WAR trouble brewing again in ukraine

S

Squid

Veteran Member
So now what could happen.

The cabal pulling the strings of the administration (Obama and the insider operatives) have put lots into motion by green-lighting or demanding Ukraine take a heavy handed posture wrt Russia.

Russia has moved Massive troops and equipment into forward operating positions that signal likely conflict.

The Russians likely have multiple objectives and not just Ukraine.
Feint either north or southeast followed by massive blitzkrieg into the center Ukraine Russia border.

Objective 1 take control of the Eastern part of Ukraine to at minimum create buffer between Russia and Nato. Demarcation line Dnieper river.
2-5 are flexible
Objective 2 take control of Estonia
Objective 3 take control of Latvia
Objective 4 take control of Lithuania
Objective 5 take control of Western Ukraine

Objectives 2-5 would threaten the concept and make Nato irrellevent and expose Europe as a toothless tiger at the mercy of any country with a military power.

Putin must either see an opportunity or feels threatened by the militaristic moves by Ukraine and with so many forces put into motion, he likely Cannot back down or ultimately lose power.

Ukraine would not have moved to the military without either direct pressure from the US administration or that plus indirect discussions about these moves being a tit-for-tat to gain full Nato membership. Of course the people running our current administration shouldn’t be trusted by anyone let alone a foreign state. They would easily let Ukraine get crushed and overpowered by Russia if nothing else to provide political cover and lock out of public discussion the Trump Russia hoax.

Now add into the mix the death of American service personnel and the administration could fully ratchet up the shredding of liberty because, well Russia and national emergency.

Any action in Eastern Europe would also provide China with a perfect opportunity for either direct play for Taiwan, a Pearl Harbor type attack on US naval forces, or possibly both.
 
naegling62

naegling62

Veteran Member
I don't think Russia wants to occupy 2-5, they can't afford it and they already played that game. They want to stabilize their frontier and prevent a coup in their own country. Russia is in the business of selling oil, gas and weapons, not occupying. Now the Soviets would have done that though and they did.
 
Nowski

Nowski

Let's Go Brandon!
So many peoples are still in 1989.

Things changed with the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Russia will move to secure, the Russian areas in Eastern Ukraine,
and to secure the fresh water canal, from the Dnipro River to Crimea.

Everything was fine with The Ukraine, until the ZUSA overthrew
the Ukraine government in 2014. Had the ZUSA left the Ukraine alone,
none of this would be happening.

Please peoples, move forward from 1989 to 2021, in regards to
what Russia was, and what Russia became, and is now.

This is so messed up.

Please be safe everyone.

Regards to all.

Nowski
 
Nowski

Nowski

Let's Go Brandon!
naegling62 said:
I don't think Russia wants to occupy 2-5, they can't afford it and they already played that game. They want to stabilize their frontier and prevent a coup in their own country. Russia is in the business of selling oil, gas and weapons, not occupying. Now the Soviets would have done that though and they did.
Click to expand...

^^^^THIS^^^^

naegling62 gets it. At least somebody does.

Please be safe everyone.

Regards to all.

Nowski
 
H

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Squid said:
So now what could happen.

The cabal pulling the strings of the administration (Obama and the insider operatives) have put lots into motion by green-lighting or demanding Ukraine take a heavy handed posture wrt Russia.

Russia has moved Massive troops and equipment into forward operating positions that signal likely conflict.

The Russians likely have multiple objectives and not just Ukraine.
Feint either north or southeast followed by massive blitzkrieg into the center Ukraine Russia border.

Objective 1 take control of the Eastern part of Ukraine to at minimum create buffer between Russia and Nato. Demarcation line Dnieper river.
2-5 are flexible
Objective 2 take control of Estonia
Objective 3 take control of Latvia
Objective 4 take control of Lithuania
Objective 5 take control of Western Ukraine

Objectives 2-5 would threaten the concept and make Nato irrellevent and expose Europe as a toothless tiger at the mercy of any country with a military power.

Putin must either see an opportunity or feels threatened by the militaristic moves by Ukraine and with so many forces put into motion, he likely Cannot back down or ultimately lose power.

