Russia invades Ukraine

[najaB]

There's a good chance they may appear in the sky before the F16s

That would be surprising given that the first batch of F-16 pilots have completed their training.

 

[Pete_uk]

Mind you, one of the head Airforce guys in Ukraine has said that they are all set up to take Gripens on. Maybe he was just trying to stir something

 

[najaB]

In an interesting, though likely not consequential, turn of events - Ukrainians have apparently managed to damage or destroy one of the few Su-57s currently in service with the Russian air force:

KYIV, June 9 (Reuters) - Ukrainian forces have for the first time hit a latest-generation Russian Sukhoi Su-57 fighter jet at an air base inside Russia, Kyiv's GUR defence intelligence agency said on Sunday, showing satellite pictures which it said confirmed the strike.
In a Telegram post, the GUR did not specify how the Su-57 was hit or by which unit of the Ukrainian military.
A popular Russian pro-war military blogger who calls himself Fighterbomber and focuses on aviation said the report of the strike on the Su-57 was correct and that it had been hit by a drone.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-says-latest-generation-russian-fighter-jet-hit-first-time-2024-06-09/

I say that it's unlikely to be consequential in the current phase of the war as Russia wasn't risking the few examples that they have in service (as few as ten?) in combat in Ukraine.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Jun 2024 ==

Didn't know if to post in this thread or not, but it seems a Russian sailor has been smoking where they shouldn't have been:

A fire has reportedly broken out on the Russian anti-submarine ship Admiral Levchenko in the Barents Sea, following an engine malfunction, as told by Dmytro Pletenchuk, the press officer for Ukraine’s Armed Forces’ Southern Defense Forces, on June 10.

Via a Facebook update, Pletenchuk communicated that the vessel, which was carrying several hundred persons, was currently engaged in a “struggle for survival.”

“We hope in vain,” he expressed further.

The Kyiv Independent has been unable to independently confirm the allegations.

MSN

While this ship wasn't taking direct part in the naval campaign against Ukraine, any loss of a large ship is one more drain on the Russian defence budget, which can only be a good thing for Ukraine. The other reason that it's notable is because the actual cause of the fire is being put down to deferred maintenance, which would normally have been conducted in Ukrainian facilities.

 

[brad465]

Recently a Crimean beach was hit by debris from a missile attack on Sevastopol, which Russia is now blaming on the US and threatening a response. Plenty of Russian threats have turned out to be limited or non-existent in follow up, but unless I've missed something, this sounds like the first time Russia has blamed the US directly for a specific attack so maybe one to watch:

Ukraine war: Russia blames US and vows response for Crimea deaths

Russia says US-made missiles programmed by American specialists were used in an attack which killed four.

