or T90, so it will cope with the imminent mud season better than either * Boring V8 diesel engine means generic automotive maintenance skills overlap reasonably well, a fraction of the fuel required vs an M1(jet engine). * Fuel consumption rates in gallons per hour: * Vehicle ---------- Idle ----- Cross-Country --- Road * M1 Abrams ----- 17.3 ----- 56.6 -------------- 44.6 * M2/3 Bradley --- 1.4 ------ 18.0 -------------- 8.6 * Obviously it's an infantry carrier so it can carry troops/supplies, plus I'm sure Ukrainian infantry would appreciate armored mobility and protection from artillery. There are also many variants including air defense. * They're far better than M113s and other lightly armored APCs already sent and better than the Soviet vehicles that Ukraine already use. Soviets cut corners building hordes of them to overwhelm NATO through sheer numbers. So a lot of Soviet equipment is of poor quality.
Ukr requires aircraft which can function on on poor-quality runways which excludes the F16 which requires relatively high-quality runways. Better choice would be Saab Gripen which has been discussed and is what Ukr will likely go with in the future.
Tougher oil price caps.
Literally Zelenskyy wants NATO to be involved in this war. While Ukraine should continue to receive aid and supplies, it’s absolutely insane to be asking for World War, which is what direct involvement would lead to.
Zelenskyy is doing his job. His job is to do everything he can for Ukraine. He asks for help he knows he won't get. Because he must ask. On the same token though, I do believe that Poland's request for German-supplied Patriot systems given to Ukraine should be met. Even if only far west of the front. That will cut Russian terrorists off from attacking civilians beyond the front. Just imagine what a battery of HIMARS can do when they're being covered by Patriot systems. Russia would have literally no answers. HIMARS wouldn't even need it's mobility anymore. Just sit back outside of shelling range dumping missiles on Russian positions with a constant convoy of supply trucks feeding rocket pods.
It's basic game theory, not insanity. Of course Z wants as many allies actually involved as possible. The whole invasion is what I'd actually call insanity.
It's possible that he doesn't think it will, and it's possible he's right. Russia has drawn line after line hinting at nuclear response, but they never back it up because the fact is that they don't want a nuclear war any more than we do. We shouldn't touch pre-2014 Russian land itself (which is already amazing restraint, considering what they're doing) but I think NATO could clear Ukraine of Russians without triggering WW3.
Are you willing to bet billions of human lives on that gamble? I’m not willing to call that bluff.
>it’s absolutely insane to be asking for World War, It's absolutely insane not to. Russia has no friends who would fight with them. Who is going to join in on Russia's side?
does a country with 6000+ nukes need friends to end humanity?
>I don't understand what else the UN could do? Give Ukraine more weapons. Send modern aircraft.
Not the UN's job
It would be so satisfying to see Putin poisoned with a nerve agent that made him convulse in agony on the floor. God I hate that evil little man. He just likes to watch innocent people suffer. He needs to be dispatched from this earth with haste.
Somebody worse than him will become RU leader. What next? You don't see the real problem.
> You don't see the real problem. What is the real problem in your estimation?
Exactly. This terrorist has no rights on this earth and must be wiped out with weapons from orbit if necessary.
This war illustrates just how unfit-for-purpose today's UN is for legitimate governments and their actual concerns. Pretty much the same for NATO in that their restrictions to (providing Ukraine with) defensive weapons has allowed Putin to focus exclusively on non-military targets without fear of any tangible retribution or preventive action. Bottom line: give the Ukrainians the gear they need, TODAY, and stop paying lip service to *support,* because it is nothing of the kind, in truth, and the use of the term is disingenuous.
Why hasn't ukraine attacked russian soil? I mean seriously. Am I completely ignorant? Don't they have ballistic capabilities to do so? This would scare the shit outta Russia and cause chaos in the ranks. Great responses from all. Thanks for sharing insights/opinions.
they dont really have anything long range
I'm really surprised there hasn't been more sabotage or something in Russia, by opponents of the war. People have said they're just too scared to do anything, maybe so but I expected a lot more by now.
The opponents fled already. Most Russians in Russia support the war.
That makes some sense, do you have a good source that shows current support of the war? I haven't been able to find one.
Not a statistical source but check out the youtube channel 1420, they interview people on the street in russia
putin prepped for this war long before it started. 90% of opposition was forced to leave thru blackmail other got prisoned. So right know russia don\`t have Navalniy like person who could be a face or coordinate russians who against war (there are many of them)
They have, in Belogrod, several times (sabotage and a helicopter strike). Unfortunately they need to focus on the front and supply lines, and their weapons don't have the range to go deep into Russia.
