Oldskooler
Well-known member
Luchthaven helemaal ten Zuiden in het Krim.
(als de berichten kloppen)
In Belgorod (Rusland) staat ook weer vanalles te kaboemen.
Oorlog tussen Rusland en Oekraïne (2022-...)
Luchthaven helemaal ten Zuiden in het Krim.
(als de berichten kloppen)
In Belgorod (Rusland) staat ook weer vanalles te kaboemen.
w00tw00t
Well-known member
Colonelcassad
Для тех, кто волновался. Видео из района Любимовки и аэродрома в Бельбеке. После отработки ПВО по БПЛА противника, в районе аэродрома все спокойно. Источник: https://t.me/romanov_92
t.me
Niks aan te hand buiten paar schoten, zegt men. Zullen morgen wrs satellietbeelden zien als er echt explosies waren.
Belgorod wordt bijna dagdagelijks beschoten.
Laatst bewerkt:
Avondland
Well-known member
Sowieso erop of eronder, er is aan beide kanten geen ruimte om een deal te sluiten. Een strategische doorbraak zal nodig zijn. De herovering van Kherson en de demoralisering van het Russische leger dat zijn tanden kapotbijt op het Oekraïense verzet zou een mogelijkheid zijn. Maar dat is de perceptie die leeft in het Westen en op basis van websites zoals liveuamap dat niet bepaald neutraal is. We bekijken de oorlog hoe dan ook door een gekleurde bril en we moeten dat wel beseffen.
Legatus
Well-known member
Aan mankracht ontbreekt het niet bij Oekraïne. Daarin hebben ze een overgewicht. Ze hebben gewoon veel meer zwaar geschut nodig vanuit het Westen. Van tanks, artillerie tot anti-lucht. Zonder dat zie ik geen tegenoffensief. Ik hoop dat de wapenfabriek hier in Europa al op volle toeren draait.
Remi
Active member
Ukraine only has three months to prevent a winter betrayal
If the war goes into deep freeze, Zelensky is likely to come under increasing pressure from his allieswww.telegraph.co.uk
Iemand toegang tot het volledige stuk?
Ukraine is about to enter its time of maximum vulnerability as Russia’s traditional ally, General Winter, arrives on the scene and the Kremlin turns the energy screws on Kyiv’s shivering European backers.
On the battlefield winter will impact both sides as the war goes into deep freeze. Winter tends to favour the defender, better able to find shelter and warmth, while movement by foot and vehicle, a greater necessity for attackers, is impeded by first mud then snow. That might allow the Ukrainian army to hold onto what it’s got now but will prevent it from re-taking any significant part of the vast swathes of territory under Russian domination.
But it is in Europe that winter will have the greatest strategic effect on the war, and Ukraine is more likely to be the loser. As European media increasingly grow bored of a freezing landscape without much fighting to report, the spotlight will be more and more on hardship at home, with the economic crisis intensified by Putin’s conflict biting ever deeper.
While Europeans have been blindly satiating their hunger for cheap Russian energy, for years Putin has been baiting the strategic trap for them to fall into. His funding, disinformation and agents of influence in the environmental movement have increased dependency on Russia, playing a critical role in preventing shale gas exploitation across Europe as well as Germany’s termination of nuclear energy, heavily influenced by green parties that arose from the Moscow-funded anti-nuclear movement in the 1980s. A master of political and economic warfare as well as propaganda, Putin’s objectives were both for Russian economic benefit and to gain political leverage in situations such as this.
Russia reduced gas supplies to Europe by 60% in June. Countries are weighing how to minimise economic damage to their already crippled economies as winter approaches, including by significantly reducing gas consumption among domestic consumers for which one of the few realistic options is an even steeper price hike. The widespread discontent among voters that follows will focus politicians’ minds and force them to reconsider their already wavering commitment to Ukraine and especially the strict sanctions against Russia which have proven not to have the hoped-for effect on restraining Putin’s aggression.
