Russia-Ukraine War - News and Developments

[Elias MC]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1500310457017675777

https://twitter.com/x/status/1500311878953746436

https://twitter.com/x/status/1500312124903596034

 

[jhungary]

So even western media agrees on these:
1) Donbas in Russian control
2) Mariupol in Russian control
3) Kherson in Russian control
4) Chernobyl and Zaporzhzhia (at least power plants) in Russian control
5) Kiev almost surrounded

All in the course of 10 days. But the official agenda is Ukraine is winning? Any of the NATO apologists care to explain?

Mariupol is in contest, it's not under Russian control. And should have been under control on day 1 due to its proximity.

Also, Russian aggression route is actually quite slow, because their battleplan as Lukashenko leaked some days ago. Was to cut off Southern Ukraine and annex Eastern Ukraine along the line between Mariupol to Dnipro to Kyiv along the Dnieper River. To do that, Russia would need to take Kyiv, Dnipro, Mariupol and Odessa, none of them felt.

And the Russian advance is on 11 days, it already committed all tactic reserve, and troop rotation is coming in at 28 days limit by then Russia would need to put in Strategic Reserve, which I don't know if they have any. And then couple to the fact that 11 days in and none of the major city felt to Russia, this time table is not going to be Russian fan.

I will not say Ukrainian is winning, but Russian is not winning either.

 

[sur]

RT on broken promise about NATO expansion:

German FM claimed:

RT counters that claim:

I think (correct me if wrong) that Russians started to make a big issue of "no NATO along our borders" around 2014.
While previous NATO countries bordering Russia happened BEFORE 2014 (in 2004 as this tweet says).

It doesn't matter whether there was ever a formal promise from NATO of not expanding into Ukraine. It could very well be a one-sided demand by Russia, just like one-sided demand by USA about Cuba. Or it could be a promise made in private meetings that never was scribed into black and white.


So anyone saying that, "oh why Russia says we won't accept NATO expansion along our border, when they already have a couple of NATO countries bordering them", needs to understand this timeline.



Lets put that out in large font:



2004 -vs- 2014


NATO bordering Russia -vs- No more please or we'll do sth about it like you reacted to Cuba.





e.g.

(Source)

The Russian Foreign Ministry has made another statement about Ukraine: militants, NATO, provocations​ THURSDAY, 27 FEBRUARY 2014, 18:35 Russia's Foreign Ministry calls on the West, and in particular NATO, to "refrain from provocative statements and respect Ukraine's non-aligned status." This is stated in a statement by the Russian Foreign Ministry on the situation in Ukraine, the text of which is posted on its website. In it, Moscow states that the agreement on resolving the crisis in Ukraine, signed on February 21, this year. and certified by the foreign ministers of Germany, Poland and France, is still not being implemented. "The militants have not yet surrendered their weapons, have not vacated administrative buildings, and are announcing their intention to" restore order "in all regions of Ukraine. There are threats of physical violence, as stated in today's statement by President Viktor Yanukovych," it said. "The agreement on joint investigation of acts of violence has been forgotten, as well as the obligation to create a government of national unity. Instead, as stated on the Maidan, a" government of winners "is being created, which includes representatives of national extremists," Moscow said. According to the statement, the forgotten agreements on constitutional reform, "which according to the February 21 Agreement must precede the presidential election. We are convinced that only such a constitutional framework that ensures the interests of all responsible political forces and all regions of Ukraine long-term ". The Foreign Ministry called on the West to realize its responsibility for the implementation of this Agreement. "We call on those foreign partners who initially encouraged opposition protests, initiated and supported the February 21 Agreement, to fully realize their responsibility for its implementation," the statement said. The Kremlin has expressed readiness to cooperate with Western countries on Ukraine. At the same time in the statement reproaches sounded. "We emphasize that the calls of Western countries to Russia for cooperation on issues related to the situation in Ukraine have become more frequent. We proposed this long ago, long before the crisis entered a hot phase, but then colleagues were ready to do so," they said. in the Russian Foreign Ministry. "However, we are ready to cooperate - with a clear understanding that it will be honest, based on the ability not only to negotiate, but also to implement agreements that must take into account the interests of all Ukrainian people and all partners of Ukraine," the Russian Foreign Ministry said. . Fulfillment of obligations under the February 21 Agreement would be an important step in this direction, it said. When NATO begins to consider the situation in Ukraine, it sends the wrong signal. And the NATO Secretary General even said it was appropriate to say that "Ukraine's membership in NATO is not the most urgent priority of the Ukrainian leadership." "They are trying to solve for the Ukrainian people again," the Foreign Ministry said in a statement. Russian diplomats did not hold back and said: "We strongly advise everyone to refrain from provocative statements and respect the non-aligned status of Ukraine, enshrined in its law" On the foundations of domestic and foreign policy. " We will remind, on February 21 the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation Vladimir Lukin, being at negotiations in Kiev on February 21 , refused to sign the Agreement on an exit from crisis to which the Russian Foreign Ministry appeals in the statement. He said he did not understand who the "characters" were. Ukrainian Pravda

