Russia Invades Ukraine AND Chinese Aircraft Enter Taiwan Airspace

[Bruce]

The Ruble is not at its low but has continued to fall in terms of average daily value. Roughly a 28% decline compared to a month ago. In the last month the Dollar as gained 5% vs the Euro and 1% vs the Pound.

 

[Bruce]

The Ukrainian Hryvnia is up 32% against the Ruble over the last month. This may explain why Russian “soldiers” are robbing Ukrainian banks.

 

[Mesa50]

The Ukrainian Hryvnia is up 32% against the Ruble over the last month. This may explain why Russian “soldiers” are robbing Ukrainian banks.

View attachment 172478

They must be running out of food as well. There are videos of them stealing groceries.

 

[HangOutdoors]

I guess what concerns me is how does this all work itself out. A larger war is inevitable, imho. If russia takes ukraine, which is the most likely outcome (which pisses me off to end) unless another country goes into to Ukraine to help, then what? There are sanctions flying everywhere and much more to come. Putin will still be backed into a corner. Does he take Ukraine and then eventually sanctions are lifted? If they are then it shows that sanctions are not worth much. IF they are not lifted and stay then Putin will have to continue on with war, posturing and aggressive behavior, since they won't be able to sustain easily.

I can't see a way where this will ever be worked out, unless Putin is deposed/killed and a new russian leadership emerges.

I don't know much about wars and history and how things have worked out previously.......

 

[ripler]

It is surprising that the convoy north of Kyiv is moving so little. I hope the Ukrainians have a good plan to capture or destroy it.

Ukraine: Why has Russia's 64km convoy near Kyiv stopped moving? - BBC News

Russian forces advancing on the Ukrainian capital appear to have stalled, US and UK officials say.

www.bbc.com

I wonder how many inflatables are in the convoy.

 

[TX_Mercenary]

A friend of mine posted this on another site.

Back in 1990, the world went to war, literally, when Kuwait, with a population of 4 million people was invaded by Iraq. With the USA leading, 35 nations banded together and attacked Iraq, and returned Kuwait to its independent nation status.

So fast forward to today and my question is this; how would the USA, indeed the rest of the world, respond if, say Canada (@ 37 mil) or Australia (@ 26 mil) or Italy (@ 59 mil) came under attack from an outside nation??? Would they stand back and literally, do nothing meaningful to help??

Here's where I am going with this. The Ukraine has 44 million people - yet the world has, basically, thrown them to the wolves in terms of helping them fend off an attack by Russia.

Here are some interesting facts about Ukraine that will REALLY piss you off:

At the time of the fall of the Soviet Union, Ukraine had a 780,000-man military force. (in perspective, that’s more than half of the size of the current US military). Ukraine had the third-largest nuclear arsenal in the world - they controlled some 5,000 nuclear weapons including long-range missiles that carried up to 10 thermonuclear warheads, each far stronger than the bomb that leveled Hiroshima. Despite the fact that Ukraine declared itself as independent after the fall of the USSR, the Clinton administration pushed hard for the nuclear disarmament of Ukraine. The Ukrainian Parliament resisted - citing a concern about being vulnerable if attacked. The Clinton administration rejected that and applied pressure threatening international isolation if Ukraine didn’t go along. As a final carrot, in return for relinquishing ALL of its nuclear weapons, the USA, United Kingdom and Russian Federation promised to protect Ukraine - it’s a document called the Budapest Accord (I'll post a link to it later). Shortly thereafter, Ukraine handed over its entire nuclear inventory to Russia (yeah, I know, go figure).

But that wasn’t enough for the USA. In August of 2005, freshman Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) having served a grand total of 7 months as a US Senator, traveled with Richard Lugar (R-IN) to Donesk, Ukraine. The two met in Kiev with Putin's puppet, Ukraine's President Victor Yushchenko, insisting that the "Cooperative Threat Reduction Program" which covered the destruction of nuclear weapons, should be expanded to include artillery, small arms, anti-aircraft weapons, and conventional ammunition of all kinds.