Ukraine would not have moved to the military without either direct pressure from the US administration or that plus indirect discussions about these moves being a tit-for-tat to gain full Nato membership. Of course the people running our current administration shouldn’t be trusted by anyone let alone a foreign state. They would easily let Ukraine get crushed and overpowered by Russia if nothing else to provide political cover and lock out of public discussion the Trump Russia hoax.

Now add into the mix the death of American service personnel and the administration could fully ratchet up the shredding of liberty because, well Russia and national emergency.

Any action in Eastern Europe would also provide China with a perfect opportunity for either direct play for Taiwan, a Pearl Harbor type attack on US naval forces, or possibly both.
Click to expand...

The problem with 2 thru 5 is also the very real possibility of nukes getting broken out.
 
Doomer Doug

Doomer Doug

TB Fanatic
there is a fictional world war 3 video that has been floating around for several years online. I think Red Baron posted it a while back. Pretty realistic actually.
 
EMICT

EMICT

Veteran Member
Doomer Doug said:
there is a fictional world war 3 video that has been floating around for several years online. I think Red Baron posted it a while back. Pretty realistic actually.
Click to expand...
That was the poster... not Housecarl, but the scenario is eerily similar to what is going on right now. Thanks for the reminder Doug.
 
Red Baron

Red Baron

Paleo-Conservative
_______________
Doomer Doug said:
there is a fictional world war 3 video that has been floating around for several years online. I think Red Baron posted it a while back. Pretty realistic actually.
Click to expand...

Here it is. Came out in 2018. Rather prescient.

The ending is refreshingly grim.

Runtime 55:56

Fictionalized BBC Special Report of NATO-Russia conflict

View: https://youtu.be/VWqWAi_H_9o


Originally posted by Ben Marking, this video is a FICTIONALIZED news broadcast from the BBC. No actual conflict is going on and certainly no nuclear conflict between NATO and Russian forces. Again, this is a work of fiction, nothing more. It is for entertainment purposes only If the OP should return to YouTube and can verify his identity, I will take this down upon request.
 
jward

jward

passin' thru
DEFCON Warning System – Statement on growing Ukraine situation

56 seconds ago
Add Comment
by DEFCON Warning System

maxresdefault-810x456.jpg





Written by DEFCON Warning System



The DEFCON Warning System has been monitoring the military buildup in the Ukraine region.

Both Ukraine and Russia have issued statements accusing each other of being the aggressor and claiming to be ready for any potential conflict initiated by the other. Large-scale military movements have been observed on both sides of the border and the usual skirmishes continue in the Donbas region of SE Ukraine.

At this time, while the United States has given assurances that they support Ukraine in the current conflict over the Crimea situation, the U.S. has stopped short of promising military intervention.

As long as US and NATO military forces do not get involved, The DEFCON Warning System believes the Ukraine situation will remain a local, conventional conflict, and that Russia has no intention of attempting to take all of Ukraine by military force. Any military incursion or “annexation” will most likely remain limited to the areas south of an approximate line from Kherson to Luhansk.

This continues to be a developing situation and we will issue additional reports as necessary. We remain at DEFCON 5 – Condition Green – until further notice.
defconwarningsystem.com

DEFCON Warning System - Statement on growing Ukraine situation - The DEFCON Warning System

The DEFCON Warning System. Ongoing Geointel, OSInt, and Analysis in the theater of nuclear war. Established 1984
defconwarningsystem.com defconwarningsystem.com
 
jward

jward

passin' thru
The Donbass War Of 2021?
Tyler Durden's Photo

by Tyler Durden
Friday, Apr 09, 2021 - 02:00 AM
Authored by J.Hawk exclusively for SouthFront,
Ever since assuming office, the Biden Administration has been probing countries it designated as America’s enemies for weaknesses through a variety of provocations. So far this approach has not had any successes. China plainly told Biden’s SecState Blinken to go packing, Iran is showing no eagerness to kowtow to Washington under new management, and Russia itself has stayed the course, brushing off verbal attacks and promising either in-kind or asymmetrical responses to any new chicaneries from Washington or Brussels.

