6 ms·

If the west keeps supplying when with weapons they might actually hold at least way past the point where Russia can continue the fight. Bellingcat reports that

If the west keeps supplying when with weapons they might actually hold at least way past the point where Russia can continue the fight. Bellingcat reports that the orders are to take Kyiv by Monday regardless the losses if Ukraine can hold out for longer they might just be in the clear. It’s also clear now that the Ukraine is getting direct intelligence from NATO especially from the global hawk drones and the sigint/elint aircraft it’s been flying their ability to avoid Russian offenses, hit key targets and to mount effective counter attack seem to indicate they do have map cheats enabled. The training they got from NATO forces seem to be paying off in spades too. Russia seem to be closer and closer to the point where their only winning condition is a Grozny scenario and if that happens then there is no chance that NATO would stand by. Conventional warfare with limited civilian casualties would be tolerated leveling cities wouldn’t this isn’t Syria. The EU and NATO knows that even if Russia takes Ukraine they won’t be able to hold it it might take another decade but it eventually would be free again even without major insurgency. Puppet regimes don’t hold and Ukrainians have been far more interconnected with the EU especially through Poland than say Belarus.

IgorPartola 5y ago
To add to this, I got some unconfirmed reports from Kyiv and Lviv of “very obviously American operatives” supplying intelligence, training, etc. to Ukrainian forces.
- danieljacksonno 5y ago
  Of course. The CIA is probably all over the place, as they should be.
- phs318u 5y ago
  Source?
oblio 5y ago
If they level Kyiv, the uproar will be huge. And from I see, the Ukrainians will probably force them to do that, if they want to take it.
- Qem 5y ago
  Can't they just block the roads and wait outside the city until the javelin operators run out of food?
  - oblio 5y ago
    You mean starve the city? That's going to have almost as bad of a reception.
    - Qem 5y ago
      Probably not if they let people surrender and treat them reasonably when they do that. It's not like in WWII, where people would be sent to the gas chambers in some concentration camp, if they surrended.
erosenbe0 5y ago
Doesn't Ukraine have too many anti-tank missiles to make occupying Kiev tenable without a scorched Earth campaign? The operator of a javelin can immediately move to civilian cover after firing -- fire and forget. Russian forces can't really be motivated to take those kind of casualties for long.
- dogma1138 5y ago
  Tanks are ineffective in an urban environment but it also impacts ATGMs that require a line of sight and a relatively long arming distance. Javelins would probably not be that effective if the tanks enter the city but other anti tank weapons like the NLAW are. Also barricades could have them bogged down. But still if the numbers of 500 tanks in Kyiv are true and the Russians are under orders not to retreat under any circumstances holding the city might be difficult. If Russia takes Kyiv even if they don’t kill Zelenskyy they’ll have a bargaining chip to play in the negotiations that would surly have to happen sometime next week if they don’t they don’t have anything. Right now Russia is running out of win conditions or even a way to get out of this situation at all and that is the most dangerous part. If they have nothing to bargain with they can’t come to the negotiating table to get the sanctions removed and they will not issue an unconstitutional surrender under any circumstances other than if there to be a regime change in Russia.
  - vkou 5y ago
    > If they have nothing to bargain with they can’t come to the negotiating table to get the sanctions removed Even if they make no progress from this point onwards, their main bargaining chip would be withdrawing from western and central Ukraine.
    - ridiculous_leke 5y ago
      This seems likely. Eastern Ukraine is where bulk of the ethnic Russians live and Putin's justification of the invasion is all about protecting them.
      - 5y ago
pbourke 5y ago
> Russia seem to be closer and closer to the point where their only winning condition is a Grozny scenario and if that happens then there is no chance that NATO would stand by. If that happens we are facing the very real possibility of escalation to some kind of nuclear war per Russia’s doctrine.
- traviswt 5y ago
  “Let me do whatever I want or I’ll nuke you.” If we do not save Ukraine due to our own fear, then that’s the effective precedence Putin will have just set. Russian conquering Ukraine is an _escalation_ from NATO perspective.
partiallypro 5y ago
I'm actually surprised Russia isn't patrolling the air along the Polish border and bombing arms shipments. They have to have intelligence of where they are coming in.
- dogma1138 5y ago
  I have a strong feeling that NATO has signaled them that if they move westwards they’ll find themselves in direct conflict. They can’t risk it especially considering they can’t control the skies over central and eastern Ukraine. Russia hasn’t been able to stop Israel from controlling the skies over Syria either and despite the fact that there is probably a major political component there (Russia doesn’t want Iran to establish themselves in Syria either since it would diminish Syrian dependence on Russia) there is also a very much practical component to it too. Israel can knock Russia out of Syria even if it can’t do it without any losses it can do it without major losses and other than a symbolic attack most likely a Russian sub sinking Israeli naval assets or attacking Israeli gas platforms in the med Russia cannot wage a conventional war on Israel due to the distance and the vulnerability of their logistics chain. The situation in Ukraine isn’t that different Russia knows that it only can operate there as long as NATO allows it too and know it probably knows that better than ever. If we to assume that Russia does not want a nuclear armageddon then we can assume that they would respect which ever red lines NATO has telegraphed to them in private.
- tim333 5y ago
  Surface to air missiles are a thing.

