Ukraine reacts to fears of Russian invasion as troops build up at the border

[LadyTevar]

I wonder how much effort he has gone through to make sure whoever he gets to check the silos hasn't been bribed to look the other way by someone who will get in trouble if the inspector reports bits missing.

Yeah that's the issue unless Putin personally inspects those silos (and he has way too much to do to have time for that) he can't be certain of the accuracy of those reports they could be accurate or they could be total BS with inspectors having ran away with the money instead of doing their jobs.

You can bet a lot of people are hoping there were a LOT of people who took the bribes, instead of keeping the missiles intact.

[Solauren]

You can bet a lot of people are hoping there were a LOT of people who took the bribes, instead of keeping the missiles intact.

Considering the sheer corruption that has been exposed in the Russian Military, it's almost a given that the missiles are not intact in some way.

After all, to most people, the purpose of nuclear weapons is to never use them. If they are not going to be used, they just need to look like they work to keep the 'other guys' guessing. Which, was probably what alot of people thought about their military.

[Lord Revan]

You can bet a lot of people are hoping there were a LOT of people who took the bribes, instead of keeping the missiles intact.

Considering the sheer corruption that has been exposed in the Russian Military, it's almost a given that the missiles are not intact in some way.

After all, to most people, the purpose of nuclear weapons is to never use them. If they are not going to be used, they just need to look like they work to keep the 'other guys' guessing. Which, was probably what alot of people thought about their military.

Not mention you can probably get pretty good money from the rocket fuel if you can sell it without getting caught.

[Lord Revan]

I wonder how much effort he has gone through to make sure whoever he gets to check the silos hasn't been bribed to look the other way by someone who will get in trouble if the inspector reports bits missing.

Yeah that's the issue unless Putin personally inspects those silos (and he has way too much to do to have time for that) he can't be certain of the accuracy of those reports they could be accurate or they could be total BS with inspectors having ran away with the money instead of doing their jobs.

You can bet a lot of people are hoping there were a LOT of people who took the bribes, instead of keeping the missiles intact.

I'm sure of it, but it's not that far off after all pretty much all the current problems the Russian military is facing can be summed as "a lot of people took bribes and because of it everything is now fucked".

[LadyTevar]

You can bet a lot of people are hoping there were a LOT of people who took the bribes, instead of keeping the missiles intact.

Considering the sheer corruption that has been exposed in the Russian Military, it's almost a given that the missiles are not intact in some way.

After all, to most people, the purpose of nuclear weapons is to never use them. If they are not going to be used, they just need to look like they work to keep the 'other guys' guessing. Which, was probably what alot of people thought about their military.

Not mention you can probably get pretty good money from the rocket fuel if you can sell it without getting caught.

Hell, just re-route it to the Space Race. The Russian Space Force would get far more use out of it.

Of course, there's the question -- does fuel get 'too old to use'. Like gas that's been stored too long?

[Jub]

Hell, just re-route it to the Space Race. The Russian Space Force would get far more use out of it.

Of course, there's the question -- does fuel get 'too old to use'. Like gas that's been stored too long?

The types used in ICBMs are generally designed for long-term storage with the drawback of being awful to handle, so it's unlikely that fuel degradation would be a primary cause of many launch failures.

[KraytKing]

I'm not fully up to date on this thread but I have read just about everything up until page 65 and skimmed the rest. That still leaves a lot of room for me missing key parts of the discussion, of course, so please forgive me if I reiterate what someone else has already said.

I am concerned that this board might have an unrealistically dim view of Russian capabilities and resilience, and an overly optimistic view of the effect this latest round of promised Ukrainian aid will bring. I know that the position of "Russia is stronger than Ukraine" is not a popular one and has been refuted quite notably in the last year, but I still think that the wise would not dismiss the idea.

On a very basic level, Russia is still an immense industrial power with enormous reserves of manpower, equipment, money, production capacity, and other critical elements. Bottom line, Russia is fucking big. They have factories that are ramping up production, they have reserves of vehicles that are in poor--but still serviceable--shape, and most easily overlooked, they really want to win. Putin guessed wrong in the initial invasion, badly wrong, but even if he does a bad job he will still be trying to scrape out a victory. They have industrial resources and reserves and money and manpower, so they aren't just going to let those sit by and lose the war.