That does not mean that Washington has acknowledged defeat. Unwilling to concede, it is liable to escalate a crisis situation elsewhere. Since Navalny’s perennial “poisonings”, “hunger strikes”, and “leg pains” have not had the desired effect on Western governments and his life and health are moreover quite secure in a Russian prison, so the prospect of a new war in Eastern Ukraine is back on the agenda, and the opponents of Nord Stream 2 now have two things to pray for: Aleksey Navalny’s death and a Russia-Ukraine war.

Zelensky on the Spot
The Russian government has made it clear on numerous occasions that it is adhering to the Minsk Agreements, will not abandon the Donbass, but at the same time will not escalate the situation out of the desire to minimize the damage to all concerned. In practical terms it means a continuation of “coercive diplomacy”. Russian military force will be used only if Ukraine attempts to create facts on the ground through offensive action. For that reason it is unlikely in the extreme that Russia will be the one to escalate first. It is worth remembering that both the summer 2014 campaign and the winter 2014/15 campaign were initiated by Kiev which first sent troops and bombers to suppress the then-peaceful protests against the Maidan and referenda to secede, and then to hope to quickly resolve the stalemate. Both operations ended in failure through the efforts of the hastily assembled and armed militias of the breakaway republics, with some “Northern Wind” military support that decimated Ukrainian forces.

Poroshenko survived the disasters that shredded the Ukrainian military thanks to the alliances he’s made with the nationalists while preparing for the Maidan. Zelensky’s position is considerably weaker and more vulnerable to the consequences of a military defeat. Having been elected on a promise to end the war in the Donbass, he has already badly disappointed his supporters on that score. But his transformation into a warhawk, perhaps best characterized by his awkward appearances on the front lines wearing an ill-fitting helmet and a remarkably short armor vest, has not earned him even grudging respect from the nationalists and neo-Nazis on whose shoulders much of Ukraine’s war effort rests. While Poroshenko could get out of many a tight spot with his “Cynical Baderite” jacket, Zelensky is now a very lonely person in Kiev, a hostage to the decisions of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council whose decisions he automatically signs, in contrast with Poroshenko who often simply ignored them.

In practice it means that Zelensky might be in process of being a scapegoat for Ukraine’s all-but-inevitable defeat at the hands of Russian forces hastening to aid the republics in the event of Ukraine’s military scoring early victories. Blackmail might be playing a role in Zelensky’s calculus too. There were persistent reports in March of an imminent release of a documentary implicating Zelensky’s office in the failure of Ukrainian intelligence operation to lure Wagner associates to Ukraine in order to imprison and try them. At the same time, if Zelensky sends his military to a defeat, his reputation will be gravely damaged, possibly to the point of forcing him to resign and even endangering his life. His nervous activity of the first week of April, including a total non-sequitur of a visit to NATO headquarters in order to plead for Ukraine’s quick admission to the alliance, is indicative of a man in a tight spot with no easy ways out.

Resistible Force Meets Immovable Object
Zelensky might be in a less anxious mood if he had a reliable military instrument to wield. The Ukrainian Armed Forces are not that instrument. While the Russian military entered 2014 rather unprepared for the prospect of high-intensity land warfare thanks to the Serdyukov reforms that made the brigade the main tactical unit, since that time much lost ground has been recovered through the reactivation of several divisions and armies, such as the First Guards Tank Army, and modernization of Land Forces’ equipment. Russia’s military today is a considerably more impressive force than it was seven years ago.

