The Situation in the Ukraine. #23

At Lugansk, Igor Yaschenko is again saying about ukrops continuing to make preperations to cross the Donets at Prishib. This time he is more specific in location and says it is at the Brodova crossing between Prishib and Krasny Liman. This bridge had it's supports at both river bank ends destroyed in 2014. http://dnr-news.com/dnr/30581-nm-lnr-vsu-prodolzhayut-gotovit-perepravy-cherez-severskiy-donec.html
https://maps.yandex.ru/?ll=38.955425%2C48.735598&spn=3.284912%2C1.351431&z=16&l=map

So Yukelberry Fynn is out and the American takes over as PM  

http://www.pravda.com.ua/articles/2016/03/4/7101127/



Saakashvili for President

Unverified report that ukrops have deployed a 60 tonne capacity pontoon bridge over the Kalmius at Pavlopol. This makes sense from their perspective as it is the most northerly point on the Kalmius were ukrops control both banks. To deploy anywhere north of Pavlopol up to Granitnoe, where both banks are then controlled by VSN, will be difficult as would mean a river assault under fire, and the river is not suitable for a crossing for much of that stretch. Having the ability to push armored formations across the Kalmius at Pavlopol will make an assault Telmanovo from the south and the north from Volnovakhna direction, or an attempt to rush to the border and cut off VSN on the coast, less of a logistics problem. If this report is true, then it can only been seen as a preperation for an offensive. Any assault from Pavlopol, no matter it's ultimate objective, could cause a problem and divert VSN resources from both Telmanovo and Novoazovsk, but this eventuality is certainly taken into account in VSN planning.

JohninMK wrote:It makes sense for Kiev to try to make the VSN spread itself thinner over a longer 'active' front. Would the UA move armoured formations across before any conflict? If not, a pontoon bridge in a known place is an attractive, non infrastructure, target for artillery or guided weapons.

The Kalmius at Pavlopol is within reach of all VSN artillery capability. Issues are that civilians are still living there and to be sure of hitting the bridge would need a blanket barrage that needs to hit the area of both banks as well. With no AF, then no "surgical strike" we have become used to seeing since Gulf War 1. Ukrops would push formations over the Kalmius before an attack anyway, and it would be, I think, a pressure point on DNR to avoid pre-emptive strike, which in military terms is needed, but gives propaganda to Washington that DNR has "started a war". In Six Day War the Arab armies, particulary the Egyptian, made a lot of posturing, showing off their equipment and bombastic statements of intent, rather like Kiev does now, but Israel did not engage with them in "Counting angels dancing on head of pin", as happens now in Donbass, but launched pre-emptive attack without regard to "sensitivites", and won. Egypt learned a hard lesson with the result being operation "Badr" in 1973. The war was lost of course, but it was a masterclass from Egyptians in how to organise, prepare, and then wage war, at least in the intial assault. In Donbass there is military nonsense dictated by politics and $

http://rushincrash.com/ussr/ukraine/turchynov-predicted-a-wave-of-migration-from-russia-to-ukraine/

Secretary of Council of national security and defence (NSDC) of Ukraine Oleksandr Turchynov said that the visa regime with Russia will protect Kiev from “waves of migration”. Relevant opinions he expressed on Friday, March 4, in an interview to “Interfax-Ukraine”.

“The time will come, and we still face enormous migratory wave that could flood across the border from Russia into Ukraine”, — he told, answering a question on necessity of introduction of a visa regime.

http://interfax.com.ua/news/political/329101.html

"И визовый режим в этом контексте является достаточно эффективным фильтром. Кроме того, Россия высокими темпами сжигает свои ресурсы на усиление своего военного потенциала, при этом, цены на энергоносители падают, санкции действуют, а кризис неэффективности управления, присущий любому авторитарному и тоталитарному государству, только усиливает все эти разрушительные процессы. Придет время и мы еще столкнемся с колоссальной миграционной волной, которая может хлынуть из России в Украину. Поэтому, я убежден, что нам лучше сейчас себя обезопасить, чем это делать постфактум", - подытожил А.Турчинов.