I think it could be these clauses in 21-Feb-2014's agreement that Russia may be referring to when it says no-NATO:

"Withdrawal of heavy weapons by both sides.",
or "The government and the opposition will refrain from the use of force",
and "Withdrawal of foreign armed formations, military equipment, mercenaries."

i.e. if Ukraine joins NATO that will violate this clause in essence. By tilting the balance between pro & anti Russian Ukrainians.

.
.
.

This is an interesting read
...

Looks like promises (or lack thereof) that both parties refer to were verbal and hence now subject to memories of participants!
Just like Mikhail Gorbachev remembers it a certain way, Russians may say that German diplomat Chrobog remembers it more accurately.
And that is in writing circulated by UK to Europeans.

 

[jhungary]

I keep analyzing this situation but what does Russia have to gain from all this? Ok, they will defeat Ukraine at a heavy cost, but it will turn the people there permanently anti-Russian. They can install a puppet, but that person will be overthrown eventually. Also, they might get sucked into a never ending guerilla war which will drain their resources.

Meanwhile Russia's economy is getting cut off from the West and living standards will eventually drop.

No doubt, the West will also be hurt as well, but most likely not as badly as Russia.

It's just becoming more clear that Putin has made a huge miscalculation. Did he start smoking his own propaganda so much that he no longer understood some of the realities he was facing?

Probably best said by a BBC head line I saw probably day 2 or day 3 on the invasion, the headline read

"Russia has made NATO great again"

The blowback is much, much more further than Ukraine and Russia itself... If we look at the strategic changes after the war, and assuming Russia can win and even successfully repel a Ukrainian insurgency. The Changes is as follow

1. EU/NATO increase military spending.
2. Russia/NATO Border increased from 2 (Latvia and Estonia) currently to 6 (the 2 + Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Hungary) 7 if Finland Joining NATO as well
3. US Troop increase in Eastern Europe

All these are going to come even after Russia successfully invaded Ukraine and on top of everything you said in your post.

 

[Hassan Al-Somal]

World War III?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1500296791178285059

https://twitter.com/x/status/1500108117274673154

 

[jhungary]

RT on broken promise about NATO expansion:

German FM claimed:
View attachment 821190



RT counters that claim:
View attachment 821192


View attachment 821191

This is an interesting read

Mikhail Gorbachev: I am against all walls

The first and last president of the Soviet Union spoke with RBTH about the past and how it should inform the present.

www.rbth.com

Mikhail Gorbachev: I am against all walls​

When asked by the interviewer form "Russian beyond the Headline" (The same company who own RT own RBTH)

RBTH: One of the key issues that has arisen in connection with the events in Ukraine is NATO expansion into the East. Do you get the feeling that your Western partners lied to you when they were developing their future plans in Eastern Europe? Why didn’t you insist that the promises made to you – particularly U.S. Secretary of State James Baker’s promise that NATO would not expand into the East – be legally encoded? I will quote Baker: “NATO will not move one inch further east.”

This is what Mikhail Gorbachev, the man who signed the 1991 agreement

M.G.: The topic of “NATO expansion” was not discussed at all, and it wasn’t brought up in those years. I say this with full responsibility. Not a singe Eastern European country raised the issue, not even after the Warsaw Pact ceased to exist in 1991. Western leaders didn’t bring it up, either. Another issue we brought up was discussed: making sure that NATO’s military structures would not advance and that additional armed forces from the alliance would not be deployed on the territory of the then-GDR after German reunification. Baker’s statement, mentioned in your question, was made in that context. Kohl and [German Vice Chancellor Hans-Dietrich] Genscher talked about it.
Everything that could have been and needed to be done to solidify that political obligation was done. And fulfilled. The agreement on a final settlement with Germany said that no new military structures would be created in the eastern part of the country; no additional troops would be deployed; no weapons of mass destruction would be placed there. It has been observed all these years. So don’t portray Gorbachev and the then-Soviet authorities as naïve people who were wrapped around the West’s finger. If there was naïveté, it was later, when the issue arose. Russia at first did not object.