Of course, it is possible that they scrape out all the Soviet stocks and put the factories on triple-shift and mobilize fully, and then still lose. That seems likely to me. The point is, they are a long long way from being a pushover. Shell production was in the millions before the war, and though it seems unable to match expenditure, that is still a lot of fucking shells. They are going to be expanding shell production now that the strategy seems to be shifting towards a long war of attrition. Their ability to fire shells has been tremendously reduced since the war began, this is true--Bakhmut is/was(?) bad, but statistics and stories from the front make it seem not nearly so bad as battles in Mariupol, Lyman, Lysychansk, and others. But that doesn't mean it's good. Shelling seems to be down by about half; possibly due to lack of shells, or lack of logistics, or lack of guns, or gunners, or Ukrainian counterbattery, or some combination. That still leaves it at about 35,000 shells per day at peak, while Ukrainian peak is about 7,000 per day. That, is a big fucking difference. Shelling isn't everything, obviously, but there is a limit to what Ukrainian armor can pull off when the Russian can just flatten what's in front of them under a sheet of hellfire.

The Russian reinforcement wave makes things like Kharkiv far less likely. One, because it happened once and now all the Russian commanders are more likely to perceive the danger next time. But also just because of reserves. The 1st Guards was left almost on its own, and still lacked the infantry complement it hadn't even started the war with. Huge numbers of troops had been moved south to Kherson, and without them, there was nobody to check the Ukrainian advance once they broke through the front line. This is all a gross simplification, but it's still basically valid. Back then, though, the 30,000 (ish. Numbers are hard.) men moved to Kherson represented 20% of the initial invasion force--and substantial casualties had been incurred since February 24. Now, though, the popular claim is 500,000 Russians. Shifting thirty thousand from one front to another isn't going to leave a regional defense crippled. Significant, yes of course, but not crippling. If Ukraine tries another big push like that, it will have a much harder time advancing and the Russians will have that much more time to bring up reserves from somewhere else.

I think battles like Bakhmut are going to be a lot more common going forward. Long battles, unable to secure anything like "initiative" for the Russians, but completely inexorable. Ukraine can't really match Russia in that kind of battle yet, and the MoD can see that. They have the artillery and brute-force manpower to make trades like that worthwhile, so they'll try it. They aren't trading favorably with Ukrainian manpower, or so it seems from open-source data (very easily flawed of course), but it doesn't matter: they can take ground, and eventually Ukraine will run out of it.

Let me make something clear about manpower. I do not believe that Russia has greater access to manpower than Ukraine does. I am, obviously, very sensitive to the meme of "infinite Russian manpower" and I am keen to avoid it. The thing is, though the casualties we are seeing are horrific, they really aren't on the right scale to be threatening to run a nation completely dry. A quick Google throws out the reasonably plausible number 270,000 killed or wounded--taking that as gospel truth, it means they have suffered 0.2% losses compared to population. Their prison population is nearly five hundred thousand alone. Obviously, the majority of their 145 mil nominal population are not fit to serve, but it should get the point across: they have a lot of bodies left if they can spend them.

Regarding the political cost of mobilizing more manpower, Putin doesn't really seem to be pulling out all the stops yet. There have been protests, yes, but these are not numerous. He, and seventy years of predecessors, have done a tremendous amount of work to depoliticize the Russian people, and the effects are paying off. If Putin wants to commit to hundreds of thousands of dead, he likely has a population he can force into accepting it, and he likely won't even have to go full 1984 secret police lockdown for another hundred thousand or so losses.

There are other factors. Russian industry is of course highly dependent on international trade, trade that is now substantially reduced. But that just limits their capability to produce modern weapons like Iskander and T-90M and Su-35, and they have shown a willingness, bordering on eagerness, to use legacy systems that haven't seen the light of day since Kennedy was in office. Some exaggeration, but still: the Russian is perfectly willing to use very old tanks, APCs, IFVs, artillery, cruise missiles, and of course rifles. BMP-1 is visually confirmed to be operational, and that is a fucking OLD vehicle. Some very old cruise missiles have similarly been visually confirmed. There were some memes about T-62s a few months ago. These are systems that, while old, are still very deadly, and they are simple. I'm not making the argument of "modern missiles too expensive, use simple old ones instead," I'm just saying that since Russia CAN'T produce new ones, they still have the OPTION of old ones, and that option is not completely counterproductive.

