History in the Making: Russian Invasion

It's an interesting question.  I guess you would have to ask, how / why NK does it? Obviously, one of the primary reason is control of the population.  This of course is something that Russia already does to a degree / as best they can, but it's clearly not as tight as NK.  As noted, the sheer size and diversity (e.g. Mongolians etc) of the "Russian" population and land mass will likely make it rather difficult. 

I would suspect you could say Russia is already doing the best they can to create that.  They will almost certainly never apply that type of control over the ultra-rich Russians (gota' take the yacht out in warm water).  That sort of applies in NK also, but mostly just to a very very few elites (e.g. glorious leaders son going to collage in Europe)

Shot of airbase with SU57 that was hit.  The lines you see are part of an anti-drone structure (like the tanks) that they put it under.  Clearly it wasn't entirely effective.  These planes obviously represent a huge investment for Russia.

Here is a shot of a similar structure.  As you can imagine, just using the right approach angle will easily defeat it.

France will be supplying Mirage 2000's to Ukraine.  One of the useful aspects of this is that they are fully capable of launching the SCALP (French version of Storm Shadow) cruise missile.  Training is obviously a factor.  Having another plane / system to train on / maintain is not ideal, but, better than not having them.

----

PARIS — France plans to supply Mirage 2000-5 jets to Ukraine and begin training pilots this summer, with the first training completed by the end of the year, French President Emmanuel Macron said Thursday.

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2024/06/07/france-to-supply-mirage-2000-5-jets-to-ukraine-train-pilots/

-----

Successful strikes were made on one S-400 anti-aircraft missile division of the Russians in the Dzhankoya area, as well as on two S-300 anti-aircraft missile divisions near Chornomorskyi and Yevpatoria.

The immediate shutdown of the radars of the S-300/S-400 systems after the impact was recorded.

Another interesting thing.  Some clear potential for drones that Ukraine is making very good use of currently.  Also of note is that the US military is developing microwave based anti-drone systems.  Can Russia come up with some sort of similar system quickly (assuming it works)?  The drones below are clearly meant for heavy jamming environments (AI guidance), but the microwave weapon attacks the drone by disrupting the signals within the drone.

Eric Schmidt, the billionaire former CEO of Google, is quietly developing AI-powered combat drones through his secretive venture. The company, whose name keeps changing, is poaching talent from Apple, SpaceX, and Google to rapidly develop and deploy advanced low-cost drones to Ukraine to help the war. They have been flight testing in California and have also reportedly been scoping out companies and production facilities in Ukraine.

Kreb (Forum Supporter) said:

The sheer size of Russia, coupled with their cultural/educational background would seem to make it impossible to go too far down the NK route. 

But I've been wrong before.  

From what I've seen of the "cultural/educational background" of today's Russians I don't think that's a factor that would prevent them from going the NK route. It seems that only the well-educated urban elites have any idea of what's really going on, and most of the rest of them buy into stupid-ass conspiracy-addled culture-war politics that justify whatever Putin is doing. If I had to bet money I'd guess that the average Russian already worships Putin harder than the average North Korean worships Kim Jong Un. If Russians ever turn against Putin it's going to be because they think he mismanaged a totally justifiable war rather than a fundamental disagreement over the reasons for it, and they'll replace him with someone very similar.

aircooled said:

It's an interesting question.  I guess you would have to ask, how / why NK does it? Obviously, one of the primary reason is control of the population.  This of course is something that Russia already does to a degree / as best they can, but it's clearly not as tight as NK.  As noted, the sheer size and diversity (e.g. Mongolians etc) of the "Russian" population and land mass will likely make it rather difficult. 

I would suspect you could say Russia is already doing the best they can to create that.  They will almost certainly never apply that type of control over the ultra-rich Russians (gota' take the yacht out in warm water).  That sort of applies in NK also, but mostly just to a very very few elites (e.g. glorious leaders son going to collage in Europe)

My uneducated guess would be for the same general reasons that everyone else does it:  They need to stay in power to stay alive (most important) and maintain this level of quality of life.  They will kill or bribe anyone they think they need to in order to do it, and pump out propaganda to make everyone think that only they can possibly fix this.