GG translate wrote:"And the visa regime in this context, is quite effective filter. In addition, Russia rapidly burn their resources to strengthen its military capabilities, while energy prices are falling, the sanctions act, and crisis management inefficiencies inherent in any authoritarian and totalitarian state, only intensifies all of these destructive processes time will come and we will be faced with enormous migratory wave that may gush from Russia to Ukraine, therefore, I am convinced that we are now better safe than to do it after the fact ", -.. concluded Turchynov.

Today OSCE were at the water plant at Yasinovataya and came under ukrops mortar fire with a shell landing 60-100 meters from then. They then rushed back to their compound in Donetsk. Workers at the plant of course continue working...... http://rusvesna.su/news/1457358831

OSCE building in Mariupol has security re-enforced with spikes and barbed wire on top of the compound wall. http://rusvesna.su/news/1457370524

So where is this going?

- UAF takes a couple of nights off from attacks
- apparently day was spent refueling all AFV's
- replacement for Yats lined up allowing him to be a fall guy if it all goes to hell
- pontoon bridge across the Donets
- anything more?

franco wrote:So where is this going?

- apparently day was spent refueling all AFV's

Any source for that or is a guess? It's likely that is happening, but if you have a source better

I think with all the political crap and Ukraine almost bankrupt, another offensive from the Ukrops is coming, it is only matter of time and after watching this I have no idea why Russia is not supporting th Kurds fighting agianst Turkey, in Turkey.

https://southfront.org/foreign-policy-diary-conflicts-heat-up-in-ukraine/

Here is a different approach to seeing this problem. There are arguments for sit and wait for Ukraine to collapse, or to simply let it become another frozen conflict that somebody else can deal with some time in the future. That the various frozen conflicts occured was due to the factors of collapse of SU which we all know about, and IMO are not relevant today as regards Ukraine, and should never have occured in 1991 anyway except treason, corruption, cowardice and stupidity.

However, if this becomes another frozen conflict, who benefits? The longer Kiev is in the grip of a Washington controlled junta, then the less chance of Ukraine ever becoming a normal country that is friendly to Russia. If this situation is not resolved, like the other frozen conflicts, for several decades, there is hardly any chance that the Kiev controlled population will ever want to be friendly to Russia, and within such a time frame Ukraine may enter NATO, tho that is irrelevant as Kiev and Washington can agree a treaty between them or Kiev can simply let as many US forces into Ukraine as it wants, or is told to accept, and treaties are not needed as all these things ultimately are ass wipe. So while it may seem to some that sit and wait from Russian side is good, it is not in the long term and will lead to the permanent divorce of Ukraine from Russia, and that means letting the treason of 1991 stand and the loss of Russian land, call it Novorossiya, will be forever. This is not tolerable.

On the side of Kiev it is also not a good strategy to sit and wait. Their situation will only deteriorate over time, not total collapse, but it will be more and more difficult for them to be able to launch any offensive to retake Donbass. So for them the longer they wait, then the less chance of them ever retaking Donbass. Frozen conflict is not a solution, it is cowardice, so for Kiev to retake Donbass or Donbass to be fully free of Kiev requires action in the short term or, even with a still free Donbass, both sides loose and Washington will be the ultimate victor in having created a serious split in the greater Russian world, and Belarus will be next.

Once the seeds of hate have been planted they will not go away.

Finns did not use to hate Russia before the 20th century. But after the Civil War of 1918 (where the Whites won against the Reds) our school system was reformed to include harsh anti-Russian propaganda that raised our children to hate Russia. All the biggest newspapers were spreading hatred of Russia as well.

Once these seeds of hate of Russia had been planted the hatred has stayed for a century here.

The same will happen in Ukraine. Their young children will be taught to hate Russia since they turn 4 or 5. Their schools will be filled with anti-Russian propaganda. Their newspapers and television channels will be filled with anti-Russian propaganda.

And not just in Kiev and Lviv, but also in Kharkov and Odessa. And in Mariupol and Slaviansk. People in these cities are mostly pro-Russian now, but their children will not. They will hate Russia as do their brethren in Lviv.