After that meeting, Obama in his true narcissistic fashion, provided his expert opinion as a community organizer (with 7 months of experience as a US Senator) in the following statement; "Vast stocks of conventional munitions and military supplies have accumulated in Ukraine" ... 'We need to eliminate these stockpiles for the safety of the Ukrainian people and people around world, by keeping them out of conflicts around the world." Yeah, I know - read that last line again...

Then he and Lugar went back to DC, sponsored a bill for calling for $48 million in US funds to eliminated Ukraine's stockpile of small arms, weapons and ammunition, which Bush signed into law in late 2006. Ukraine then disposed of 400,000 small arms, 1,000 anti-aircraft missiles, and more than 15,000 tons of ammunition. Through the end of 2007, the UN reported that Ukraine disposed of over 700,000 small arms and missles.

In 2008, Putin invaded and absorbed Georgia, a close ally of Ukraine. The world did nothing ...

In 2010, Obama reassured Ukraine that it would stand behind them, referring to the Budapest Accord. He even sent his Vice President, Joe Biden, to Ukraine to comfort them when Putin attacked Crimea. Oh yeah, and he also sent them meal packets and blankets.

In 2014, when Ukrainian voters finally force Putin's puppet, Yushchenko, out of office and voted in the current President, Putin attacked and absorbed Crimea, which was a part of Ukraine. But it was too late for Ukraine - once again, the US, UK, and NATO did, literally, nothing. So much for the promises made in the Budapest Accord.

And Russia?? Putin declared the Budapest Accord as non-binding in 2014 - and again, nobody did a damn thing about that.

And that is how Ukraine, once a nuclear superpower with a huge military machine that could have easily defeated Putin and his Russian military organization, was methodically stripped of its ability to defend itself by outside, "pro democracy" forces who were hell bent on ridding Ukraine of its arms "for the safety of the Ukrainian people ... by keeping them out of conflicts around the world."

Other than the fact that this is why the Ukraine thing bothers the hell out of me, still there is another relatively simple lesson to draw from this and its this:

I am not a gun nut - I own one shotgun I used to hunt with as a kid which hasnt been fired in years - but this is a good example of why you will have to pry that gun out of my cold dead hands before I ever relinquish it to anyone pushing gun control.

God bless the Ukrainians ...

*cough, the Clinton administration *cough

 

[Ohio]

A friend of mine posted this on another site.

Back in 1990, the world went to war, literally, when Kuwait, with a population of 4 million people was invaded by Iraq. With the USA leading, 35 nations banded together and attacked Iraq, and returned Kuwait to its independent nation status.

So fast forward to today and my question is this; how would the USA, indeed the rest of the world, respond if, say Canada (@ 37 mil) or Australia (@ 26 mil) or Italy (@ 59 mil) came under attack from an outside nation??? Would they stand back and literally, do nothing meaningful to help??

Here's where I am going with this. The Ukraine has 44 million people - yet the world has, basically, thrown them to the wolves in terms of helping them fend off an attack by Russia.

Here are some interesting facts about Ukraine that will REALLY piss you off:

At the time of the fall of the Soviet Union, Ukraine had a 780,000-man military force. (in perspective, that’s more than half of the size of the current US military). Ukraine had the third-largest nuclear arsenal in the world - they controlled some 5,000 nuclear weapons including long-range missiles that carried up to 10 thermonuclear warheads, each far stronger than the bomb that leveled Hiroshima. Despite the fact that Ukraine declared itself as independent after the fall of the USSR, the Clinton administration pushed hard for the nuclear disarmament of Ukraine. The Ukrainian Parliament resisted - citing a concern about being vulnerable if attacked. The Clinton administration rejected that and applied pressure threatening international isolation if Ukraine didn’t go along. As a final carrot, in return for relinquishing ALL of its nuclear weapons, the USA, United Kingdom and Russian Federation promised to protect Ukraine - it’s a document called the Budapest Accord (I'll post a link to it later). Shortly thereafter, Ukraine handed over its entire nuclear inventory to Russia (yeah, I know, go figure).