www.bbc.co.uk

Russia has blamed the US and vowed "consequences" for a Ukrainian missile strike on Sevastopol in occupied Crimea on Sunday, which officials say killed four people - including two children.
Around 150 more were injured in the attack as missile debris fell on a beach nearby.
Russia's defence ministry said the missiles used by Ukraine were US-supplied ATACMS missiles, and claimed they were programmed by US specialists.
Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov called the strike "barbaric" and accused the US of "killing Russian children".
He pointed towards comments by President Vladimir Putin, who recently vowed to target countries supplying weapons to Ukraine.
Moscow said Sunday's deaths and injuries were caused by falling debris, after its air defences in Crimea intercepted five missiles loaded with cluster warheads launched by Ukrainian forces.
Footage carried on Russian state TV showed chaos on the beach in the Uchkuyevka area, as people ran from the falling debris and some injured people were carried away on sun loungers.
Russia's defence ministry claimed on Sunday that all ATACMS missiles are programmed by US specialists and guided by American satellites.
Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov reiterated the claim during a meeting in Minsk on Monday, saying that the system "cannot be used without the direct participation of the American military, including satellite capabilities".
The US has been supplying ATACMS missiles to Ukraine for over a year. The system allows Ukrainian forces to strike targets up to 300km (186 miles) away, according to manufacturer Lockheed Martin.
Moscow illegally annexed Crimea in 2014 and just a handful of countries recognise the peninsula as Russian territory. It therefore does not fall under the US demands that Ukraine refrain from using Washington-supplied weapons to strike Russian territory.
A spokesperson for the White House National Security Council told the BBC: “Ukraine makes its own targeting decisions and conducts its own military operations.”
But Mr Peskov told reporters in Moscow on Monday that the "involvement of the United States, the direct involvement, as a result of which Russian civilians are killed, cannot be without consequences".
"Time will tell what these will be," he added.
The Russian foreign ministry summoned the US Ambassador Lynne Tracy on Monday, with Mr Lavrov claiming that US involvement in the attack was "not in doubt".
Moscow has repeatedly threatened to target countries supplying weapons to Ukraine, claiming that they are legitimate military targets.
Earlier this month, Mr Putin vowed to target countries arming Ukraine during a meeting with international news agencies.
"If someone thinks it is possible to supply such weapons to a war zone to attack our territory and create problems for us, why don't we have the right to supply weapons of the same class to regions of the world where there will be strikes on sensitive facilities of those (Western) countries?" he said.
"That is, the response can be asymmetric. We will think about it," he added.
Ukrainian officials have defended the strike in the wake of the attack, calling Crimea a legitimate target.
Mykhailo Podolyak - a top aide to President Volodymyr Zelensky - said the peninsula was in effect "a large military camp" which he said held "hundreds of direct military targets, which the Russians are cynically trying to hide and cover up with their own civilians".
The UN's human rights monitoring mission in Ukraine says at least 10,000 civilians have been killed since Russia invaded in February 2022. The real figure, officials say, is likely to be far higher.

 

[najaB]

Recently a Crimean beach was hit by debris from a missile attack on Sevastopol, which Russia is now blaming on the US and threatening a response.

Well, if those Russian civilians hadn't been on occupied Ukrainian territory in the first place...

 

[Brooklands]

Well, if those Russian civilians hadn't been on occupied Ukrainian territory in the first place...

How dare they live where they always have for generations.Outrageous.
The ignorance of reality on this message board is staggering.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

How dare they live where they always have for generations.Outrageous.
The ignorance of reality on this message board is staggering.

The dominant nationality of the Crimean population has changed many times throughout history. Russians only appeared in numbers during WW2 when Stalin decided that the then dominant ethnic group in the area, the Tatars, weren't Russian enough and were therefore a security risk requiring them all to be deported and replaced by forcibly transplanted Russians.

The later transfer of Crimea from Russia to Ukraine during Kruschev's time was a cynical move to avoid Moscow having to deal with the growing problem of ensuring a reliable water supply. Kyiv successfully dealt with the problem by building the North Crimea Canal.

As for Russian civilians enjoying the Crimean beaches very many of them are indeed tourists from Russia itself, many of whom are glad to have a cheaper alternative to Sochi on the eastern side of the Black Sea.

Is that enough reality for you?

 

[najaB]

How dare they live where they always have for generations.

I would put all the money I have on the people who were killed being either recent (as in post 2014) immigrants, or tourists from Russia.

 

[Brooklands]

Well, people can believe anything they want.
It’s their right but in many conflicts in the world are all too simplistic. It’s often a perceived choice between the so called goodies and the baddies.
It really is sad and pathetic and more complicated as history is in many ways is a matter of opinion.
Of course the so called ‘west’ is virtuous and all knowing. It’s an example to us all isn’t it.

Hypocrisy run riot I would say. Who knows and who cares anymore. It’s all a become a media event unfortunately. Thousands of innocent lives lost for nothing.
This is very serious and not a game. It is so unnecessary and keyboard warriors attitudes are so disrespectful.

It’s only my opinion and I really don’t care what you might think .Sadly so many take great store in what the person on the telly says you should your attitude should be.
God help us all.