Putin knows how to ratchet up the pressure until European countries succumb, including by ordering a total energy shut-off. With this threat hanging over their heads, he will dangle a ceasefire at the G20 summit in November, saying that peace can come if he holds onto the Donbas, Crimea and the territory he has captured along the south coast of Ukraine. He will speak of self-determination of peoples, citing plebiscites that he will ensure show the majority of the populations in these areas want to be a part of Russia. His appeal will not be aimed at Ukraine but at Europeans whose economic woes would be eased.
This message will be every bit as enticing to President Biden as it will be to his European counterparts. America too is suffering severe economic damage which Biden invariably blames on Putin’s war. His mood is demonstrated in an article last week in the New York Times. While reassuring Russia about the limitations of US military support for Kiev, he wrote: “I will not pressure the Ukrainian government to make any territorial concessions”, the first time a major national leader has raised the prospect of concessions in many months.
Leaders will be tempted to grab at Putin’s offer of peace, withholding support for Zelensky. Until now, an attritional war has been said to favour Ukraine. That's about to be seriously tested. It may have been built on a false premise in the first place: Russia has usually started wars badly in its history, but has been able to call upon its vast resources and manpower over time. And the Ukrainians are entirely reliant on foreign weapons, equipment and intelligence.
On the battlefield winter will impact both sides as the war goes into deep freeze. Winter tends to favour the defender, better able to find shelter and warmth, while movement by foot and vehicle, a greater necessity for attackers, is impeded by first mud then snow. That might allow the Ukrainian army to hold onto what it’s got now but will prevent it from re-taking any significant part of the vast swathes of territory under Russian domination.
But it is in Europe that winter will have the greatest strategic effect on the war, and Ukraine is more likely to be the loser. As European media increasingly grow bored of a freezing landscape without much fighting to report, the spotlight will be more and more on hardship at home, with the economic crisis intensified by Putin’s conflict biting ever deeper.
While Europeans have been blindly satiating their hunger for cheap Russian energy, for years Putin has been baiting the strategic trap for them to fall into. His funding, disinformation and agents of influence in the environmental movement have increased dependency on Russia, playing a critical role in preventing shale gas exploitation across Europe as well as Germany’s termination of nuclear energy, heavily influenced by green parties that arose from the Moscow-funded anti-nuclear movement in the 1980s. A master of political and economic warfare as well as propaganda, Putin’s objectives were both for Russian economic benefit and to gain political leverage in situations such as this.
Russia reduced gas supplies to Europe by 60% in June. Countries are weighing how to minimise economic damage to their already crippled economies as winter approaches, including by significantly reducing gas consumption among domestic consumers for which one of the few realistic options is an even steeper price hike. The widespread discontent among voters that follows will focus politicians’ minds and force them to reconsider their already wavering commitment to Ukraine and especially the strict sanctions against Russia which have proven not to have the hoped-for effect on restraining Putin’s aggression.
Putin knows how to ratchet up the pressure until European countries succumb, including by ordering a total energy shut-off. With this threat hanging over their heads, he will dangle a ceasefire at the G20 summit in November, saying that peace can come if he holds onto the Donbas, Crimea and the territory he has captured along the south coast of Ukraine. He will speak of self-determination of peoples, citing plebiscites that he will ensure show the majority of the populations in these areas want to be a part of Russia. His appeal will not be aimed at Ukraine but at Europeans whose economic woes would be eased.
This message will be every bit as enticing to President Biden as it will be to his European counterparts. America too is suffering severe economic damage which Biden invariably blames on Putin’s war. His mood is demonstrated in an article last week in the New York Times. While reassuring Russia about the limitations of US military support for Kiev, he wrote: “I will not pressure the Ukrainian government to make any territorial concessions”, the first time a major national leader has raised the prospect of concessions in many months.
Leaders will be tempted to grab at Putin’s offer of peace, withholding support for Zelensky. Until now, an attritional war has been said to favour Ukraine. That's about to be seriously tested. It may have been built on a false premise in the first place: Russia has usually started wars badly in its history, but has been able to call upon its vast resources and manpower over time. And the Ukrainians are entirely reliant on foreign weapons, equipment and intelligence.