Regarding the state of their boneyards. Up until a year ago, the popular knowledge in my demographic at least was that Russia had a bottomless well of tanks and armored vehicles. Thousands or tens of thousands. Now, that might need some qualification: if they have tens of thousands and they all work perfectly, they seem to be REALLY weirdly picky about sending them out. More likely, leaving vehicles in a Siberian field for 10-50 years didn't do them much good and now they're broke. But, that doesn't mean useless. Combine their need for austere vehicles with the absolutely bonkers quantity of them in shitty condition, and then add in their large but inefficient arms industry, and you get a shitty but workable solution: have your factories quit producing shiny new toys like Armata and Terminator and instead make your tens of thousands of rusted shit heaps operational, and you can fuel a very long war. Not a good solution, obviously: ideally you want your factories making new vehicles up to standard and your reserves to be actually serviceable. But it just pays to remember that just because they can't produce Armata and their reserves suck, doesn't mean they're out of BTRs next week.

To shift topics a little bit. I worry about this next round of aid. Yes, it's big that western MBTs are being sent to Ukraine. But some might be making a bigger deal of this than they should be. I can't remember the total number of promised tanks but I think it's around 150 all told. So far, Poland alone has ALREADY delivered more than 250 tanks, all T-72 or PT-91. Less capable, sure, but not HALF as capable. A tank is a tank: Abrams will be slightly more likely to win a fair fight against T-72 or T-90, but not twice as likely, and that is HEAVILY influenced by other factors like artillery, infantry support, drone support, communications, and everything else. My point being, Ukraine has taken delivery of hundreds of tanks since the war began, and we are currently seeing what it can do with those. So if tank reinforcements go up by another 150, great, they can do a little bit more, assuming the Russians remain just as capable as they were in February 2022. More likely, the Russians have gotten stronger and more conservative, the Ukrainians have lost a couple hundred tanks, and these reinforcements are enough to break even or maybe just keep from falling too far behind. This is not revolutionary, this is an incremental improvement. If, for example, they received 650 Abrams tanks and a proportional number of Leopards, Bradleys, and Marders, then we would be seeing a revolution.

Tank delivery schedules are also a HUGE factor. I'll admit I haven't kept up as well as I should have, but a couple of weeks ago John Kerry wasn't even willing to say if the US tank package would arrive this year. Training the ZSU on this equipment, all of it completely new and foreign, is going to take HELLA days. So, in addition to the promised tanks not really being the numbers we need to see Ukraine kick Russia out of Crimea, they aren't going to arrive and see use until after the next round of Russian offensives. Too late to change that, of course, but at least we could make sure there was a bunch of them when they DO arrive.

Here's my conspiracy-theorist view: we aren't trying to win this war for Ukraine, we're just dragging it out to see the whole Russian state get chewed up and spat out. Russia, unlike China, has shown an unwillingness to play nice and integrate with the global economy in a way that makes the US richer, and they are clearly VERY willing to step in and fuck up that economy for stupid reasons. They are, currently, almost a rogue state. This is the major reason I could see, and have seen argued earlier in this thread, that the US would not want to see Russia in its current form stamped out. Historically, successor states can be reluctant to integrate with the global economy and might be more willing to go around blowing shit up and threatening nuclear holocaust. Since we ALREADY see that in Moscow, what is there to lose?

The US isn't doing a lot of obvious things that could make the war end faster. Without even increasing expenditures or aid provided, here's one idea: announce the fucking aid schedule. The way it being done currently, there is always the hope in the MoD that the next package will be the last, or smaller, or less directly useful. Each offensive that fails might still have time for a second chance before the next aid package is announced or arrives. If the US had, in February or March of 2022, announced the next 12 months of aid, then the Russian strategic planners could point out the "we're fucked THEN" spot on the timeline. Obviously, they didn't know in March that they would be sending Patriot or Abrams, but those things can be welcome surprises. Commit to a base level of aid for the next two years, including all of the things so far promised, and make sure the Russians know they won't outlast the US in an attritional war.