You comment about "russia doing their best to do that" is 100% agreed upon by me, which I why I popped in here 20 times but deleted the post (as I felt we weren't quite there yet).  Honestly, in russia it's  a pretty well paved path dating back centuries to when vodka was (and still is, I believe) owned by the state/oligarchs and made to be sold incredibly cheap to the consumer (as a drunk population is a content population, and therefore easier to control).

All that history of control methods, the rampant pushing of propaganda, the not too long ago history of the iron curtain...  Even Gameboy's comment about a putin worshiping population...  It seems to me that the ingredients are there and mixing together, someone just needs to put the cake in the oven.

I have had the opinion for a while that while Russia may not actually "turn into" North Korea, complete with making the entire country into a giant prison with recurring famines, there's still a lot of similarities. 
 

In reply to Hungary Bill (Forum Supporter) :

"Honestly, in russia it's  a pretty well paved path dating back centuries to when vodka was (and still is, I believe) owned by the state/oligarchs and made to be sold incredibly cheap to the consumer (as a drunk population is a content population, and therefore easier to control)."

This has been my take on the recent efforts in this country to legalize marijuana, that and the big tax revenues the government is getting from it.  

Was looking back on some history recently, and reminded that current events have not-so current root causes.  From the NATO wikipedia page.  I'm sure it's been discussed here before, but it does provoke thought.  

"There is no mention of NATO expansion into any other country in the September–October 1990 agreements on German reunification.[24] Whether or not representatives from NATO member states informally committed to not enlarge NATO into other parts of Eastern Europe during these and contemporary negotiations with Soviet counterparts has long been a matter of dispute among historians and international relations scholars.[25][26]

With several countries threatening to withdraw from the Warsaw Pact, the Soviet military relinquished control of the organization in March 1991, allowing it to be formally dissolved that July.[27][28] The so-called "parade of sovereignties" declared by republics in the Baltic and Caucasus regions of the Soviet Union and their War of Laws with the government in Moscow further fractured its cohesion. Following the failure of the New Union Treaty, the leadership of the remaining constituent republics of the Soviet Union, starting with Ukraine in August 1991, declared their independence and initiated the dissolution of the Soviet Union, which was completed in December of that year. Russia, led by President Boris Yeltsin, became the most prominent of the independent states.[29] The Westernization trend of many former Soviet allied states led them to privatize their economies and formalize their relationships with NATO countries, the first step for many towards European integration and possible NATO membership.[30][31]

In December 1997, Russian President Boris Yeltsin described NATO expansion as a threat to Russia.

By August 1993, Polish President Lech Wałęsa was actively campaigning for his country to join NATO, at which time Yeltsin reportedly told him that Russia did not perceive its membership in NATO as a threat to his country. Yeltsin however retracted this informal declaration the following month,[32] writing that expansion "would violate the spirit of the treaty on the final settlement" which "precludes the option of expanding the NATO zone into the East."[33][34] During one of James Baker's 1990 talks with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, Baker did suggest that the German reunification negotiations could have resulted in an agreement whereby "there would be no extension of NATO's jurisdiction for forces of NATO one inch to the east,"[35] and historians like Mark Kramer have interpreted it as applying, at least in the Soviets' understanding, to all of Eastern Europe[36][37][26][dubious – discuss], while concluding that "at no point in the discussion did either Baker or Gorbachev bring up the question of the possible extension of NATO membership to other Warsaw Pact countries beyond Germany."[38] Gorbachev later stated that NATO expansion was "not discussed at all" in 1990, but, like Yeltsin, described the expansion of NATO past East Germany as "a violation of the spirit of the statements and assurances made to us in 1990."[24][34][39]

This view, that informal assurances were given by diplomats from NATO members to the Soviet Union in 1990, is common in countries like Russia,[26][21] and, according to political scientist Marc Trachtenberg, available evidence suggests that allegations made since then by Russian leadership about the existence of such assurances "were by no means baseless."[25][40] Yeltsin was succeeded in 2000 by Vladimir Putin, who further promoted the idea that guarantees about enlargement were made in 1990, including during a 2007 speech in Munich.[41][39] This impression was later used by him as part of his justification for Russia's 2014 actions in Ukraine and the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022"

