It’s not just believing his own press. He’s had people arrested and extorted billions out of them for their release. He’s assassinated his enemies using bizarre techniques one would expect in a James Bond movie.
He’s a modern day Caligula.
Hasn’t put his horse in the Duma yet.
Russia withdrawing is a whole different thing from the cease-fire you mentioned upthread. If Russian forces withdraw to Russia, then sure, Ukraine would likely stop shooting. But a simple cease-fire in which Russian forces continue occupying Ukrainian territory? Why wouldn’t Ukraine keep shooting at them until they leave or die?
An article in Newsweek gives Russia only about 90 more days at the rate of loss of equipment and men. Keep in mind that an increasing flow of weapons is making its way to the Ukraine, it should be the Russians negotiating at a disadvantage soon enough.
Can you expand on what you are looking for? That has info from tanks down to how many rounds are carried by a 9mm sniper rifle. Seems pretty complete to me. Whether the Russians actually had fully manned groups is anybody’s guess.
Thanks for the first hand information. It’s always good to hear from “regular” folks rather than read headlines from politicians.
If the results of his decisions weren’t so horrific, the guy could be a comic book character.
I was surprised it was that long, but I didn’t know about this part:
Spoonts said evidence that Russia’s troop ranks and arsenal are suffering can be seen by how troops units and equipment were recently moved from Russia’s border with Mongolia thousands of miles away and placed in Ukraine.
That’s already a desperation move right there. Don’t know how I missed that before.
No, I was talking about the Russian view, not the Finnish. From the Russian side, when considering things like moving troops from one of their distant borders (with Georgia, Mongolia, China, etc.) and over to Ukraine, it’s always thinking in terms of insurance. “What’s the actual likelihood of an attack? If so, how many troops do I need at minimum to delay things long enough to move more people in?”
Regardless that the likelihood might be small, that doesn’t mean that they won’t appreciate it becoming even smaller, when they’re coming out shorthanded in Ukraine.
Sounds good, but I’m reminded of how multiple sources said Russia would have already been a broken and spent military force by April.
I never saw one of those. Care to point them out?
This is a fairly reputable analysis from a very reputable news source.
The opportunity for a Ukrainian counter offensive is narrowing. Institute for War analysis is interesting and also quite frightening.
The Russian conventional forces are in disarray and weakening. Putin’s best option is to annex the occupied territory and use his Nuclear deterrent.
The permanent loss of territory would weaken Ukraine. Russia would probably invade again when ready. I didn’t quote this analysis but it’s in the article.
It’s ironic that defeating Russia conventional forces leads back to the Nukes. 
Ukraine and NATO needs to regain as much territory as possible before Russian annexation.
I’m not sure how any official status changes imposed by Russia makes a difference. “Annexing” the Donbas just means that if / when Ukraine retakes it that the people who helped would be charged with treason. Let’s say, for example, that Russia had officially annexed the land northeast of Kharkiv that Ukraine just liberated. How would that have made a difference to the forces on the ground? It wouldn’t have.
Well, but that is out of respect for Tsarina Kate.
I understand annexation is a political move.
The problem is Russia will claim any attacks on new territory will be viewed as attacks on Mother Russia.
Just have to wait and see what happens.
Keep hoping Putin’s health will bring in a more rational leader.
Russians don’t give up easily. That river crossing has to be defended. Otherwise the Ukrainian troops in that area get encircled.
Guardian blog
I think the counter-offensive would be (for Zelensky) to make it terribly clear that the response to annexation would be mass sniping and terrorism, without end. Everyone in Russian government and the military gets to live the rest of their lives hiding in bunkers and caves, inside their own country.
Zelensky does like to reference Israel a lot, and they are famous for their assassination squads.
It doesn’t. It was inevitable. Putin’s goal since attaining power has been to recover all the access points for invasion into Russia that were lost when the Soviet union collapsed. Ukraine was the next ones on the list, and after that came Poland. And due to their population collapse of 30 years ago this is literally the last time they’ll have near enough 20 year olds to put up any kind of war.
Yes, Russia’s population is in decline and that may have been taken into consideration. Between the population decline, loss of future oil revenue and sanctions this is a significant turning point for them regardless of the outcome.
They really need to get rid of the oligarchs and become something that can join in Europe’s success of united free nations.
Think of how quickly this could happen if they revolted and started fresh.
Ukrainians are using light quadcopters to drop improvised explosive devices on Russian positions (video)
Of course Sweden and Finland would not be talking about joining NATO if they were not worried about neighbours doing irrational things. There were some times when there was concern, often misplaced, that it was a moribund organization. Not sure too many people think that now.
Ukraine has been a personal inspiration on standing up to those who would bully others without real cause. It saddens me that the reason Putin felt he could do this is because, nine times out of ten, he probably could. Instead, he has given new life to NATO, exposed weakness in his army, won too little on the battlefield to succeed in fair negotiations. Will he go too far as he has won so little? No.
However, my concern is for the millions forced to flee. Although it makes little sense, one could say the same for other conflicts which also did not garner much attention that would help. I hope we see a new era which places real premiums on peace. People have hoped such things before.
The second time as farce?
(Seriously, though, a failed revolution would NOT be cool, considering how many people starved and/or were purged the first time. Ideally the RSDRP will have learned a thing or two from history.)
Ukrainians I know aren’t trying to garner attention. They are quietly doing their thing and helping relatives and refugees but won’t even broach the subject of the tragedy, with me anyway, saying they are too pissed off to talk about it the one time I dared to bring it up.
I’m sure that’s true, but not my point. My point is the fight and issues in Ukraine are rightly earning the world’s attention, but wars in other places (possibly including Ukraine in 2015) have often been ignored or underaddressed in the past. I hope going forward there is less tolerance of aggression in general due to meaningful measures, not just where there is undeniable strategic value.