Russia lost a brother nation forever. Ukrainians are the same people with the Russians, but there will be a wall of hate between them and it will not go away during our lifetimes.

The West scored a decisive victory in Maidan. It was brutal for Russia. There must have been a lot of celebrating going on in Washington and London.

And those who say that "Belarus is safe", don't underestimate the West! They are capable of a lot more evil than one would think.

I used to read a lot of people say how "Ukrainians like Russia" before Maidan happaned. There were polls in Ukraine which said that Putin was the most popular politician there and Putin would be elected as the president of Ukraine if he participated in the elections.

People used to say that there are too many connections between Russians and Ukrainians for them to ever turn against each other. Millions of Ukrainians live in Russia. Millions of Russians live in Ukraine. Russians and Ukrainians speak the same language, they have a common religion, there are millions of interjacent marriages between Ukrainians and Russians. Ukrainians and Russians are brothers that can never be separated!, they said.

Well, it all proved to be false. It all happened in a matter of few weeks. Ukraine was torn away from Russia forever. And it was an incredibly easy victory for the West. Russia and pro-Russian Ukrainians offered practically no resistance.

There are three Russian nations in the world: the Russian Federation (Great Russia), Ukraine (Little Russia) and Belarus (White Russia). Little Russia has already been rip apart from the core of the Russian world. Irreversibly. The Russian world lost tens of millions of people, a great abundance of natural resources, and some of the best agricultural land in the world. It lost historical Russian cities such as Kharkov and Odessa.

If Russia allows the same shit happen in Belarus then the Putin government will go down as one of the most incompetent in the history of Russia. In Belarus Russia must be prepared to use real force, not just words, when the same shit starts to happen as happened in Ukraine. And it will.

Khepesh wrote:Here is a different approach to seeing this problem. There are arguments for sit and wait for Ukraine to collapse, or to simply let it become another frozen conflict that somebody else can deal with some time in the future. That the various frozen conflicts occured was due to the factors of collapse of SU which we all know about, and IMO are not relevant today as regards Ukraine, and should never have occured in 1991 anyway except treason, corruption, cowardice and stupidity.

However, if this becomes another frozen conflict, who benefits? The longer Kiev is in the grip of a Washington controlled junta, then the less chance of Ukraine ever becoming a normal country that is friendly to Russia. If this situation is not resolved, like the other frozen conflicts, for several decades, there is hardly any chance that the Kiev controlled population will ever want to be friendly to Russia, and within such a time frame Ukraine may enter NATO, tho that is irrelevant as Kiev and Washington can agree a treaty between them or Kiev can simply let as many US forces into Ukraine as it wants, or is told to accept, and treaties are not needed as all these things ultimately are ass wipe. So while it may seem to some that sit and wait from Russian side is good, it is not in the long term and will lead to the permanent divorce of Ukraine from Russia, and that means letting the treason of 1991 stand and the loss of Russian land, call it Novorossiya, will be forever. This is not tolerable.

On the side of Kiev it is also not a good strategy to sit and wait. Their situation will only deteriorate over time, not total collapse, but it will be more and more difficult for them to be able to launch any offensive to retake Donbass. So for them the longer they wait, then the less chance of them ever retaking Donbass. Frozen conflict is not a solution, it is cowardice, so for Kiev to retake Donbass or Donbass to be fully free of Kiev requires action in the short term or, even with a still free Donbass, both sides loose and Washington will be the ultimate victor in having created a serious split in the greater Russian world, and Belarus will be next.

There is a difference between frozen conflict and infinite frozen conflict.

And there are advantages to keeping this one on the ice for a while but do not doubt for a second that it might drag on longer than couple of years. More likely several months from now at most. Kiev is broke, desperate and pretty much deemed a failure by West and ukrops (ones in charge at least) know it.

If west had any faith in coming offensive we would see infinite barrage of coverage in MSM for months in advance but still nothing. Whole thing has been given barely a lip service here and there for quite a while.

You can't cold-start something like this. Media preparation is needed and it is simply not there.

Kiev is being slowly cut loose and led to slaughter, only ukranian idiots abroad and morons in the ukrop trenches are still not aware of this.