Avondland
Well-known member
Blijkbaar drone-aanval maar geen schade?
w00tw00t
Well-known member
Zowel daar als op de Krim brug, poging tot aanvallen met drones maar beide mislukt. De drones werden neergehaald. Toch volgens de berichtgeving. Anders hadden we ondertussen de schade gezien.
Ik vind dat stuk toch wel overdreven:
WO2: men heeft toen voor materiaal zeer sterk gesteund op Lend-Lease van de US:
Afghanistan: gaan we nu toch niet eens succes van de Soviets noemen?
Winter was niet Rusland bondgenoot, maar van de Soviets. Niet vergeten dat Oekraïne ook deel uitmaakte van de Soviet Unie. Die hebben ook ervaring met strenge winters en kennen het weer en terrein in Oekraïne beter dan de Russen.
Euhm, Macron en nog wat anderen?
Is dat zo? In welke landoorlogen is Rusland (Soviet Unie) betrokken geweest?
WO2: men heeft toen voor materiaal zeer sterk gesteund op Lend-Lease van de US:
Dat was ook 1,25x de productie van de Soviets zelf.
Afghanistan: gaan we nu toch niet eens succes van de Soviets noemen?
WO1, WO2 en de Napoleontische oorlogen, misschien wel niet allemaal goede voorbeelden dat het over resources en manpower ging maar zijn allemaal wel oorlogen die rampzalig gestart zijn voor Rusland maar waar ze daarna wel weer teruggekrabbeld zijn (om in het geval van WO1 uiteindelijk dan wel weer te mislukken).
Ik kan me niet ontdoen van het idee dat alles wat er gebeurd halve afgemeten maatregelen zijn. We veroordelen collectief Rusland voor die invasie maar we zenden geen mensen etc naar daar. Noem het een speciale operatie en stuur toch gewoon een coalitieleger van landen naar daar. Neem al die gebieden terug in en biedt dan een elegante vredeoplossing aan Rusland aan. Het is immers geen oorlog maar een speciale operatie om terroristen uit Oekraine te verdrijven.
Mij lijkt het crazy om halve hulp te bieden en dit conflict heel lang te laten duren.
Mij lijkt het crazy om halve hulp te bieden en dit conflict heel lang te laten duren.
Mja die posities zijn in deze thread toch toch op grond al helemaal uitgeklaard geweest.
Dat artikel van de telegraph strooit wat mij betreft met veel te veel dure woorden. Ondertussen is het Westen reeds de bocht weg van Russiche steenkolen en olie aan het maken. Ja, dat is niet hetzelfde als gas. Neen, dat wil niet zeggen dat er deze winter geen problemen kunnen zijn.
Noem me paranoia. Maar stellen we ons dan niet de vraag waarom al die berichten over gastoevoer, feestende Finse PM's, of gerommel op het kabinet van Zelinksyy, de laatste tijd zo gemakkelijk hun weg naar de media vinden?
Avondland
Well-known member
Komkommertijd?
De winter zal stevig worden, maar we bouwen inderdaad af van Russische steenkolen, gas en olie. Dat neemt wel wat tijd in beslag. Rusland vindt intussen andere afzetmarkten voor hun grondstoffen. Dat neemt ook wat tijd in beslag, maar de samenwerking tussen Peking en Moskou zal alleen maar sterker worden.
Zubrowka
Well-known member
Ukraine is about to enter its time of maximum vulnerability as Russia’s traditional ally, General Winter, arrives on the scene and the Kremlin turns the energy screws on Kyiv’s shivering European backers.Ukraine only has three months to prevent a winter betrayal
If the war goes into deep freeze, Zelensky is likely to come under increasing pressure from his allies
Iemand toegang tot het volledige stuk?
On the battlefield winter will impact both sides as the war goes into deep freeze. Winter tends to favour the defender, better able to find shelter and warmth, while movement by foot and vehicle, a greater necessity for attackers, is impeded by first mud then snow. That might allow the Ukrainian army to hold onto what it’s got now but will prevent it from re-taking any significant part of the vast swathes of territory under Russian domination.