And damn it, just step up the aid. There are a fucking lot of tools back here that aren't being sent. Cluster rounds for artillery are CRAZY useful against light infantry, which the Russians are heavily reliant on. ATACMS would fuck up their logistics even more than GMLRS did, and GMLRS is probably a pretty big reason why their shell consumption is down by half and truck attrition is up. Bradley is a great platform, and there are two fucking thousand of them in inactive reserves: not National Guard, not active, just sitting in garages or boneyards being quietly kept a little bit ready. Two thousand Bradleys with commensurate munitions would end the damn war, we saw in '91 how effective they are at killing tanks. Estonia made a great point sending all of its 155s to Ukraine: what are we saving it all for, if not this? When is the US going to have the opportunity to fight an attrition war with a major geopolitical rival without actually fighting? Any war with China would last two goddamn weeks before both sides run out of good missiles and agree to disagree, and any war with Russia would end WELL before the entire stock of active service armored vehicles is chewed up.

Anyway. I look back at the last hour I spent typing this and realize I don't have a forum post, I have a shitty essay. Meh. Here's the tl;dr.

Russia is a big country, and those have a LOT of resiliency no matter how shitty and inefficient their economy is. Pushing them out of Ukraine is going to require a lot more dying and a lot more equipment and a lot more time. Not all of Ukraine's allies are really stepping up with equipment, so either Russia is going to make incremental gains until Ukraine gives up and accepts terms, or equipment packages will continue to increase just fast enough to keep the war from ending and just slow enough to keep Russia from giving up and going home. These options all suck, but my favorite is the one where Americans do what we spent the WHOLE COLD WAR SAYING WE WOULD, and take the opportunity to fuck up Russia with a bunch of fancy shit for Ukraine and the war ends by 2024.

[madd0c0t0r2]

You haven't missed much analysis, just fat chewing and schadenfreude as the news trickles in.

I think your analysis is too kind to Russia.
The demographics are harsh: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Russia

The median age is 40.3 years. There's a huge squeeze on population numbers between 16 and 40. Compared to the relatively youthful USA, Russia simply has half the number of people of fighting age you'd expect for the population. That small population is also busy supporting and caring for the relatively large elderly population, and the unusually large addict/Ill/not-working population, so you can call up far less of them then you might expect before other problems cascade through the economy.

This wouldn't be a problem if they seemed to be spending their soldiers wisely. And obviously we're getting one end of the propaganda reports that are feeding on ww2 stereotypes but in attrition, Russia does not have huge reserves.

And the attrition is another factor that is not really in Russia's favour. Over the course of the war, we've seen steady downgrading from blitzkrieg elite to boneyard junkers and ww1 attritional tactics. We have not seen that in the Ukrainian forces, who are fighting with steadily better and better equipment. Russia simply cannot match the production and logistics of NATO, especially when all the factories are located outside of Ukraine and cannot be touched by Russia. Long slow warfare does not play into Russia's interests.

Finally, you said Russia really wants to win. I dispute that. Admittedly, using the same logic that had me confident they wouldn't invade, but surely some of the elite want to maintain their position and have access to reasonably accurate info?
If the Russian population really wanted to win, the army wouldnt be relying on the draft.
For the Ukrainian's, it is an existential war. Like Vietnam, it's not about winning, it's about not wanting to loose harder.

Manifold markets currently has:
War to last more than another year 70%
Russia to still control Crimea at end of year 81%
Kerch Strait bridge destroyed again by may 02 45%
Ukraine to eventually win 70%
Russia federation fragments by 2030 30%

[LaCroix]

Russia has sold gold from their reserves to balace their budget... First time, ever - while revenue is down 30%, expenses up 60% and productive population (tax and actal work) is running away (0.5 to 1 million estimated) or getting fed into ukraine (130k dead, 400k or so crippled). Not a good outlook for the economy.

Factory building replacment sections for the Kerch bridge got burnt down, so that one will take much longer to be repaired (it was the original builder factory, so most likely all tooling and docu was lost)

Yeah, not looking good for them.

[LaCroix]

Additionally Wagner went back to the prisions and word has come back that only like 15% of the first round survived their tour. Nobody wants to sign up, anymore.

Right now, Russia is doing human wave tactics due to lack of training - even with a few months of training, soldiers can pretty much only be used in an ON/OFF manner - complicated things need way more experience. So they can only tell them to attack or not.
Ukrainians simply shoot as many as possible, and then are commanded to fall back to the next save position, preserving manpower and trading space for it. In the last 6 weeks, russia traded 30k dead (and easily 100k wounded) for a few square miles in advance - if they keep doing that, they will capture the DONBAS (not Ukraine) in about 5 years, losing a couple million men.