Permanent divorce of Ukraine from Russia is non issue simply because, for Russia, there are no more reasons to keep Ukraine in it's current form. It will be a lengthy process but it will be done.

PapaDragon wrote:

There is a difference between frozen conflict and infinite frozen conflict.

No, there is only frozen conflict, and it is bad.

I do not see any argument that says it is in Kiev's interests to delay attempting to take Donbass and I do not see any argument to say it is in Russia's interests to let the regime in Kiev remain and so day by day increase the foothold of Washington.

This conflict should be seen as an error that neither side wanted and that both sides now cannot resolve with both getting what they want and not loosing face, or much worse. Either Donbass returns to Kiev and Putin is seriously embarrassed, and that will not happen, it will not return, or Kiev lets Donbass go and Poroshenko is removed in bloody revolution. For it to continue is bad for both sides and the only ridiculous "middle way" is for Donbass to be in permanent limbo, neither Ukraine or Russia, and not able to survive without Russia. For Russia to eventually recover all Ukraine would only be a "lengthy process" for one reason, and that is fear of Washington, otherwise T-90s would have been sitting on Mariinsky lawn in 2014. Washington does what it wants when it wants, so why should Russia be different, and particulary when it is not a question of some far away country not connected, but of historic Russian lands. Russia waiting, is Russia deferring to Washington, and that is not acceptable. No matter about Crimea, do you think Putin wants to be remembered as the Russian leader who let a hostile foreign power take Odessa for it's own naval base? or that American armored formations could one day be facing Belgorod? America did not wait during Cuba missile crisis for some undefined solution to appear at some undefined time in the future, they acted quickly and ruthlessly, only they can do this?

I do not really want to be seen as warmonger, no sane person wants war, but it is part of human condition and "stuff happens". My argument is that something should be done now or it will be worse in the future. If T-90 were on lawn of Mariinsky in May or June 2014 very few lives would have been lost as Kiev would not have been able to offer any serious resistance. Would Washington have had apoplectic fit and screamed and shouted? of course, but most everybody else would eventually see it as what it would have been, an internal Russian issue, simply resolving issues from 1991 and nothing for anybody in Berlin, or London or Paris or Rome or even Warsaw and Riga to get excited about. But T-90 were not in Kiev and tens of thousands are now dead or maimed for life. I contend that while action to stop this situation in the short term will of course lead to more deaths and suffering, further delay will lead to even more deaths in the future.

Khepesh wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:

There is a difference between frozen conflict and infinite frozen conflict.

No, there is only frozen conflict, and it is bad.

I do not see any argument that says it is in Kiev's interests to delay attempting to take Donbass and I do not see any argument to say it is in Russia's interests to let the regime in Kiev remain and so day by day increase the foothold of Washington.

Having a foothold in a cesspool in hardly positive outcome.

Khepesh wrote:
This conflict should be seen as an error that neither side wanted and that both sides now cannot resolve with both getting what they want and not loosing face, or much worse. Either Donbass returns to Kiev and Putin is seriously embarrassed, and that will not happen, it will not return, or Kiev lets Donbass go and Poroshenko is removed in bloody revolution. For it to continue is bad for both sides and the only ridiculous "middle way" is for Donbass to be in permanent limbo, neither Ukraine or Russia, and not able to survive without Russia. For Russia to eventually recover all Ukraine would only be a "lengthy process" for one reason, and that is fear of Washington, otherwise T-90s would have been sitting on Mariinsky lawn in 2014. Washington does what it wants when it wants, so why should Russia be different, and particulary when it is not a question of some far away country not connected, but of historic Russian lands. Russia waiting, is Russia deferring to Washington, and that is not acceptable. No matter about Crimea, do you think Putin wants to be remembered as the Russian leader who let a hostile foreign power take Odessa for it's own naval base? or that American armored formations could one day be facing Belgorod? America did not wait during Cuba missile crisis for some undefined solution to appear at some undefined time in the future, they acted quickly and ruthlessly, only they can do this?

