Jump to content

Where Do Things End With Vlad? (h/t romad1)


chasfh

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, clark1mt said:

I think the expectation is still that a Russian military victory is inevitable (presuming that said military doesn't revolt). The hope is that Ukraine can make their victory as painful as possible, with the idea that Russian citizens won't tolerate sustained heavy casualties that will be hard to keep concealed. This would force Putin to have to abandon the occupation to save himself domestically.

This also presumes that Putin's hold on power in Russia isn't so tight that he can get away with atrocities against his own people if that's what it would take for him to achieve his goals.

The conventional wisdom is that it probably is tight enough to survive.

Domestically, aside from the people, the other question I have is about the oligarchs... at least a portion of his grip comes from them. An individual oligarch who crosses Putin may go off a third-floor balcony, but there may be power in numbers should some of them turn en masse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, romad1 said:

 

 

Make it beyond painful for Putin's War Criminal Invasion of Ukraine.

 

1 hour ago, romad1 said:

So early.  The actual professional intel people looking specifically at this stuff (not me) are paid to be rational, cold and not emotionally invested.  

I'm totally invested in the passion of Ukraine. 

 

I have Ukrainian-American friends, best friends' wives who are from Ukraine, even my ex's father was from Ukraine.

I am totally invested, passionately, in Ukraine's cause for freedom and independence.

Not even counting I'm a ferocious defender of Democracy over Fascism and Communism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, clark1mt said:

I think the expectation is still that a Russian military victory is inevitable (presuming that said military doesn't revolt). The hope is that Ukraine can make their victory as painful as possible, with the idea that Russian citizens won't tolerate sustained heavy casualties that will be hard to keep concealed. This would force Putin to have to abandon the occupation to save himself domestically.

This also presumes that Putin's hold on power in Russia isn't so tight that he can get away with atrocities against his own people if that's what it would take for him to achieve his goals.

I think this is the victory we are looking for...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As always...be careful projecting and be dispassionate when considering anything likely to be biased like this.  The RAF didn't have nearly the success the BBC said it had in September 1940 but it still won and it also won because the British government through the BBC kept the World and the British people in the fight. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ewsieg said:

Is there an Intelligence belief that Ukraine can in fact win this?  ...

 

I don't know about the intel, but...

I do believe there is a way for Ukraine to win this militarily.

Putin committed 200,000 troops to the invasion of Ukraine. These forces are split into at least 4, if not more, arenas: Kiev, Kharkov, Kherson, and Odessa. Possibly split into more forces. Against 40 million Ukrainians in which every Vitaly, Anatoly, and Alexei is arming themselves to the teeth to attack these Russian forces.

Putin can't win with tanks, planes and bombs alone.

And, tactically, he may have under-committed the forces needed to subdue Ukraine. I mentioned this before, but I believe by about 10x the amount. I think he'll need closer to 2,000,000 than 200,000 ground forces in Ukraine to steal their country. If he doesn't commit that post haste... Losses, domestic unrest, the world against Putin's Fascist Invasion...

May add up to a military loss for Putin and he is forced to back off...

We'll see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

 

I don't know about the intel, but...

I do believe there is a way for Ukraine to win this militarily.

Putin committed 200,000 troops to the invasion of Ukraine. These forces are split into at least 4, if not more, arenas: Kiev, Kharkov, Kherson, and Odessa. Possibly split into more forces. Against 40 million Ukrainians in which every Vitaly, Anatoly, and Alexei is arming themselves to the teeth to attack these Russian forces.

Putin can't win with tanks, planes and bombs alone.

And, tactically, he may have under-committed the forces needed to subdue Ukraine. I mentioned this before, but I believe by about 10x the amount. I think he'll need closer to 2,000,000 than 200,000 ground forces in Ukraine to steal their country. If he doesn't commit that post haste... Losses, domestic unrest, the world against Putin's Fascist Invasion...

May add up to a military loss for Putin and he is forced to back off...

We'll see.

I watched about 15 minutes of the "News" last night for the first time in at least 10 years...the thing that stood out was how they ALL kept mispronouncing Kiev.   Kee ev....not keeve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, John_Brian_K said:

I watched about 15 minutes of the "News" last night for the first time in at least 10 years...the thing that stood out was how they ALL kept mispronouncing Kiev.   Kee ev....not keeve

Wrong. Kee ev is how the Russians pronounce it. Keeve is how the Ukrainians pronounce it. I trust the Ukrainians to know how to pronounce their own capitol. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, romad1 said:

As always...be careful projecting and be dispassionate when considering anything likely to be biased like this.  The RAF didn't have nearly the success the BBC said it had in September 1940 but it still won and it also won because the British government through the BBC kept the World and the British people in the fight. 

Yes, published casualty rates for the enemy typically are exaggerations of what is really happening.  But it's nice to know that there were in fact some tanks and helicopters destroyed and some Russians killed.  Make it hurt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, John_Brian_K said:

I watched about 15 minutes of the "News" last night for the first time in at least 10 years...the thing that stood out was how they ALL kept mispronouncing Kiev.   Kee ev....not keeve

 

8 minutes ago, chasfh said:

They’ve been pushing the “keev” pronunciation over “kee-ev” for at least a decade now. I think it actually closer to “kee-eve”.

in Ukranian, the first vowel is what we would call a short 'i'. the second syllable is close to "yeev" (but a pretty short 'ee'). stress goes on the first syllable. the Ukranian pronunciation is probably indistinguishable from "keev" to our English-speaking ears.

Edited by Crazy Cat Gentleman
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Crazy Cat Gentleman said:

 

in Ukranian, the first vowel is what we would call a short 'i'. the second syllable is close to "yeev" (but a pretty short 'ee'). stress goes on the first syllable.

So, “kih-yeev”?

I can hear that in my head being said out loud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

Wrong. Kee ev is how the Russians pronounce it. Keeve is how the Ukrainians pronounce it. I trust the Ukrainians to know how to pronounce their own capitol. 

Correct.  The "Kiev" spelling is outdated too, having been replaced by "Kyiv".

I don't think it's a big deal.  If a news story originates in Paris I don't expect an English speaking newsreader to say Pa-ree.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...