Same for the artillery - even russians say that these days, you should always call a russian artillery strike on your own position to get support - if they aim for you, you will be the only one safe in the area. Russian artillery fires because they need to report that they fired a lot of shells, and show levelled cities as "results.
Ukrainian artillery fires and hits their target. So while the russians are still firing 5 times as many shells as the ukrainians, the ukrainians are hitting 5x more targets, with less ammo. And they are continously hitting russian ammo dumps and concentrations, while russians only occasionally hit an unlucky bloke.

Right now, the war of attrittion looks bad for Russia, and will get worse with the next delivery - hat's why they desperately want to start a new operation right now, while the ground is still frozen, even though they are not ready. Because in a few weeks, everything gets bogged down in mud till the end of April, and by then the UA will have most of the equipment delivered to start their offensive.

So right now, russia tries to desperately push while UA is at it's weakest for the near future, Russia still has something left (pulling stuff and manpower together for an offensive is exactly what gets all the HIMARS to your yard), and push for a better position - read: trying to get the frontline to align with some river as a natural protection against being overrun.

Only chance they have - because while (unlike russia, who simple never manages) Ukraine CAN do attacks over a water body, it still means you can hold these frontlines with little effort, freeing up manpower for the areas where the new NATO stuff will have to attack...

[LadyTevar]

Hell, just re-route it to the Space Race. The Russian Space Force would get far more use out of it.

Of course, there's the question -- does fuel get 'too old to use'. Like gas that's been stored too long?

The types used in ICBMs are generally designed for long-term storage with the drawback of being awful to handle, so it's unlikely that fuel degradation would be a primary cause of many launch failures.

Thank you. I didn't know what mix of fuel was used for that. And, tbh, isn't the fuel in space-faring rockets just a mix of pure oxygen and hydrogen?

[LadyTevar]

Russia has sold gold from their reserves to balace their budget... First time, ever - while revenue is down 30%, expenses up 60% and productive population (tax and actal work) is running away (0.5 to 1 million estimated) or getting fed into ukraine (130k dead, 400k or so crippled). Not a good outlook for the economy.

Factory building replacment sections for the Kerch bridge got burnt down, so that one will take much longer to be repaired (it was the original builder factory, so most likely all tooling and docu was lost)

Yeah, not looking good for them.

TBH, I trust your analysis over anything we're getting from US news media, because you're closer and (presumably) getting better intel. There was nothing in the news that I'd seen about Russia selling gold.

As to the Manpower problem -- what's the chance Wagner/Russia resorts to press-ganging the prisoners who won't sign up? It's a more extreme form of Draft, which Russia will probably have to resort to. Russia should close all borders first or they'll get a repeat of last time; hundreds of young men running away.

[Solauren]

As to the Manpower problem -- what's the chance Wagner/Russia resorts to press-ganging the prisoners who won't sign up? It's a more extreme form of Draft, which Russia will probably have to resort to. Russia should close all borders first or they'll get a repeat of last time; hundreds of young men running away.

IF Wagner/Russia starts doing that, they'll probably find those prisoners turning their weapons against Wagner the first chance they get.

The prisoners have to know that it's a death sentence now. So, if you have a choice of 'march into the Ukraine to be slaughtered' vs 'you and 20 friends shot the bastard Wagner put in charge of you and desert and probably survive', which are you going to take?

[Eternal_Freedom]

Press-ganging prisoners who refused to join up the first time might be a really bad idea (beyond the obvious military, tactical issues) - you're giving a bunch of people who already don't like you guns and ammunition. I'd bet it wouldn't take long for Wagner commanders to be "accidentally" killed.

Damn, Solauren ninja'd me while typing.

[Solauren]

Here's my conspiracy-theorist view: we aren't trying to win this war for Ukraine, we're just dragging it out to see the whole Russian state get chewed up and spat out. Russia, unlike China, has shown an unwillingness to play nice and integrate with the global economy in a way that makes the US richer, and they are clearly VERY willing to step in and fuck up that economy for stupid reasons. They are, currently, almost a rogue state. This is the major reason I could see, and have seen argued earlier in this thread, that the US would not want to see Russia in its current form stamped out. Historically, successor states can be reluctant to integrate with the global economy and might be more willing to go around blowing shit up and threatening nuclear holocaust. Since we ALREADY see that in Moscow, what is there to lose?