But that wasn’t enough for the USA. In August of 2005, freshman Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) having served a grand total of 7 months as a US Senator, traveled with Richard Lugar (R-IN) to Donesk, Ukraine. The two met in Kiev with Putin's puppet, Ukraine's President Victor Yushchenko, insisting that the "Cooperative Threat Reduction Program" which covered the destruction of nuclear weapons, should be expanded to include artillery, small arms, anti-aircraft weapons, and conventional ammunition of all kinds.

After that meeting, Obama in his true narcissistic fashion, provided his expert opinion as a community organizer (with 7 months of experience as a US Senator) in the following statement; "Vast stocks of conventional munitions and military supplies have accumulated in Ukraine" ... 'We need to eliminate these stockpiles for the safety of the Ukrainian people and people around world, by keeping them out of conflicts around the world." Yeah, I know - read that last line again...

Then he and Lugar went back to DC, sponsored a bill for calling for $48 million in US funds to eliminated Ukraine's stockpile of small arms, weapons and ammunition, which Bush signed into law in late 2006. Ukraine then disposed of 400,000 small arms, 1,000 anti-aircraft missiles, and more than 15,000 tons of ammunition. Through the end of 2007, the UN reported that Ukraine disposed of over 700,000 small arms and missles.

In 2008, Putin invaded and absorbed Georgia, a close ally of Ukraine. The world did nothing ...

In 2010, Obama reassured Ukraine that it would stand behind them, referring to the Budapest Accord. He even sent his Vice President, Joe Biden, to Ukraine to comfort them when Putin attacked Crimea. Oh yeah, and he also sent them meal packets and blankets.

In 2014, when Ukrainian voters finally force Putin's puppet, Yushchenko, out of office and voted in the current President, Putin attacked and absorbed Crimea, which was a part of Ukraine. But it was too late for Ukraine - once again, the US, UK, and NATO did, literally, nothing. So much for the promises made in the Budapest Accord.

And Russia?? Putin declared the Budapest Accord as non-binding in 2014 - and again, nobody did a damn thing about that.

And that is how Ukraine, once a nuclear superpower with a huge military machine that could have easily defeated Putin and his Russian military organization, was methodically stripped of its ability to defend itself by outside, "pro democracy" forces who were hell bent on ridding Ukraine of its arms "for the safety of the Ukrainian people ... by keeping them out of conflicts around the world."

Other than the fact that this is why the Ukraine thing bothers the hell out of me, still there is another relatively simple lesson to draw from this and its this:

I am not a gun nut - I own one shotgun I used to hunt with as a kid which hasnt been fired in years - but this is a good example of why you will have to pry that gun out of my cold dead hands before I ever relinquish it to anyone pushing gun control.

God bless the Ukrainians ...

With friends like the US, who needs enemies?

 

[Ohio]

This is all accurate but fails to properly draw the reality of the changing "democracy" in the Ukraine. It does admit that Yushchenko was a puppet dictator, but doesn't link that well to US foreign policy towards the Ukraine. The west wanted a disarmed Ukraine as it was effectively a puppet Government of Russia. We didn't want nukes that close to Europe (neither did the Europeans). Pretty much glosses over this entirely. ( its a partisan opinion commentary piece).

That said, it does help shine a light on how changing political situations are very hard to keep up with. How quickly do you arm a new democracy that was until very recently a puppet Russian enclave?

When you are a border nation to a country like Russia, rule #1 is you had better play nice with Russia. To not follow this rule is very, very bad policy. And this is the case with being the neighbor of any powerful country. We helped run out their puppet and installed ours, and now here we are.

 

[Julian]

*cough, the Clinton administration *cough

Again....so you think the Clinton administration was wrong in trying to disarm the Ukraine when it was a Puppet state run by Russia? Things have changed over time....so have the politics.

The hard part is the transition period. You get a democratically elected President, yet still have corruption issues. Do you open the free flow of arms....of course not. Which is why they don't have a solid air defense system. We didn't want to give them our top technology.....yet. Catch-22.