VikkiDp said:

Kreb (Forum Supporter) said:

It's too late now, but Ukraine in certain ways was ideally suited to be a neutral go-between. But one of the biggest flaws in the ointment of that particular scenario was that a prosperous Ukraine would make Russia look bad. Citizenry could look to the Southwest and say: How come they can pull off that standard of  living and we can't? Bloody shame what's gone down.

You know, i agreed with this and i can say that it was one of the reasons for starting the war (in my opinion).

But i still very much keep asking myself the questions: Why??? What's the sense??? What's the reason for doing that??? Whaaattt???

Spending hundreds of billions of dollars to destroy a neighboring country and its citizens. I'm even not talking about russian troops casualties, it seems like it doesn't bother anyone.

Instead of this spend that money on improving something at your home - in russia. 

Anyone who think himself an emperor has two ways to stay in history - do something good or do something bad... 

Whyyy? Why did evil prevail this time? i still can't find the answer.

The ultra rich think differently.  It is all about having more than everyone else.  You can get this most easily by making sure everyone else has less.

The phrase "raising the water lifts all boats" makes no sense to them.  They would rather see everyone else drown as long as they have a boat on the water, so to speak.

In reply to 02Pilot :

Thank you for your deep analysis.

Of course i understand everything you wrote about, my conclusions on the situation are very close.

The only thing is that the option of a settlement along the lines of Korea doesn't seem possible to me, russians have a very different mentality.

History and foreign policy are the secret weapon of totalitarians. With an ignorant populace and control of the media, it is possible, even easy, to craft a new narrative that serves the purpose of distracting the people from the failures of the regime, and redirecting them to foreign enemies and agents, who are blamed for undermining the efforts of the government. Thus, the Russian people are suffering because of these foreign powers, rather than the failings of the Putin government. This is compounded by a selective reading of history (again possible because of an ignorant, uneducated populace) to show that this hostility is not new, and that Russia is a martyr state, victim of irrational foreign hatreds that as such cannot be reasoned with and can only be opposed with strength and force.

Completely agreed. 

I've experienced it myself - the impact of propaganda and the country's closure to the whole world, buttt... i was smart and savvy enough to start asking questions of myself first.

Well, history repeats itself(only in a more twisted version) and the external enemies are the same.

Floating Doc (Forum Supporter) said:

I have had the opinion for a while that while Russia may not actually "turn into" North Korea, complete with making the entire country into a giant prison with recurring famines, there's still a lot of similarities. 
 

My opinion - russia is more likely to be like China in terms of restrictions on citizens and freedom of speech.

Hungary Bill (Forum Supporter) said:

aircooled said:

It's an interesting question.  I guess you would have to ask, how / why NK does it? Obviously, one of the primary reason is control of the population.  This of course is something that Russia already does to a degree / as best they can, but it's clearly not as tight as NK.  As noted, the sheer size and diversity (e.g. Mongolians etc) of the "Russian" population and land mass will likely make it rather difficult. 

I would suspect you could say Russia is already doing the best they can to create that.  They will almost certainly never apply that type of control over the ultra-rich Russians (gota' take the yacht out in warm water).  That sort of applies in NK also, but mostly just to a very very few elites (e.g. glorious leaders son going to collage in Europe)

My uneducated guess would be for the same general reasons that everyone else does it:  They need to stay in power to stay alive (most important) and maintain this level of quality of life.  They will kill or bribe anyone they think they need to in order to do it, and pump out propaganda to make everyone think that only they can possibly fix this.

You comment about "russia doing their best to do that" is 100% agreed upon by me, which I why I popped in here 20 times but deleted the post (as I felt we weren't quite there yet).  Honestly, in russia it's  a pretty well paved path dating back centuries to when vodka was (and still is, I believe) owned by the state/oligarchs and made to be sold incredibly cheap to the consumer (as a drunk population is a content population, and therefore easier to control).