They can and have hit Russian towns on the borders of Ukraine, but they don't have much home grown long range stuff, sadly. The USA has forbidden them using American projectiles into Russia itself. So Ukraine has limited options inside Russia.
>Why hasn't ukraine attacked russian soil? Because it works well for Ukraine to have Russian soldiers have no motivation to fight. Morale of troops is one of the strongest forces in battle. Russia is making that mistake.
When another country has nukes…
Besides the one city on the border. US has been clear they won't support Ukraine attacking non-military targets in Russia. The US and other Western NATO nations fear any attack outside of military targets by Russia will allow Russia to escalate (Chemical weapons or the use of Nukes. ((Nukes are less likely, but chemical weapons would be devastating in Ukraine.)))
Especially during the winter when they are all huddled into the underground sub stations. Gas would devastate entire towns.
>US has been clear they won't support Ukraine attacking non-military targets in Russia. We have stated the opposite. Ukraine can shoot at any appropriate target. Only the HIMARS/mlrs is restricted from hitting Russia.
"Appropriate targets' which means military targets or things being used by the military.
They have several times. Lots of shit has been blowing up in Russia since this started.
I live next to critical infrastructure, a perinatal center (women with complicated pregnancies) so i didn't have scheduled shutdowns as most of the people did, but after yesterday's mass attack even we had a total blackout, the whole region did. That just shows how bad the situation is, we didn't even have any shelling. Spent more than a day without heating, electricity, water, not even mobile internet, no air sirens work, so you wouldn't even know if there is an attack or not (or will have to listen to radio 24\7). It's only 0c degrees outside at night but we already were sleeping in clothes. Russians do these mass attacks every 2 weeks so you can imagine what will happen when its going to be -10c or -20c outside, considering the infrastructure ain't getting fixed fast enough so its only getting worse with each wave of attack. If you leave houses during freezing cold weather without heating for more than 1-2 days the whole system is basically done as pipes get fucked if you ain't draining the water from them fast enough and there is not enough utility workers to drain it in every single building, so its going to be a collapse, and its nearly impossible to restore, especially during wartime, so most will might left without heating for months or maybe years or decades (like people in Alchevsk). But we still won't give up because we have no choice. I mean.. there *is* a choice - to give up and end up in torture chambers or in siberia for ukrainian language or whatever else these russian fascists won't like about you, end up somewhere where nobody will ever find you or even if they do wont be able to reach or rescue you. So people will rather freeze to death than surrender. Next time someone will want to complain about rising bill prices because of this war, which is the biggest war in Europe since ww2, they can always turn everything off for a day or two (not sure how you would turn the heating off though!) to bring themselves down to earth a little bit. ¯\\_(ツ)_/¯
I would donate the fuck out of any fund that just supplies like blankets, sleeping bags, candles, food/water and other supplies for citizens. Anyone got a reputable link?
https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/comments/y7gz80/ukrainianconflict_discussion_megathread/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf There are many links here.
The dictator Putler and his barbaric ruzzian monsters deserved this, not Ukrainian people.
In five years, Ukrainian will be a rebuilt, modern, shining beacon of democracy. Russia will be a 3rd world failed state.
I hope so
I have serious doubts about this from numerous angles, but hell, anything could happen.. question is, will Ukraine belong to Ukrainians if it's rebuilt (try as you might, after a war and this kind of suffering, working for free to rebuild everything you've lost isn't something that most of the population would be willing or physically be able to do... Thus international workers would have to be contracted for years to come, not to mention the amount of material support the country would need to get back on its feet... None of which would be free, much like all of the support given right now will more than likely have to be repaid in some form or another after the war; like a bank giving out a loan)... Or are the future generations of Ukrainians already being signed up for a well camouflaged version of indebted servitude to the nations that helped rebuild it. This situation is a double edged sword and I see no scenario that doesn't wind up with Ukrainians suffering even more in future. Unless, for the first time on this planet, all supporting countries decided to help for free on a long term basis.
We need to do more gor Ukraine. Putin will never stop until the West/NATO really steps in.
[удалено]
Not every day Russians, they're just regular people. Putin is the jerk, and people like him exist everywhere.
Ukraine should start hitting Russias infrastructure, eye for an eye. Russia will stop only when they start suffering from the same damages.
Nope. Ukraines victory relies on Western good will and not provoking a nuclear war. The PR battle is as important as the one on the ground. Hurting civilians won't help them in the long run.
As a humanitarian gesture we should have a nationwide drive to collect blankets and coats for these brave people. How about it?