15 ms·

They are also getting fresh soldiers. I saw a claim from a Canadian vet in Kyiv that 40,000 foreign fighters were already in Kyiv. The Canadian was part of a

by q1w2 5y ago

They are also getting fresh soldiers. I saw a claim from a Canadian vet in Kyiv that 40,000 foreign fighters were already in Kyiv. The Canadian was part of a 500-man exclusively Canadian urban battalion. There was also a report on BBC that Russia had summoned foreign ambassadors in Moscow to complain about foreign volunteers traveling to Ukraine to fight against Russia [1]. I've also been on Telegram channels helping American vets organize, fund their flights to Poland, equip, and then drive them to the Ukrainian border. These are highly motivated well equipped men - many are veterans. Assuming these data points are accurate, then Russia's odds of victory are going down by the day as more western men and supplies enter Ukraine each day than Russian men and supplies. [1] https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/west-sends-mercenaries-to-fight-for-ukraine-russian-defense-ministry/2523009 https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/west-sends-mercenaries-to-fi...

jjulius 5y ago
>There was also a report that Russia had summoned foreign ambassadors in Moscow to complain about foreign volunteers traveling to Ukraine to fight against Russia. I am absolutely dying laughing at the absurdity of such a complaint (if true), lol.
- flir 5y ago
  I hope every single ambassador said "they're on holiday".
  - aaronchall 5y ago
    I was thinking this every time I read the news back when Putin was saying this.
- cableshaft 5y ago
  Meanwhile Russia is busy trying to recruit foreign soldiers themselves from Kazakhstan and Syria. Kazakhstan told them no, despite begging Russia to send their troops into their country when riots broke out a few months ago.
  - blaser-waffle 5y ago
    It's one thing to agree to remain in Russia's sphere and offer them some favorable deals -- quid pro quo for the riot thing -- but it's another thing to scrape up your own people to die in someone else's war. Plus the experience of the Chechen volunteers -- who generally got hit hard from the looks of it -- is something the Kazakhs can look at and say "nah".
    - tim333 5y ago
      Chechen volunteers now seem to be leaning towards fighting against Russia https://www.newsflare.com/video/482085/chechen-volunteers-to-fight-in-ukraine-against-nazism-caused-by-russian-occupation-london https://www.newsflare.com/video/482085/chechen-volunteers-to...
- trhway 5y ago
  Unfortunately, it is a big point of Russian internal propaganda which demonizes it into foreign "soldiers of fortune", "mercenaries" coming to fight Russia, basically they are making it into an additional point of how Russia in this war is basically defending itself from foreign invasion. "Ukraine is being pumped up with foreign weapons and mercenaries!". Unfortunately Russians are eating it. As a glaring example of how gullible are Russians to their propaganda - this official Russian TV story shows planes with unguided dumb bombs (FAB-250, 500lbs) with which Russia bombs Ukrainian cities, and they call it "high-precision missiles" and "point-precision weapons" with which Russia supposedly strikes only military targets (while any Russian can find, yet wouldn't, on YouTube the videos of Ukraine cities destruction by those bombs) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrekdY2FgD0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrekdY2FgD0 , yet if you talk to a Russian in Russia they will be screaming that they only "precision-strike only military targets".
  - rossmohax 5y ago
    Russia claims their SVP-24 bomb sight with integrated computer enables high precision (3-4m accuracy) bombing with dumb bombs
    - trhway 5y ago
      That obvious lie just like that missile launch in the video by a plane loaded only with bombs. That is technically impossible, and if that were possible you wouldn't use 500lbs bombs as it makes the precision pointless. That is the same unit - the same planes and pilots - who did similar bombing of civilians in Syria cities back then. On February 5 Ukraine shot down one of those planes when it was bombing the city of Chernigov. The pilot was captured - happened to be the guy infamous for his Syrian cities bombings and who was celebrated by Putin for that. https://www.unian.net/war/bombil-mirnyy-gorod-letchika-so-sbitogo-v-chernigove-samoleta-rf-doprosili-video-novosti-donbassa-11730376.html https://www.unian.net/war/bombil-mirnyy-gorod-letchika-so-sb...
  - WouterZ 5y ago
    This is actually relatively comforting to me. Putler is at least trying to say they are using precision strikes. A lot harder to uphold once a tactical nuke is used... My worry after the world is so blatently defying Putler with MiGs & other armarments...
- kkjjkgjjgg 5y ago
  What do you consider funny about it? I suppose it is the difference between officially being at war and not. If some country sends fighters to support your enemy, you may start asking if you are at war with that other country, after all? So would you say it would be funny if Canada was officially at war with Russia now? Unless Russia gives up, WWIII seems to already have started, as most countries have joined in one way or another. I guess the only hope is that Russia will decide that the cost is too high.