Meanwhile Ukraine’s armed forces stagnated. Unmodernized T-64 remains its most numerous main battle tank while production of light armored vehicles proceeds at a trickle. Considering that artillery has been the most active arm in the years of static warfare along the line of separation, Ukraine’s “god of war” remains in poor shape and is suffering from ammunition shortage. In the last decade, Ukraine has suffered seven major ammunition depot explosions, in addition to the tremendous expenditure of munitions during the 2014 and 2015 battles and the occasional escalations of shelling since. Since Ukraine is a failing state that cannot even maintain its crumbling civilian infrastructure, it is little wonder that it has failed to establish domestic munitions manufacture. It did receive some supplies of weapons and munitions from NATO member states which have stores of Soviet-pattern weapons themselves, most notably Bulgaria, but little in the way of heavy artillery munitions. Since Ukraine also does not manufacture artillery pieces, specifically the technology-intensive barrels, for either its tanks or howitzers, the existing artillery park is being gradually used up, and every shell fired not only diminishes existing reserves but also adds to the wear and tear of the artillery pieces. An effort to provide cheap indirect fire capabilities by procuring 120mm “Molot” mortars manufactured in a factory owned by Poroshenko did not live up to expectations. There have been several cases of these mortars bursting during live fire exercises, with dire consequences for their crews. And if a simple technology of a mortar cannot be mastered by Ukraine’s defense industry, what success can it have attempting more challenging tasks?

Nor is the human factor any better. To borrow Wellington’s characterization of his own soldiers, UAF rank and file are “scum of the earth, enlisted to drink.” Military service remains highly unpopular and attracts only those who cannot find lucrative employment in the civilian economy—or abroad. Draft evasion and bribery of military recruitment officials is widespread, leading the Rada to drastically increase penalties for such activities to include lengthy prison terms. Even if such measures do not result in an exodus of able-bodied males out of the country, they are hardly likely to fill the ranks with motivated recruits. In the first week of April 2021 alone, Ukrainian forces have lost on average one soldier a day to non-combat causes, which included alcohol and drug overdoses, careless handling of weapons, suicide, and murder. The single greatest killer of Ukrainian soldiers, however, are their own minefields, which have killed 57 soldiers and injured 126 between July 27, 2020 (the beginning of the last ceasefire) and April 3, 2021, a statistic indicating a very low level of training and discipline.

Units themselves remain understrength. Some of the brigades are short of 60% of enlisted personnel and 30% of officers. Troops’ low morale translated into not only irregular and erratic training but also into poor equipment maintenance habits. An inspection of the 59th Brigade whose results fell into the hands of Novorossia intelligence services revealed that as of March 2020, some 60% of the brigade’s heavy weapons and vehicles were either greatly behind their maintenance schedule or were altogether unserviceable. The brigade has not held any maneuvers because the fuel supplies delivered to its logistics units never made it to the actual tactical subunits, suggesting theft by brigade’s leadership.

Cossack Mace
For all of the above reasons, a Ukrainian military operation, even a limited one, seems unlikely in the immediate future. The very visible Ukrainian troop movements meant that no element of surprise could be achieved. The aim appears to have been to relocate sizable formations to the Donbass so as to provide them with an ability to launch a quick, almost no-warning attack in the future, after Novorossia’s vigilance has been dulled by months of alerts and provocations.
Unless other events intervene, the period of greatest danger will be the Cossack Mace exercise held during the summer of 2021. The aim of the exercise which will take place under British leadership is to practice repelling a “Russian invasion” and then launching an offensive to secure the Ukraine-Russia border which would mean the end of Novorossia.

The fact of British leadership is particularly worrisome, since that country seems to have undertaken the task of “dirty tricks” on Washington’s behalf. In this instance, the “dirty trick” could be using the exercise to rehearse invasion of the Donbass immediately prior to its execution or, equally plausibly, the exercise itself might turn into an invasion. Foreign command of the invasion would be consistent with the Ukrainian trend of slipping under direct control by Western powers, and reminiscent of the role of the Military Professional Resources Incorporated (MPRI) in the planning and execution of Croatia’s Operation Storm in 1995.

One can’t even rule out direct British participation in such an operation, since a British-supported Ukrainian offensive against Novorossia forces would not be an offensive against Russia. The Defence Review released in March 2021 stated that the British Army would stand up four so-called “ranger regiments”, or battalion-sized formations whose aim would be to train “indigenous forces” and, if need be, actually go to battle with them in order to pursue British interests as part of the “Global Britain” project. An addition of professional British soldiers, in conjunction with British planning and execution of the operation, would provide a morale boost to the UAF and increase the chances of at least moderate success. Once embedded within Ukrainian forces, British troops would also serve as a deterrent against a direct Russian intervention.