But it is in Europe that winter will have the greatest strategic effect on the war, and Ukraine is more likely to be the loser. As European media increasingly grow bored of a freezing landscape without much fighting to report, the spotlight will be more and more on hardship at home, with the economic crisis intensified by Putin’s conflict biting ever deeper.
While Europeans have been blindly satiating their hunger for cheap Russian energy, for years Putin has been baiting the strategic trap for them to fall into. His funding, disinformation and agents of influence in the environmental movement have increased dependency on Russia, playing a critical role in preventing shale gas exploitation across Europe as well as Germany’s termination of nuclear energy, heavily influenced by green parties that arose from the Moscow-funded anti-nuclear movement in the 1980s. A master of political and economic warfare as well as propaganda, Putin’s objectives were both for Russian economic benefit and to gain political leverage in situations such as this.
Russia reduced gas supplies to Europe by 60% in June. Countries are weighing how to minimise economic damage to their already crippled economies as winter approaches, including by significantly reducing gas consumption among domestic consumers for which one of the few realistic options is an even steeper price hike. The widespread discontent among voters that follows will focus politicians’ minds and force them to reconsider their already wavering commitment to Ukraine and especially the strict sanctions against Russia which have proven not to have the hoped-for effect on restraining Putin’s aggression.
Putin knows how to ratchet up the pressure until European countries succumb, including by ordering a total energy shut-off. With this threat hanging over their heads, he will dangle a ceasefire at the G20 summit in November, saying that peace can come if he holds onto the Donbas, Crimea and the territory he has captured along the south coast of Ukraine. He will speak of self-determination of peoples, citing plebiscites that he will ensure show the majority of the populations in these areas want to be a part of Russia. His appeal will not be aimed at Ukraine but at Europeans whose economic woes would be eased.
This message will be every bit as enticing to President Biden as it will be to his European counterparts. America too is suffering severe economic damage which Biden invariably blames on Putin’s war. His mood is demonstrated in an article last week in the New York Times. While reassuring Russia about the limitations of US military support for Kiev, he wrote: “I will not pressure the Ukrainian government to make any territorial concessions”, the first time a major national leader has raised the prospect of concessions in many months.
Leaders will be tempted to grab at Putin’s offer of peace, withholding support for Zelensky. Until now, an attritional war has been said to favour Ukraine. That's about to be seriously tested. It may have been built on a false premise in the first place: Russia has usually started wars badly in its history, but has been able to call upon its vast resources and manpower over time. And the Ukrainians are entirely reliant on foreign weapons, equipment and intelligence.
w00tw00t
Well-known member
Dus de groene beweging is initieel gesteund geweest door Russen om zo de afhankelijkheid v. Europa tegenover Rusland te verhogen? Eigenlijk kan je als zo een land kapitalisme en globalisme wel enorm exploiteren door de sterk in verbonden markten te misbruiken als anderen te afhankelijk worden van jou. China heeft dat ook al goed begrepen.
Rusland zijn economische sterkte is maar dubbel zoveel als dat van de lage landen, en toch zitten we wereldwijd (ook al door de pandemie) in een recessie, hoewel sterk gefocust in bepaalde domeinen zoals energie, die alleen al voor de hoge inflatie verantwoordelijkheid zijn, en natuurlijk is energie ook belangrijk voor elke andere sector (domino-effect), en op het einde van de dag krijgt de burger de rekening gepresenteerd, wat leidt tot een lagere koopkracht en een recessie die zich versnelt.
Laat ons maar hopen dat deze winter er één is zoals de afgelopen 10 jaar, een milde. En voorlopig op basis van de eerste data gaan we geluk hebben, want alles wijst op dit moment op een (zeer) zachte winter. Grotere temperatuurgradiënt dan normaal in de Atlantische Oceaan zal de straalstroom op volle toeren doen blazen, en winterse toestanden hier bijna onmogelijk maken. Al is het nog ver vooruit, en kan dat nog veranderen. Maar de oceaan is ons voorlopig gunstig gezind.
Laatst bewerkt:
Imo is dit toch wel veel in veel te korte tijd, ik geloof niet dat het allemaal waar is.