  - jjulius 5y ago
    >If some country sends fighters... Canada itself is not sending them, that is the distinction here. The humor is in a country exercising hostility by invading another country then asking people to stop coming to that country's defense, simple as that.
  - shuntress 5y ago
    There is a pretty big philosophical difference between a Canadian private citizen taking their own equipment to Ukraine and a Canadian soldier follows orders into Ukraine. Obviously the real world has more complexity than that. "Complain about it" could mean "We know about your tax incentives driving your citizens to fight us and we want you to end that program" but is more likely to mean "We want you to police your internal borders and prevent your citizens from traveling to Europe"
    - chii 5y ago
      > a pretty big philosophical difference between a Canadian private citizen taking their own equipment to Ukraine and a Canadian soldier follows orders into Ukraine. and a legal quagmire. I wonder if a canadian citizen who murders someone overseas can be tried for such in canada (when they return). Because if they can be, then going overseas to participate in a war can be legally problematic, esp. unauthorized by the canadian gov't. But if this is seen as legal today, then it sets a bad precedence for private citizens going overseas to commit murder!
      - 5y ago
- rich_sasha 5y ago
  “This kind of French passport, Ukrainian soldier papers, you can buy in any hobby story”.
dekhn 5y ago
Eventually the question becomes "if these guest fighters are successful, at what point do they consider going north through the contested border and attacking Russian (or, more likely, Belurussian) cities?"
- t0mas88 5y ago
  Belarus may be at a higher risk here, the local army is weak and the political opposition was quite strong last election.
- lb1lf 5y ago
  -At that point, of course, they'd meet resistance from Russian forces which suddenly _have_ a good reason to fight, likely also being supported by a population which will not be thrilled at a bunch of mercenaries having a go at their homeland. Kicking a poorly motivated invasion force out of the Ukraine is one thing. Wreaking havoc in Russia? Quite another. Now, Belarus, on the other hand, I could see toppling over in such a way (unless propped up by Russia)
- q1w2 5y ago
  Probably not at all. I doubt there will be any will to invade Russia. Crimea and Donbas would be hard enough.
  - blaser-waffle 5y ago
    Aye. Attackers need 3-to-1 to overpower defenders, unless you've got some serious force-multipliers -- or so goes the thinking. UA forces are doing a good job holding out and fighting defensively, but a genuine attack will require serious concentrations of troops and equipment. Outside of local counterattacks, or maybe special forces raids (blow up rail lines, etc), large scale assaults probably aren't feasible. You only need a few NLAWs and a yoga mat to sleep on if you're fighting in Kherzon, but you'll need a lot of fighting vehicles and gas if you want to launch an offensive. See also: Russian logistical problems.
    - pmoriarty 5y ago
pmoriarty 5y ago
That's really dangerous. I'm not sure that Russia will care to distinguish between current and former military personnel when it considers whether NATO countries have intervened.
- NoboruWataya 5y ago
  Whether Russia considers NATO to have intervened is less a function of whether the facts on the ground justify that assertion, and more a function of whether Russia wants a war with NATO. It will decide based on strategic considerations and manufacture or ignore the facts as necessary to justify its decision.
  - pmoriarty 5y ago
    "Whether Russia considers NATO to have intervened is less a function of whether the facts on the ground justify that assertion, and more a function of whether Russia wants a war with NATO. It will decide based on strategic considerations and manufacture or ignore the facts as necessary to justify its decision." If that were true, NATO would have at least have sent troops to defend Ukraine. We know that if NATO uses nukes against Russia, Russia will nuke back. Nuclear war will also almost certainly result from a direct non-nuclear confrontation between NATO and Russia. Everything short of that is a murky, gray area. We are in uncharted waters, where one wrong move or miscalculation could mean the end of civilization as we know it, and possibly all of humanity. I wouldn't be surprised if both Russia and the US have already started working through their WW3 contingency plans and watching each other very closely like two gunfighters looking to see who's going to draw first. The slightest hint of starting to move towards a direct confrontation could quickly and easily result in a corresponding or even more provocative response, and then spiral out of control.
    - euroderf 5y ago
      If Russia lobs a nuclear warning shot into the North Sea (say), what is the move by US+NATO that avoids escalation and avoids abandoning Ukraine ?