 

[brad465]

The dominant nationality of the Crimean population has changed many times throughout history. Russians only appeared in numbers during WW2 when Stalin decided that the then dominant ethnic group in the area, the Tatars, weren't Russian enough and were therefore a security risk requiring them all to be deported and replaced by forcibly transplanted Russians.

The later transfer of Crimea from Russia to Ukraine during Kruschev's time was a cynical move to avoid Moscow having to deal with the growing problem of ensuring a reliable water supply. Kyiv successfully dealt with the problem by building the North Crimea Canal.

As for Russian civilians enjoying the Crimean beaches very many of them are indeed tourists from Russia itself, many of whom are glad to have a cheaper alternative to Sochi on the eastern side of the Black Sea.

Is that enough reality for you?

I would put all the money I have on the people who were killed being either recent (as in post 2014) immigrants, or tourists from Russia.

Don't talk to users like them, they can't be persuaded and it gives them oxygen they don't deserve.

 

[najaB]

Thousands of innocent lives lost for nothing.

At least we can agree on that. And one person has the power to end the killing, right now. The same person who could have ended it at any point during the war, or who could have prevented it from happening in the first place.

 

[ainsworth74]

Meanwhile, whilst Ukraine accidently killed some Russian civilians on holiday in occupied Crimea recently after their missiles where shot down by Russian air defence systems, it would seem Russia happily targets a children's hospital directly. A children's hospital. A hospital for children.

At least 20 people have been killed after Russia launched a massive missile attack against cities across Ukraine, according to officials.

In the capital, Kyiv, at least seven people were killed in a rare daytime attack. The city's mayor said a children's hospital was hit by the missile strike and was being evacuated.

The head of the military administration in the central Ukrainian city of Kryvyi Rih said at least 10 people had been killed there, with three killed in the eastern town of Pokrovsk.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who is visiting Poland, said that Russia had fired some 40 missiles at targets across the country.

Mr Zelensky, who is due to travel to the US for this week's Nato summit in Washington, said Russia had "massively attacked" Ukraine.

"Different cities: Kyiv, Dnipro, Kryvyi Rih, Sloviansk, Kramatorsk. More than 40 missiles of various types. Residential buildings, infrastructure and a children's hospital were damaged," he said.

Plumes of smoke could be seen across the capital Kyiv, while video posted on social media showed the destruction inside and outside of the Okhmadyt children's hospital. It is not clear if anyone inside was injured.

But Mr Zelensky said in a social media post that people were trapped under the rubble of the hospital. He added that the number of people injured at Okhmadyt hospital was unclear.

Children's hospital hit as Russian strikes kill dozens in Ukraine

Two people were killed at the Okhmatdyt Children's Hospital after an intense Russian barrage, officials say.

www.bbc.co.uk

But sure, Ukraine and NATO is the aggressor and should immediately make concessions to allow for "peace".

 

[DustyBin]

Meanwhile, whilst Ukraine accidently killed some Russian civilians on holiday in occupied Crimea recently after their missiles where shot down by Russian air defence systems, it would seem Russia happily targets a children's hospital directly. A children's hospital. A hospital for children.

Children's hospital hit as Russian strikes kill dozens in Ukraine

Two people were killed at the Okhmatdyt Children's Hospital after an intense Russian barrage, officials say.

www.bbc.co.uk

But sure, Ukraine and NATO is the aggressor and should immediately make concessions to allow for "peace".

A useful (if very unpleasant) reminder of what we're dealing with here....

 

[najaB]

it would seem Russia happily targets a children's hospital directly. A children's hospital. A hospital for children.

Some of those children would have likely joined the Ukrainian armed forces in a decade or so, making it a legitimate military target.

 

[Pete_uk]

My heart bleeds with sadness and hatred.

This could be over in a week or two if 'the west' had the you-know-whats.

 

[najaB]

This could be over in a week or two if 'the west' had the you-know-whats.