Alternate theory - Biden isn't willing to send alot right now, due to the upcoming US election. He doesn't want to get Ukraine hopes up in case he loses, and he doesn't want the war to influence the election against him by Republican's going 'cost, cost, cost!'

[LadyTevar]

Press-ganging prisoners who refused to join up the first time might be a really bad idea (beyond the obvious military, tactical issues) - you're giving a bunch of people who already don't like you guns and ammunition. I'd bet it wouldn't take long for Wagner commanders to be "accidentally" killed.

Damn, Solauren ninja'd me while typing.

You and Solauren are both right. At least when the British Navy was press-ganging from prisons the prisoners were trapped on a ship with no where to run as well.
Still -- what's the difference between a Draft and a Press-Gang anyway?

[Batman]

A draft means you get the people who are legally required to do military service. Press-gang means you grab whomever you can get your hands on.

[Jub]

Thank you. I didn't know what mix of fuel was used for that. And, tbh, isn't the fuel in space-faring rockets just a mix of pure oxygen and hydrogen?

Some types do use that for fuel, but it has to be stored cryogenically and thus boils off the longer you need to store it. The ICBM type uses substances that auto-ignite when mixed but which are more stable at storage temperatures. They're less efficient and generally toxic as hell, but when you need a rocket to sit fueled for decades and only need to fuel them once you take the trade.

[Lord Revan]

A draft means you get the people who are legally required to do military service. Press-gang means you grab whomever you can get your hands on.

To add to this at least in Western countries there's medical reasons why you wouldn't be drafted, certain professions are also exempt from the draft (what those professions are depends on the situations and local laws) and no not just CEOs and other rich people but also people who work in vital jobs. Drafts also typically only focus on certain age groups to maximize the quality of recruits

press-gang means they take who ever they can get their hands on regardless of standards or usefulness in other ways, often leading to poor quality and unmotivated troops/sailors that had to be monitored as to prevent defections or mutinies essentially defeating the purpose anyway.

[Jub]

Russian forces are feeling very much like this at the moment:

[EnterpriseSovereign]

'Nothing off the table': Sunak considers supplying Ukraine with fighter jets after Zelenskyy plea

The UK is "actively" considering whether to supply Ukraine with fighter jets after a plea from President Volodymyr Zelenskyy for "powerful English planes".

Rishi Sunak's spokesman said no decision had been made on whether to grant Mr Zelenskyy's wish and insisted jets would only form a "long-term solution rather than a short-term capability, which is what Ukraine needs most now".

Asked about the possibility of sending jets to Ukraine during a joint press conference with Mr Zelenskyy in Dorset, Prime Minister Sunak said "nothing is off the table".

Mr Zelenskyy asked for air support from the UK and other Western nations, in an earlier speech at Westminster Hall during his first visit to Britain since Russia invaded his country.

The UK and the rest of Nato have been refusing to send military jets to Ukraine, arguing that the RAF’s F-35 and Typhoon aircraft systems take too long for pilots learn. However, the president's visit may have sparked a shifting of the dial, in Britain at least.

Asked following Mr Zelenskyy's speech whether fighter jets would be provided, the PM's spokesman said Britain had already promised to train Ukrainian pilots, but added: “What we have not made a decision on is whether we send UK fighter jets."

"Obviously there is an ongoing discussion among other countries about their own fighter jets, some of which are more akin to what Ukrainian pilots are used to.”

He continued: “We’ve confirmed there will be a training programme for Ukrainian pilots and the Defence Secretary [Ben Wallace] is actively looking at whether we send jets.”

President Zelenskyy poured praise on Britain for its support of Ukraine in his speech, saying "the world needs your leadership Britain, just as it needs Ukrainian bravery".

He said: “London has stood with Kyiv since day one, from the first seconds and minutes of the full-scale war, Great Britain you extended your helping hand when the world had not yet come to understand how to react."

In a powerful, symbolic gesture, the Ukrainian president gifted House of Commons Speaker Lindsay Hoyle the helmet of a fighter pilot, on which were written the words: "We have freedom, give us wings to protect it."

Much of his rousing speech was used to request jets - a plea the West has treat with caution, given Vladimir Putin has a nuclear arsenal at his disposal and has previously threatened to use it if an attack is launched on Russian soil.

But former prime minister Boris Johnson appears to believe the benefit of supplying the jets outweighs the risk.