by q1w2 5y ago

jjulius 5y ago

>There was also a report that Russia had summoned foreign ambassadors in Moscow to complain about foreign volunteers traveling to Ukraine to fight against Russia. I am absolutely dying laughing at the absurdity of such a complaint (if true), lol.

flir 5y ago
I hope every single ambassador said "they're on holiday".
- aaronchall 5y ago
  I was thinking this every time I read the news back when Putin was saying this.
cableshaft 5y ago
Meanwhile Russia is busy trying to recruit foreign soldiers themselves from Kazakhstan and Syria. Kazakhstan told them no, despite begging Russia to send their troops into their country when riots broke out a few months ago.
- blaser-waffle 5y ago
  It's one thing to agree to remain in Russia's sphere and offer them some favorable deals -- quid pro quo for the riot thing -- but it's another thing to scrape up your own people to die in someone else's war. Plus the experience of the Chechen volunteers -- who generally got hit hard from the looks of it -- is something the Kazakhs can look at and say "nah".
  - tim333 5y ago
    Chechen volunteers now seem to be leaning towards fighting against Russia https://www.newsflare.com/video/482085/chechen-volunteers-to-fight-in-ukraine-against-nazism-caused-by-russian-occupation-london https://www.newsflare.com/video/482085/chechen-volunteers-to...
trhway 5y ago
Unfortunately, it is a big point of Russian internal propaganda which demonizes it into foreign "soldiers of fortune", "mercenaries" coming to fight Russia, basically they are making it into an additional point of how Russia in this war is basically defending itself from foreign invasion. "Ukraine is being pumped up with foreign weapons and mercenaries!". Unfortunately Russians are eating it. As a glaring example of how gullible are Russians to their propaganda - this official Russian TV story shows planes with unguided dumb bombs (FAB-250, 500lbs) with which Russia bombs Ukrainian cities, and they call it "high-precision missiles" and "point-precision weapons" with which Russia supposedly strikes only military targets (while any Russian can find, yet wouldn't, on YouTube the videos of Ukraine cities destruction by those bombs) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrekdY2FgD0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrekdY2FgD0 , yet if you talk to a Russian in Russia they will be screaming that they only "precision-strike only military targets".
- rossmohax 5y ago
  Russia claims their SVP-24 bomb sight with integrated computer enables high precision (3-4m accuracy) bombing with dumb bombs
  - trhway 5y ago
    That obvious lie just like that missile launch in the video by a plane loaded only with bombs. That is technically impossible, and if that were possible you wouldn't use 500lbs bombs as it makes the precision pointless. That is the same unit - the same planes and pilots - who did similar bombing of civilians in Syria cities back then. On February 5 Ukraine shot down one of those planes when it was bombing the city of Chernigov. The pilot was captured - happened to be the guy infamous for his Syrian cities bombings and who was celebrated by Putin for that. https://www.unian.net/war/bombil-mirnyy-gorod-letchika-so-sbitogo-v-chernigove-samoleta-rf-doprosili-video-novosti-donbassa-11730376.html https://www.unian.net/war/bombil-mirnyy-gorod-letchika-so-sb...
- WouterZ 5y ago
  This is actually relatively comforting to me. Putler is at least trying to say they are using precision strikes. A lot harder to uphold once a tactical nuke is used... My worry after the world is so blatently defying Putler with MiGs & other armarments...
kkjjkgjjgg 5y ago
What do you consider funny about it? I suppose it is the difference between officially being at war and not. If some country sends fighters to support your enemy, you may start asking if you are at war with that other country, after all? So would you say it would be funny if Canada was officially at war with Russia now? Unless Russia gives up, WWIII seems to already have started, as most countries have joined in one way or another. I guess the only hope is that Russia will decide that the cost is too high.
- jjulius 5y ago
  >If some country sends fighters... Canada itself is not sending them, that is the distinction here. The humor is in a country exercising hostility by invading another country then asking people to stop coming to that country's defense, simple as that.
- shuntress 5y ago
  There is a pretty big philosophical difference between a Canadian private citizen taking their own equipment to Ukraine and a Canadian soldier follows orders into Ukraine. Obviously the real world has more complexity than that. "Complain about it" could mean "We know about your tax incentives driving your citizens to fight us and we want you to end that program" but is more likely to mean "We want you to police your internal borders and prevent your citizens from traveling to Europe"
  - chii 5y ago
    > a pretty big philosophical difference between a Canadian private citizen taking their own equipment to Ukraine and a Canadian soldier follows orders into Ukraine. and a legal quagmire. I wonder if a canadian citizen who murders someone overseas can be tried for such in canada (when they return). Because if they can be, then going overseas to participate in a war can be legally problematic, esp. unauthorized by the canadian gov't. But if this is seen as legal today, then it sets a bad precedence for private citizens going overseas to commit murder!
    - 5y ago
rich_sasha 5y ago
“This kind of French passport, Ukrainian soldier papers, you can buy in any hobby story”.