All that history of control methods, the rampant pushing of propaganda, the not too long ago history of the iron curtain...  Even Gameboy's comment about a putin worshiping population...  It seems to me that the ingredients are there and mixing together, someone just needs to put the cake in the oven.

there's one more ingredient that should be added - the mass exodus or mass destruction of intelligent, intellectual or dissenting people and(what's important as well) specialists from many different disciplines and areas. This process began with the revolution of 1917 and continued practically throughout the existence of the USSR, especially the repression of 1937, World War II and the time after the war until about Stalin's death. The USSR simply exterminated citizens (there were a lot of them) who did not want the regime. The history of WWII  - that's also a separate "interesting" history.

So it becomes clearer why russian citizens believe propaganda and are loyal to their leader. Isn't it?

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

The ultra rich think differently.  It is all about having more than everyone else.  You can get this most easily by making sure everyone else has less.

The phrase "raising the water lifts all boats" makes no sense to them.  They would rather see everyone else drown as long as they have a boat on the water, so to speak.

That's true. Of course, obviously, i'm thinking from a layman's perspective.

The trick is that their richness and greatness rests on the common people, and ordinary people are not aware of this power and are simply unorganized as a rule.

Some more assessment from our favorite Austrian.  He is saying there is still a general Russian offensive to come.  It's not a great assessment, especially in the area of Russian jamming capabilities, but it also should be noted that this was recorded before the US and others opened up targeting of Russian territories, likely precisely because of assessments just like this.

The end part with Zelenski, speaks to exactly why the targeting needed to be opened up.  It also should be noted that the Kharkiv offensive (Sever, which I think is in the thumnail below) was still working at that point.  It has since been completely shut down (with apparently very large losses for the Russians) and the Ukrainians are even counter attacking a bit.

Russian Federation has deployed the S-500 Budanov system in Crimea

The Russian military deployed the latest S-500 Prometheus systems to the occupied Crimean peninsula to cover important facilities.

***************

I find this somewhat puzzling because it seems Ukraine seems to be targeting missile systems more so than facilities in Crimea.  

Russia: "You blew up our S-300 and S-400, let's see if you can blow up our S-500!"

Ukraine: "Um, Ok."

I did some reading on the claimed performance of that S-500.  If it's accurate (stop laughing) then it sounds quite formidable.

Also, yesterday I saw something that I thought lended to our previous conversations regarding a potential "isolated russia":

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/baltic-nations-might-bring-forward-cut-off-russian-power-grid-2023-05-12/

In reply to Hungary Bill (Forum Supporter) :

Interesting.  Oh, the tangled web Putin weaves.

Russia is now financing the war against itself:

Official: Ukraine to receive $50 billion from frozen Russian assets

German Finance Minister Christian Lindner announced this:

"For this, we are using interest from frozen assets - a smart tool that demonstrates our unity to Putin, greatly helps Ukraine and relieves the burden on budgets. We are currently working on the details," he wrote.

----

G-7 nations would give out loans to Ukraine that will be repaid using the profits generated by the roughly $280 billion of blocked funds, most of which lie immobilized in Europe. The loans will be structured differently on the basis of each participant’s internal procedures and each will carry the risk of the loans they provide, should the frozen assets generate fewer profits than envisioned.

-----

The S-500 system noted above may not even be in full production (they have been struggling to do so for a while now)... it would be a shame to have it blown up.  It's likely being moved into Crimea to try and protect the Kerch bridge.  The Russians are really going all out to try and defend it.  Seems like they are really expecting it to get attacked.

------

Ukraine is considering basing F-16's outside of Ukraine.  It creates a rather strange situation, if allowed.  Now, I would not think F-16's would take off from, say Poland, to attack Russian positions, but likely be bases there, then move to Ukraine to arm and fuel quickly, then take off to attack.  Now, if they are armed already and just do a touch and go at a Ukrainian airport, or stop for some fuel.  Did the attack come from Ukraine, or Poland?  I am not sure NATO countries would allow this of course.