He said: “It is time to give the Ukrainians the extra equipment they need to defeat Putin and to restore peace to Ukraine.

“That means longer range missiles and artillery. It means more tanks. It means planes."

He added: “Every time we have stepped up with more military support the Ukrainians have responded and turned the tide of war. Now is the time to give them exactly what they need to finish the job.”

Mr Zelenskyy has also been meeting Ukrainian troops in the South West, who are being trained by the British armed forces.

The government said the training will "ensure Ukraine can defend its skies well into the future".

Britain is one of the biggest military backers of Ukraine and has sent the country more than £2 billion in weapons and equipment.

More than 10,000 Ukrainian troops have also been trained at bases in the UK, some on the Challenger 2 tanks that Britain is sending.

Mr Zelenskyy's visit is only his second known trip outside of Ukraine since Vladimir Putin's Russia invaded, with the first being a summit in the US.

His first address to the UK Parliament was a virtual one, in March last year, in which he echoed Winston Churchill’s famous “never surrender” speech, vowing that Ukrainians “will fight till the end at sea, in the air. We will continue fighting for our land, whatever the cost".

The PM said: “President Zelenskyy’s visit to the UK is a testament to his country’s courage, determination and fight, and a testament to the unbreakable friendship between our two countries.

“Since 2014, the UK has provided vital training to Ukrainian forces, allowing them to defend their country, protect their sovereignty and fight for their territory.

“I am proud that today we will expand that training from soldiers to marines and fighter jet pilots, ensuring Ukraine has a military able to defend its interests well into the future.

“It also underlines our commitment to not just provide military equipment for the short term, but a long-term pledge to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Ukraine for years to come.”

Rishi Sunak says it is ‘not practical’ to give Ukraine British fighter jets
Mr Sunak visited Ukraine recently in November, with Mr Zelenskyy praising a “meaningful and useful visit for both our countries”.

“With friends like you by our side, we are confident in our victory,” he added on Twitter.

The UK has also announced new sanctions targeting those who have helped Vladimir Putin build his personal wealth and firms which have profited from the war.

Ukrainian troops are already being trained in the use of Challenger 2 tanks, which are expected to be sent to the country next month.

Sunak also offered longer-range firepower to help counter Russia’s ability to strike at Ukraine’s towns and energy facilities. After the speech Mr Zelenskyy headed to Buckingham Palace for a meeting with King Charles.

The pair were served tea during 30 minutes of conversation about the continuing conflict in Ukraine, and the part Britain has played in supporting the nation.

Mr Zelenskyy said it was an honour to be at the palace and the King told him "we’ve all been worried about you and thinking about your country for so long, I can’t tell you".

After finishing his engagements in London, Mr Zelenskyy flew to Paris for dinner with French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz.
Mr Zelenskyy was greeted Wednesday night on the steps of the Elysee Palace with a friendly embrace by Mr Macron, and then all three leaders headed inside.

The visit marks a turnaround in Mr Zelenskyy’s relations toward France and Germany, which earlier in the war were viewed by many in Ukraine as not doing enough to help.

"Ukraine can count on France, its European partners and allies to win the war. Russia cannot and must not win," Mr Macron said before their working dinner.

[LaCroix]

As to the Manpower problem -- what's the chance Wagner/Russia resorts to press-ganging the prisoners who won't sign up? It's a more extreme form of Draft, which Russia will probably have to resort to. Russia should close all borders first or they'll get a repeat of last time; hundreds of young men running away.

You had to jinx it, right?

Latest reports are that prisoners are going to get slammed with "revised sentences", adding 10-20 years to their tab...

Of course, if they sign up, that'll all go away...

[wautd]

Additionally Wagner went back to the prisions and word has come back that only like 15% of the first round survived their tour. Nobody wants to sign up, anymore.

It's pretty fucking insane that in Russia, a neo nazi mercenary group/Putin's private army has the right to release prisoners. Putin really is disintegrating any form of law in the Russian Federation Putinstan

Speaking about disintegrating any form of law, Navalny's health really looks bad these days.

[bilateralrope]

IF Wagner/Russia starts doing that, they'll probably find those prisoners turning their weapons against Wagner the first chance they get.

The prisoners have to know that it's a death sentence now. So, if you have a choice of 'march into the Ukraine to be slaughtered' vs 'you and 20 friends shot the bastard Wagner put in charge of you and desert and probably survive', which are you going to take?