There's no way that the western powers can get involved directly. As distasteful as it is, Russia still has the second-largest nuclear arsenal in the world, and very little to lose by using them if provoked.

 

[Bantamzen]

There's no way that the western powers can get involved directly. As distasteful as it is, Russia still has the second-largest nuclear arsenal in the world, and very little to lose by using them if provoked.

"When two tribes go to war
A point is all that you can score"

Never a more powerful line in a song was ever sung. And I am very sure there are plenty of people inside Putin's government & military mechanism that will be aware that any nuclear response will almost certainly signal the end of humanity. I only hope that one of steps up and does what is needed sooner rather than later.

Because even Russia has everything to lose...

 

[najaB]

Because even Russia has everything to lose...

Indeed, the Russian people do. But the leadership, not so much. Most of them know that the day they lose power is the day they need to start being wary of windows and staircases.

 

[DustyBin]

There's no way that the western powers can get involved directly. As distasteful as it is, Russia still has the second-largest nuclear arsenal in the world, and very little to lose by using them if provoked.

This is the problem; you could say it's deterrence in action.

If "provoked" I think it's extremely unlikely that Putin would attempt to strike the West/NATO directly (either conventionally or with WMDs). The real danger (although still unlikely in my opinion) is that he decides to target somewhere in Ukraine, probably an abandoned village or town behind the front lines, and says "over to you NATO". Whilst I believe the consequences of such an action have been made clear, Putin knows that the West has no desire to truly get it's foot on the first rung of the escalatory ladder. What the West mustn't do however is signal weakness in this regard; the calculation in Putin's mind has always got to be that there's nothing to be gained, and therefore it's not worth the risk.

The above is not to say that Putin holds all the cards by any means. He knows that one way or another there's no victory to be had in a military confrontation with the West, and ordering a nuclear strike carries a risk in itself. What happens if the order is disobeyed? Have people close to Putin got a "contingency plan" should he issue such an order? Would the West act preemptively? Putin can't be sure, and I'm certain he doesn't want to find out.

What all of this means though is that as repugnant as it is, Putin will continue to get away with abominations such as what we saw the other day, unfortunately.

 

[uglymonkey]

Also , in this context, we only have to worry about a strike from Russia ( And will they/won't they). Putin has to worry about the US, UK and French Arsenal, Even if the US didn't want to loose New York for Paris and not launch, the UK might and France definately will. So it complicates it for him.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

There's no way that the western powers can get involved directly. As distasteful as it is, Russia still has the second-largest nuclear arsenal in the world, and very little to lose by using them if provoked.

I don’t want to be too pedantic but I just triple checked multiple sources using google. Russia has the largest nuclear arsenal in the world - in fact more than 2nd and 3rd place USA and China combined.

 

[Killingworth]

I don’t want to be too pedantic but I just triple checked multiple sources using google. Russia has the largest nuclear arsenal in the world - in fact more than 2nd and 3rd place USA and China combined.

China is a factor that's too often overlooked. As the conflict has gone on they've been getting closer to Russia, early professions of neutrality now negated by joint military exercises.

However the nuclear threat is less of an issue than what non military action Russia can deploy against the west. And that can work both ways! We don't know how this could develop.

 

[joieman]

China is a factor that's too often overlooked. As the conflict has gone on they've been getting closer to Russia, early professions of neutrality now negated by joint military exercises.

Which is why I am of the opinion that not improving relations between the West and Russia is the greatest foreign policy disaster of the 20th century. Unfortunately, it's too late to do anything about that now!

 

[DustyBin]

Also , in this context, we only have to worry about a strike from Russia ( And will they/won't they). Putin has to worry about the US, UK and French Arsenal, Even if the US didn't want to loose New York for Paris and not launch, the UK might and France definately will. So it complicates it for him.

True; that's three different countries each with their own doctrine. In reality I think it's unlikely that any Western country would use a nuclear weapon (other than in a MAD scenario), but the fact is we have them. Deterrence works both ways!