It seems reasonable F-16's could be transferred to NATO countries for repairs (they do that with tanks).  F-16's need a lot of maintenance, lets say, after every mission...

aircooled said:

Ukraine is considering basing F-16's outside of Ukraine.  It creates a rather strange situation, if allowed.  Now, I would not think F-16's would take off from, say Poland, to attack Russian positions, but likely be bases there, then move to Ukraine to arm and fuel quickly, then take off to attack.  Now, if they are armed already and just do a touch and go at a Ukrainian airport, or stop for some fuel.  Did the attack come from Ukraine, or Poland?  I am not sure NATO countries would allow this of course.

It seems reasonable F-16's could be transferred to NATO countries for repairs (they do that with tanks).  F-16's need a lot of maintenance, lets say, after every mission...

The only way I could see this being even remotely plausible would be if the Vipers are only used as CAP over Ukrainian soil. Launching strikes from foreign soil is not without precedent, but it certainly has the potential to complicate things. That said, it has happened in virtually every conflict involving a major power since 1945 (Soviet MiGs over Korea based in China, US B-29s over Korea based in Japan, US F-105s over Vietnam based in Thailand, etc.); the difference here is that the theoretical target country is the major power, with all the retaliatory capability that implies, which has not been the case previously.

Ukraine is considering basing F-16's outside of Ukraine.  It creates a rather strange situation, if allowed.  Now, I would not think F-16's would take off from, say Poland, to attack Russian positions, but likely be bases there, then move to Ukraine to arm and fuel quickly, then take off to attack.  Now, if they are armed already and just do a touch and go at a Ukrainian airport, or stop for some fuel.  Did the attack come from Ukraine, or Poland?  I am not sure NATO countries would allow this of course.

Kinda sounds like the VC operating in Cambodia and Laos, dunnit?

We have a ceasefire offer!  All Ukraine has to do is completely surrender the entirety of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia ... 

Nothing new here, obviously. The second half of the video is where things get interesting. The way putin refers to Ukraine, its border, and its status as a sovereign nation seems to be rather flexible.

In regards to the above.  These are the highlights. 

If you want to see the full text:  https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/why-putin-remains-uninterested-meaningful-negotiations-ukraine

-----

Western media continues to report that Russian President Vladimir Putin is interested in a negotiated ceasefire in Ukraine, although Kremlin rhetoric and Russian military actions illustrate that Putin remains uninterested in meaningful negotiations and any settlement that would prevent him from pursuing the destruction of an independent Ukrainian state. 

Russian sources that have spoken to Western media have also offered mutually contradictory characterizations of Putin's stance on negotiations

These Russian sources notably highlighted territorial concessions as part of Putin's alleged envisioned ceasefire but have sparsely addressed the wider strategic objectives of Putin's war in Ukraine.

A ceasefire does not preclude Russia from resuming its offensive campaign to destroy Ukrainian statehood, and Russia would use any ceasefire to prepare for future offensive operations within Ukraine.

Russia is currently preparing for the possibility of a conventional war with NATO, and the Kremlin will likely view anything short of Ukrainian capitulation as an existential threat to Russia's ability to fight such a war.

The Kremlin will continue to feign interest in negotiations at critical moments in the war to influence Western decision-making on support for Ukraine and to continue efforts to extract preemptive concessions from the West.

Did I miss something? This thread has been awful quiet. 

In reply to No Time :

Same here, I miss the news.

Meanwhile, in North Korea Putin and Un saving the world from the west.

When you see it, you western capitalist pig.  You will understand.

Story from the WSJ on how Ukraine is using sea drones:

https://www.wsj.com/world/naval-drones-innovation-warfare-ukraine-russia-ce35adfa?st=qrf90k0xatd52qk&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

Ukraine grain shipments have rebounded but are still below pre-war levels: 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-61759692

Ukraine exported 5.2 million tonnes of grain and maize in March, 5.8 million tonnes in February and 5.3 million tonnes in January. 

Before Russia's invasion in 2022, the country was sending about 6.5 million tonnes abroad every month.