They don't need 20 friends with guns. Just four of them with shovels and sledgehammers.

Wagner Troops Filmed Beating Their Commander With Shovels—Reports

BY ISABEL VAN BRUGEN ON 2/8/23 AT 11:19 AM EST

Brutal footage released by Ukraine purportedly shows Wagner Group fighters beating their commander with shovels in the city of Bakhmut in eastern Ukraine, where the paramilitary group has focused its efforts for half a year.

The video, shot from a Ukrainian drone by the Seneka special platoon earlier this week, was released on Ukrainian social media channels on Monday. It appears to show four Wagner Group fighters dragging their commander through the war-torn region, holding him by his arms and legs.

Three of the men are seen in another portion of the clip hitting him with what appears to be either shovels or sledgehammers.

[bilateralrope]

SpaceX admits blocking Ukrainian troops from using satellite technology

By Alex Marquardt and Kristin Fisher, CNN
Published 9:26 AM EST, Thu February 9, 2023

The president of SpaceX revealed the company has taken active steps to prevent Ukrainian forces from using the critical Starlink satellite technology with Ukrainian drones that are a key component of their fight against Russia.

“There are things that we can do to limit their ability to do that,” Gwynne Shotwell told reporters on Wednesday, referencing reports on Starlink and drone use. “There are things that we can do, and have done.”

Starlink was never meant to be used militarily in the way that it has, Shotwell argued, saying the company didn’t foresee how profoundly – and creatively – Ukrainian forces would rely on the technology.

“It was never intended to be weaponized,” Shotwell told an audience at a space conference. “However, Ukrainians have leveraged it in ways that were unintentional and not part of any agreement.”

Shotwell’s admission that SpaceX, which was founded by Elon Musk, has prevented Ukrainian soldiers from fully using the technology confirms the long-standing belief that Musk and the company are uneasy with Ukraine’s military use of Starlink.

Speaking with reporters after, Shotwell argued that Starlink had sent units to Ukraine to “keep the banks going, hospitals, keep families connected.”

“We know the military is using them for comms, and that’s OK,” Shotwell added. “But our intent was never to have them use it for offensive purposes.”

Last October, Musk angered Ukrainians, including President Volodymyr Zelensky, for proposing a peace plan on Twitter that argued Ukraine just give up efforts to reclaim Crimea and cede control of the Luhansk and Donetsk regions.

That same month, there were reports that the Starlink signal had been restricted and was not available past the front line as Ukrainian troops tried to advance, essentially hamstringing their efforts to retake territory from the Russians. Those reports of the outages fueled accusations that Musk was kowtowing to Russia.

“That has affected every effort of the Ukrainians to push past that front,” a person familiar with the outages told CNN in October. “Starlink is the main way units on the battlefield have to communicate.”

Ukrainian troops have roundly praised Starlink as a game-changing piece of satellite technology that has not only allowed them to maintain communications, but also better target Russian forces with artillery and drones.

After Musk received Ukrainian – and global – praise for quickly delivering Starlink capabilities to Ukraine, CNN obtained exclusive documents showing that SpaceX was trying to get the Pentagon to start paying for thousands of terminals, along with their expensive connectivity, for Ukraine’s military and intelligence services. Thousands of units had also quietly been purchased by third countries for Ukraine.

One senior defense official told CNN that SpaceX had “the gall to look like heroes” while having others pay so much.

Musk responded quickly to CNN’s report, tweeting, “The hell with it…we’ll just keep funding Ukraine govt for free.”

However, SpaceX and the Pentagon had continued discussions about a possible deal for military units, according to people familiar with the conversations. On Wednesday, Shotwell indicated at least part of those conversations had ended.

“I was the one that asked the Pentagon to fund, this was not an Elon thing,” Shotwell said on Wednesday. “We stopped interacting with the Pentagon on the existing capability. They are not paying.”

SpaceX had never envisioned that Starlink would be used in Ukraine the way it has been, Shotwell said, echoing coverage and accounts of Ukrainian troops’ ingenuity on the battlefield.

“Honestly,” she said, “I don’t even think we thought about it. You know, it could be used that way? We didn’t think about it. I didn’t think about it. Our Starlink team may have, I don’t know. But we’ve learned pretty quickly.”

SpaceX has decided to be the kind of ISP that blocks legal activity that they don't like. They have picked their side in this war.