-You keep forgetting one thing: Ukraine is populated with idiots who worship Nazis. It would be perfect playground for CIA Soviet/Afghan style mess. T-90 on a lawn will not solve anything unless you are ready to dig very big hole and fill it with load and loads of ukrops carcases of all ages and genders really fast without any pussyfooting and with no questions asked. I despise Nazis myself and would have no problem with that solution but plenty of other folks would. So that is a no go.

-Donbass may seem like it is in limbo but that is incredibly naive point of view. We all want instant solutions (nobody more than me) but it is reality that dictates speed of solution, not our personal preference.

- Russia effectively has blade on Ukraine's throat. The moment anyone even theoretically consideres putting foreign hostile force in Odessa (or anywhere else in 404) whole country will go up in flames again. I know that because it already happened once as everyone remembers.

-This is not Cuban Missile Crisis, it is not the 60's and Russia is not even on the level of USSR let alone America.

Khepesh wrote:
I do not really want to be seen as warmonger, no sane person wants war, but it is part of human condition and "stuff happens". My argument is that something should be done now or it will be worse in the future. If T-90 were on lawn of Mariinsky in May or June 2014 very few lives would have been lost as Kiev would not have been able to offer any serious resistance. Would Washington have had apoplectic fit and screamed and shouted? of course, but most everybody else would eventually see it as what it would have been, an internal Russian issue, simply resolving issues from 1991 and nothing for anybody in Berlin, or London or Paris or Rome or even Warsaw and Riga to get excited about. But T-90 were not in Kiev and tens of thousands are now dead or maimed for life. I contend that while action to stop this situation in the short term will of course lead to more deaths and suffering, further delay will lead to even more deaths in the future.

-Not a single person would see it that way simply because it would not be internal Russian issue. Majority of Russians first and foremost. Average Ivan may have rediscovered it's patriotism now, but that was certainly not the case back then.

-Ukrainians ultimately made their bed plain and simple. And they have very few excuses. Folks in former Yugoslav countries can always (rightfully) say that they made mistake and went to war because they were in the dark basically. Ukrainians have no excuses. They had all the info, TV, cellphones, internet, everything you need to make informed decision. And they decided.


And please hit Enter key from time to time when you write, replying to your posts can be logistical nightmare.

Ispan wrote:

franco wrote:So where is this going?

- apparently day was spent refueling all AFV's

Any source for that or is a guess? It's likely that is happening, but if you have a source better

It was on twitter, Pete John or shinobi, one of those guys.

PapaDragon wrote:-Donbass may seem like it is in limbo but that is incredibly naive point of view. We all want instant solutions (nobody more than me) but it is reality that dictates speed of solution, not our personal preference.

- Russia effectively has blade on Ukraine's throat. The moment anyone even theoretically consideres putting foreign hostile force in Odessa (or anywhere else in 404) whole country will go up in flames again. I know that because it already happened once as everyone remembers.

Donbass is in a limbo since Minsk I.

Foreign hostile forces are already in Ukraine.

Washington does not if the whole Ukraine "goes up in flames again".
It will cost Russia so much that it will be worth it.

PapaDragon wrote:-Not a single person would see it that way simply because it would not be internal Russian issue. Majority of Russians first and foremost. Average Ivan may have rediscovered it's patriotism now, but that was certainly not the case back then.

-Ukrainians ultimately made their bed plain and simple. And they have very few excuses. Folks in former Yugoslav countries can always (rightfully) say that they made mistake and went to war because they were in the dark basically. Ukrainians have no excuses. They had all the info, TV, cellphones, internet, everything you need to make informed decision. And they decided.

Seconded.
It stopped being an internal Russian issue since the end of the USSR.
Ukraine is near-abroad, but still abroad.

ExBeobachter1987 wrote:................

It will cost Russia so much that it will be worth it.

............

It will not cost Russia squat. It will cost Ukraine dearly though but that is the objective (Russia's objective).

Why would it cost Russia anyway? You speak of Ukraine like it has some kind of value or something. It does not. Not for a very long time.

Economy is gone, population is expendable and real-estate will be partitioned and rearranged according to Russia's needs. Done.