An Ounce of Prevention
It may well be that the sudden Russian troop movements, the reinforcement of Crimea, and even Belarus’ deployment to the border of Ukraine, indicate contingency planning to launch an enveloping counteroffensive that would trap Ukrainian forces in a giant cauldron between the Dnepr River and Novorossia itself. At the very least, their presence forces Ukraine to divert forces away from its offensive grouping on the Donbass toward the border with Russia and even Belarus. It is also possible that the snap deployment was intended to pre-empt Ukraine’s increasingly obvious moves to mount an offensive during the summer, an offensive with direct foreign military employment. Russia’s pre-emption may also include a changed status of the Donbass. President Putin’s declaration that the rights of 600,000 holders of Russian passports in Novorossia has become a priority for him. An official recognition of Novorossia, combined with the placement of a Russian peacekeeper force, would stop the Ukrainian offensive dead in its tracks and moreover render any British participation unsustainable, though at certain diplomatic cost due to the withdrawal from the Minsk Agreements it would entail.

The forceful Russian response has already had the effect of knocking not only Ukraine but, judging by the panicky demands for Russia to “explain” its troop movements, all of NATO. It communicated that under no circumstances will Ukraine enjoy tactical, operational, or strategic surprise. Now the question is whether Russia and major European powers can craft a diplomatic solution that will allow Zelensky to back down in a face-saving manner, thus ending the danger of war against the Donbass.

British “ranger regiments” and “greyzone warfare”
Use of NATO forces directly vs. unrecognized republics is no the same as use of NATO forces against Russia. Recognition by Russia would, on the other hand, create an additional layer of deterrence, though associated with risks for Russia.
If LPR/DPR are formally recognized by the Russian Federation which then spreads the umbrella of “extended deterrence” which, it should be noted, is backed by a potent nuclear arsenal. It would also mean Russia’s formal rejection of Minsk Agreements and of the Normandy Four format, creating a legal limbo fraught with unpredictability. NATO countries which committed themselves to preserving Ukraine’s “sovereignty and integrity” could hardly be expected to ratify this move.
Major minelaying operations by Ukrainian forces, which may be part of the offensive preparations. The greater the extent and intensity of mines on a certain sector of the front, the greater the ability to concentrate forces on other sectors—suggesting that whichever sectors of the front are not seeing a minelaying operations are being reserved as corridors for future assault, making them eligible for DPR/LPR defensive minelaying.

Posted for Fair use

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com www.zerohedge.com
 
S

Squid

Veteran Member
Many wars have started from creating distraction from internal strife, miscalculating reactions and ol fashioned political blundering.

Fwiw, Russia ‘defending’ Russian regions in Ukraine and even adventuring north in any of the states (my 2-5 were a collection of possibles not a all) is a whole different animal than rolling tanks into Germany or even Poland.

Russia can apply pressure against Nato snd even limit western resolve by keeping their action in Eastern Europe. Hell most Americans may not even know Estonia and Latvia are countries let alone where they are on a map.

I would not be surprised if this was all orchestrated by the Soro’s/Obama or Soro’s/MI-6 group to sow chaos destruction fear and provide cover (no matter how limited) for further government controls. I cannot fathom Ukraine making these moves without detailed consultation with US. I seem to remember a previous US politician once bragging how much they personally controlled the Ukraine government by a phone call, can’t remember his name.

Ukraine as it was even with the Donbas Crimea carve-outs seemed perfectly fine for 4 years.

So as the armies stare at each other, the unknown question what is the US administration truly looking to get? Would they be happy with triggering the Ukraine Russia war and standing in shock at how evil Putin is and didn’t he try to get the Trumpster elected, or are they willing to throw in wNato and US (kind of the same thing) and risk US-Russia war expansion with all those nuclear weapons possibly in play. ‘Do you want to play a game?’
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top