I don’t want to be too pedantic but I just triple checked multiple sources using google. Russia has the largest nuclear arsenal in the world - in fact more than 2nd and 3rd place USA and China combined.

They certainly do on paper. It's a moot point really, but I strongly suspect that the number of serviceable warheads and delivery systems is somewhat smaller....

 

[najaB]

I don’t want to be too pedantic but I just triple checked multiple sources using google. Russia has the largest nuclear arsenal in the world - in fact more than 2nd and 3rd place USA and China combined.

Yes, sorry. That's true - the US drew down their stockpile more that the Russians did.

 

[nw1]

Meanwhile, whilst Ukraine accidently killed some Russian civilians on holiday in occupied Crimea recently after their missiles where shot down by Russian air defence systems, it would seem Russia happily targets a children's hospital directly. A children's hospital. A hospital for children.

Children's hospital hit as Russian strikes kill dozens in Ukraine

Two people were killed at the Okhmatdyt Children's Hospital after an intense Russian barrage, officials say.

www.bbc.co.uk

But sure, Ukraine and NATO is the aggressor and should immediately make concessions to allow for "peace".

Yes, the poor, set upon State of Russia and its leader, the bullied victim Putin.

 

[edwin_m]

Which is why I am of the opinion that not improving relations between the West and Russia is the greatest foreign policy disaster of the 20th century. Unfortunately, it's too late to do anything about that now!

Pretty sure we tried that in the 1970s with detente, discontinued when they invaded Afghanistan. And from the mid-80s onwards (the Glasnost period) where the problem may have been excessive Western influence, as too much economic reform too quickly led to the rise of the oligarchs and turned many of the population against at Western-style economy. That led to the rise of Putin, and we tried to stay friends with him even when he annexed Crimea.

 

[joieman]

Pretty sure we tried that in the 1970s with detente, discontinued when they invaded Afghanistan. And from the mid-80s onwards (the Glasnost period) where the problem may have been excessive Western influence, as too much economic reform too quickly led to the rise of the oligarchs and turned many of the population against at Western-style economy. That led to the rise of Putin, and we tried to stay friends with him even when he annexed Crimea.

I struggle to believe that Crimea is going to remain a part of Ukraine in the long term. Statistically speaking, the population of Crimea has had an ethnic Russian absolute majority for decades (71.4% in 1959, 60.4% in 2001, 67.9% in 2014).

 

[najaB]

I struggle to believe that Crimea is going to remain a part of Ukraine in the long term. Statistically speaking, the population of Crimea has had an ethnic Russian absolute majority for decades (71.4% in 1959, 60.4% in 2001, 67.9% in 2014).

While that may well be true, it's up to the people who live there to decide.

Of course, had the 2014 annexation not occurred and Ukraine had continued to slowly grow towards the EU it may well have been that economic pragmatism would have outweighed historic links.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Which is why I am of the opinion that not improving relations between the West and Russia is the greatest foreign policy disaster of the 20th century. Unfortunately, it's too late to do anything about that now!

Not even close, the appeasement of Nazi Germany was far worse. And an argument could also be made for the way much of the Treaty of Versailles was written. Also throw in this country's reluctance to make reasonable arrangements for the decolonising of the Middle East.

I struggle to believe that Crimea is going to remain a part of Ukraine in the long term. Statistically speaking, the population of Crimea has had an ethnic Russian absolute majority for decades (71.4% in 1959, 60.4% in 2001, 67.9% in 2014).

That would also suggest that Ukraine will fail to regain control of its other southern oblasts since Crimea's water supply issues mean it is somewhat economically dependent on remaining under the same government as the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia oblasts. As for Crimean ethnicity the Russian population only became significant as a result of Stalin's decision to Russify the place during WW2 with the long-standing native population of Tatars being forcibly replaced by Russians in 1941. While the dependents of those reluctantly migrated Russians may be well established there any historic claim on Crimea is no stronger than that of other groups.