 

[Jim_in_Delaware]

At the time of the fall of the Soviet Union, Ukraine had a 780,000-man military force. (in perspective, that’s more than half of the size of the current US military). Ukraine had the third-largest nuclear arsenal in the world - they controlled some 5,000 nuclear weapons including long-range missiles that carried up to 10 thermonuclear warheads, each far stronger than the bomb that leveled Hiroshima. Despite the fact that Ukraine declared itself as independent after the fall of the USSR, the Clinton administration pushed hard for the nuclear disarmament of Ukraine. The Ukrainian Parliament resisted - citing a concern about being vulnerable if attacked. The Clinton administration rejected that and applied pressure threatening international isolation if Ukraine didn’t go along. As a final carrot, in return for relinquishing ALL of its nuclear weapons, the USA, United Kingdom and Russian Federation promised to protect Ukraine - it’s a document called the Budapest Accord (I'll post a link to it later). Shortly thereafter, Ukraine handed over its entire nuclear inventory to Russia (yeah, I know, go figure).

Sorry, but I'm confused by this paragraph.

Prior to fall of the Soviet Union, was Ukraine a nuclear power or was the Soviet Union (run out of Moscow) the nuclear power WITH nuclear missiles located in the Ukraine? I think the latter is probably the correct statement.

The speed that the Soviet Union fell was surprisingly fast. The Administration (and world) thoughts at this time were a concern that some nuclear weapons or materials, might get lost and fall into the wrong hands.

Jim

 

[TX_Mercenary]

Again....so you think the Clinton administration was wrong in trying to disarm the Ukraine when it was a Puppet state run by Russia? Things have changed over time....so have the politics.

The hard part is the transition period. You get a democratically elected President, yet still have corruption issues. Do you open the free flow of arms....of course not. Which is why they don't have a solid air defense system. We didn't want to give them our top technology.....yet. Catch-22.

i get the intent of the administration and this is captain hindsight talking..... but it still remains moot. trying to negotiate disarmament of nuclear is a difficult task from other countries. the US during that time the administration happened to pick the lowest hanging fruit which happens to be ukraine because they were the little guy who is willing to bend a little while nothing can be done with Russia because they are very independent.

 

[Jim_in_Delaware]

Europeans have seized two mega yachts and counting:

Yachts Owned by Russian Oligarchs Seized in Europe

A day after German authorities seized a luxury yacht owned by a Russian billionaire, the French government confirmed they, too, had seized an oligarch's yacht this morning.

www.townandcountrymag.com

Russian oligarch Alisher Usmanov’s $600M yacht seized in Germany: reports

Authorities in Germany this week seized a lavish $600 million yacht belonging to a Russian oligarch, according to reports.

www.foxbusiness.com

Little dingys!

View attachment 172466
View attachment 172467

They would make for very pretty artificial reefs!

Jim

 

[Neutron]

Sorry, but I'm confused by this paragraph.

Prior to fall of the Soviet Union, was Ukraine a nuclear power or was the Soviet Union (run out of Moscow) the nuclear power WITH nuclear missiles located in the Ukraine? I think the latter is probably the correct statement.

The speed that the Soviet Union fell was surprisingly fast. The Administration (and world) thoughts at this time were a concern that some nuclear weapons or materials, might get lost and fall into the wrong hands.

Jim

It was part of the Soviet Union( one of its states so to speak) there was a large amount of Nuclear weapons there prior to the fall of the SU. they probably put them there because it was close to Europe.

 

[mwalker4]

So how does this all end? Why has the advance on KYIV paused?
- The most viable scenario is a two state solution. Eastern and Western Ukraine, with Eastern Ukraine friendly to Russia.
- Other possibilities include someone taking out or overthrowing Putin?
- Possible but not probable, Putin declares Ukraine is no longer a threat, Ukraine accepts Crimea is Russian, Russians withdraw, and sanctions are lifted.
- Of course, the Russians could over run the entire country.