IgorPartola 5y ago

To add to this, I got some unconfirmed reports from Kyiv and Lviv of “very obviously American operatives” supplying intelligence, training, etc. to Ukrainian forces.

danieljacksonno 5y ago
Of course. The CIA is probably all over the place, as they should be.
phs318u 5y ago
Source?

oblio 5y ago

If they level Kyiv, the uproar will be huge. And from I see, the Ukrainians will probably force them to do that, if they want to take it.

Qem 5y ago
Can't they just block the roads and wait outside the city until the javelin operators run out of food?
- oblio 5y ago
  You mean starve the city? That's going to have almost as bad of a reception.
  - Qem 5y ago
    Probably not if they let people surrender and treat them reasonably when they do that. It's not like in WWII, where people would be sent to the gas chambers in some concentration camp, if they surrended.

erosenbe0 5y ago

Doesn't Ukraine have too many anti-tank missiles to make occupying Kiev tenable without a scorched Earth campaign? The operator of a javelin can immediately move to civilian cover after firing -- fire and forget. Russian forces can't really be motivated to take those kind of casualties for long.

dogma1138 5y ago
Tanks are ineffective in an urban environment but it also impacts ATGMs that require a line of sight and a relatively long arming distance. Javelins would probably not be that effective if the tanks enter the city but other anti tank weapons like the NLAW are. Also barricades could have them bogged down. But still if the numbers of 500 tanks in Kyiv are true and the Russians are under orders not to retreat under any circumstances holding the city might be difficult. If Russia takes Kyiv even if they don’t kill Zelenskyy they’ll have a bargaining chip to play in the negotiations that would surly have to happen sometime next week if they don’t they don’t have anything. Right now Russia is running out of win conditions or even a way to get out of this situation at all and that is the most dangerous part. If they have nothing to bargain with they can’t come to the negotiating table to get the sanctions removed and they will not issue an unconstitutional surrender under any circumstances other than if there to be a regime change in Russia.
- vkou 5y ago
  > If they have nothing to bargain with they can’t come to the negotiating table to get the sanctions removed Even if they make no progress from this point onwards, their main bargaining chip would be withdrawing from western and central Ukraine.
  - ridiculous_leke 5y ago
    This seems likely. Eastern Ukraine is where bulk of the ethnic Russians live and Putin's justification of the invasion is all about protecting them.
    - 5y ago

pbourke 5y ago

> Russia seem to be closer and closer to the point where their only winning condition is a Grozny scenario and if that happens then there is no chance that NATO would stand by. If that happens we are facing the very real possibility of escalation to some kind of nuclear war per Russia’s doctrine.

traviswt 5y ago
“Let me do whatever I want or I’ll nuke you.” If we do not save Ukraine due to our own fear, then that’s the effective precedence Putin will have just set. Russian conquering Ukraine is an _escalation_ from NATO perspective.

partiallypro 5y ago

I'm actually surprised Russia isn't patrolling the air along the Polish border and bombing arms shipments. They have to have intelligence of where they are coming in.

dogma1138 5y ago
I have a strong feeling that NATO has signaled them that if they move westwards they’ll find themselves in direct conflict. They can’t risk it especially considering they can’t control the skies over central and eastern Ukraine. Russia hasn’t been able to stop Israel from controlling the skies over Syria either and despite the fact that there is probably a major political component there (Russia doesn’t want Iran to establish themselves in Syria either since it would diminish Syrian dependence on Russia) there is also a very much practical component to it too. Israel can knock Russia out of Syria even if it can’t do it without any losses it can do it without major losses and other than a symbolic attack most likely a Russian sub sinking Israeli naval assets or attacking Israeli gas platforms in the med Russia cannot wage a conventional war on Israel due to the distance and the vulnerability of their logistics chain. The situation in Ukraine isn’t that different Russia knows that it only can operate there as long as NATO allows it too and know it probably knows that better than ever. If we to assume that Russia does not want a nuclear armageddon then we can assume that they would respect which ever red lines NATO has telegraphed to them in private.
tim333 5y ago
Surface to air missiles are a thing.