dekhn 5y ago

Eventually the question becomes "if these guest fighters are successful, at what point do they consider going north through the contested border and attacking Russian (or, more likely, Belurussian) cities?"

t0mas88 5y ago
Belarus may be at a higher risk here, the local army is weak and the political opposition was quite strong last election.
lb1lf 5y ago
-At that point, of course, they'd meet resistance from Russian forces which suddenly _have_ a good reason to fight, likely also being supported by a population which will not be thrilled at a bunch of mercenaries having a go at their homeland. Kicking a poorly motivated invasion force out of the Ukraine is one thing. Wreaking havoc in Russia? Quite another. Now, Belarus, on the other hand, I could see toppling over in such a way (unless propped up by Russia)
q1w2 5y ago
Probably not at all. I doubt there will be any will to invade Russia. Crimea and Donbas would be hard enough.
- blaser-waffle 5y ago
  Aye. Attackers need 3-to-1 to overpower defenders, unless you've got some serious force-multipliers -- or so goes the thinking. UA forces are doing a good job holding out and fighting defensively, but a genuine attack will require serious concentrations of troops and equipment. Outside of local counterattacks, or maybe special forces raids (blow up rail lines, etc), large scale assaults probably aren't feasible. You only need a few NLAWs and a yoga mat to sleep on if you're fighting in Kherzon, but you'll need a lot of fighting vehicles and gas if you want to launch an offensive. See also: Russian logistical problems.
  - pmoriarty 5y ago

pmoriarty 5y ago

That's really dangerous. I'm not sure that Russia will care to distinguish between current and former military personnel when it considers whether NATO countries have intervened.

NoboruWataya 5y ago
Whether Russia considers NATO to have intervened is less a function of whether the facts on the ground justify that assertion, and more a function of whether Russia wants a war with NATO. It will decide based on strategic considerations and manufacture or ignore the facts as necessary to justify its decision.
- pmoriarty 5y ago
  "Whether Russia considers NATO to have intervened is less a function of whether the facts on the ground justify that assertion, and more a function of whether Russia wants a war with NATO. It will decide based on strategic considerations and manufacture or ignore the facts as necessary to justify its decision." If that were true, NATO would have at least have sent troops to defend Ukraine. We know that if NATO uses nukes against Russia, Russia will nuke back. Nuclear war will also almost certainly result from a direct non-nuclear confrontation between NATO and Russia. Everything short of that is a murky, gray area. We are in uncharted waters, where one wrong move or miscalculation could mean the end of civilization as we know it, and possibly all of humanity. I wouldn't be surprised if both Russia and the US have already started working through their WW3 contingency plans and watching each other very closely like two gunfighters looking to see who's going to draw first. The slightest hint of starting to move towards a direct confrontation could quickly and easily result in a corresponding or even more provocative response, and then spiral out of control.
  - euroderf 5y ago
    If Russia lobs a nuclear warning shot into the North Sea (say), what is the move by US+NATO that avoids escalation and avoids abandoning Ukraine ?