 

[Julian]

i get the intent of the administration and this is captain hindsight talking..... but it still remains moot. trying to negotiate disarmament of nuclear is a difficult task from other countries. the US during that time the administration happened to pick the lowest hanging fruit which happens to be ukraine because they were the little guy who is willing to bend a little while nothing can be done with Russia because they are very independent.

The "little guy" with a 3/4 million man Nuclear backed army (at the time)....not so little....which is why we were worried at the time. We've always wanted FEWER countries with Nukes (thankfully).

 

[Jim_in_Delaware]

So how does this all end? Why has the advance on KYIV paused?
- The most viable scenario is a two state solution. Eastern and Western Ukraine, with Eastern Ukraine friendly to Russia.
- Other possibilities include someone taking out or overthrowing Putin?
- Possible but not probable, Putin declares Ukraine is no longer a threat, Ukraine accepts Crimea is Russian, Russians withdraw, and sanctions are lifted.
- Of course, the Russians could over run the entire country.

I'll add one more question - Where is the Russian Air Force?

Maybe a two state solution is the off-ramp for Putin? Puts the breakaway areas under Russian control, and leaves the rest alone. This would eventually lead to a relaxation of the sanctions.

Jim

 

[Inthrustwetrust]

I'll add one more question - Where is the Russian Air Force?

Maybe a two state solution is the off-ramp for Putin? Puts the breakaway areas under Russian control, and leaves the rest alone. This would eventually lead to a relaxation of the sanctions.

Jim

Likely a several part answer. Russia is lacking in their integration of ground and air forces into a potent fighting arm.

The west has funneled a crap ton of manpads to Ukraine that have proved effective, and Ukraine still has a degraded but effective SAM threat. Planes and more importantly good pilots are hard to replace, at risk of loosing high numbers of air power you scale air ops way back, especially since Ukraines Air Force is pretty degraded. Russia also lacks precision guided weapons fired from aircraft, which is probably a contributing factor as well.

To understand this war you must see past the stuff on the news and take a deep dive into Russian Tactics, doctrine, and history. Russia heavily relies on a partially conscript army. You send those dudes in first as bullet sponges, saving your professional army for strategic targets and use later in the fight. Secondly, red army tactics dating back to wwII heavily rely on encircling targets, setting up a forward supply/staging artillery point, and advancing from there. From open source maps, the 40 mile long convoy is “stalled” about 20km from the capitol, well that’s about exactly the range of their MLRS systems and self propelled artillery. Best guess, stage 2 is in the works, encircle the capitol, stopping the flow of supplies, food, water, ammo, etc, create a humanitarian crisis forcing the negotiation of surrender.

All that said, Russia has looked pretty poorly in week 1, not what most expected, and the Ukrainian people have proved much more capable and determined than expected.

 

[HangOutdoors]

All that said, Russia has looked pretty poorly in week 1, not what most expected, and the Ukrainian people have proved much more capable and determined than expected.

I almost tend to think that was by design that he did it that way on purpose. I dunno I have been reading various thoughts on the matter.

 

[Inthrustwetrust]

I almost tend to think that was by design that he did it that way on purpose. I dunno I have been reading various thoughts on the matter.

In some ways I agree, there was restraint shown in the opening days, in other ways I disagree. Russia has some nifty toys they aren’t using, most likely because they lack the numbers to risk loosing them, and they are to pricy to replace. The lack of the air/ground coordination is telling, using unencrypted radios, pictures of their vehicles show some very outdated equipment inside, and even the newer stuff shows signs of neglect of basic maintenance.

The real tell is the logistical issues. Amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics. You can take all the territory you want, if you can’t get water, food, fuel, and ammo to the front you ain’t going to hold it. Not saying that’s going to last, but this opening week either caught them off guard.

 

[Julian]

In my opinion we really should

1. enforce a no fly zone
2. Provide cruise missiles at the border that we teach the Ukrainians how to target and launch
3. Move the Nato rapid reaction forces into Western Ukraine as "peacekeepers" just like Putin has.