​

​

World War III?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1500296791178285059

https://twitter.com/x/status/1500108117274673154

Think it meant they transfer those article to Ukraine. Not for Poland to use them on Russia....

This is no different than what the West has done already

 

[Microsoft]

Mariupol is in contest, it's not under Russian control. And should have been under control on day 1 due to its proximity.

Also, Russian aggression route is actually quite slow, because their battleplan as Lukashenko leaked some days ago. Was to cut off Southern Ukraine and annex Eastern Ukraine along the line between Mariupol to Dnipro to Kyiv along the Dnieper River. To do that, Russia would need to take Kyiv, Dnipro, Mariupol and Odessa, none of them felt.

And the Russian advance is on 11 days, it already committed all tactic reserve, and troop rotation is coming in at 28 days limit by then Russia would need to put in Strategic Reserve, which I don't know if they have any. And then couple to the fact that 11 days in and none of the major city felt to Russia, this time table is not going to be Russian fan.

I will not say Ukrainian is winning, but Russian is not winning either.

Mariupol is under Russian control according to multiple (including Western) sources. Lukashenko's "leak" could be a red-herring for all we know. It would be silly to believe that a world leader would leak such critical information in that fashion in a life or death situation for his country.

10 days or 11 days depends on when you consider the start and it could also be time zone difference since you are in Australia. Also Kherson is considered a major city and Odessa will likely be next to fall into Russian hands as the fighting in the southern region has been going well for Russians. Russians have called in forces even from the Eastern part of Russia so they have more forces on the way.

My claim is not that Russia is winning. I'm trying to understand where the narrative of Ukraine winning comes from.

 

[Elias MC]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1500316774197346308

https://twitter.com/x/status/1500317712500801538

 

[Englishman]

Was just about to post this ACTUAL WAR footage lost in a swamp of dubious tweets. More of this is needed. Fascinating watch.

@RescueRanger
@jhungary
@gambit

Would appreciate your thoughts on this engagement gentlemen. Seems genuine.

 

[Hassan Al-Somal]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1500164831428685828

 

[jhungary]

Mariupol is under Russian control according to multiple (including Western) sources. Lukashenko's "leak" could be a red-herring for all we know. It would be silly to believe that a world leader would leak such critical information in that fashion in a life or death situation for his country.

10 days or 11 days depends on when you consider the start and it could also be time zone difference since you are in Australia. Also Kherson is considered a major city and Odessa will likely be next to fall into Russian hands as the fighting in the southern region has been going well for Russians. Russians have called in forces even from the Eastern part of Russia so they have more forces on the way.

My claim is not that Russia is winning. I'm trying to understand where the narrative of Ukraine winning comes from.

None of the big news organisation (non biased one not like Fox or MSNBC) said Mariupol has felt, The Ukrainian internal ministry has not said Mariupol had failed. While I still cannot connect to people I know in Ukraine to verify whether or not Mariupol had felt, I would say this is not yet fallen.

It take Russian force 9 days to take Kherson, and Odessa is about 5 times as big (900,000 resident vs 200,000 resident), it would probably be next month if and when Odessa fall.

The Ukrainian "winning" is coming from the lack of progress on the Russia side, a fact reflected very clearly on the losing of 3 Russian general on the front line. General don't usually tour the frontline unless there is a problem of the offensive, and the fact that the 3 was killed means stuff is not at all going in the Russian direction.

On the other hand @tower9 said, this is a no sum game for the Russia, even if Russia did manage to conquer Ukraine, ignoring the fact that there are going to be a long and unwieldly insurgency, let's set that aside for a moment, it actually make Russian situation more dire instead of better, NATO is going to step up, Russia lost a chunk of economy, possibly cannot be recover from (Depends on how deep the Chinese want to go to help them) and then they would most likely ended up with MORE NATO border instead of less. I think on a strategic level, Russia already had lost, it's just how they salvage the situation in term of scoring a tactical victory is what left to be discovered.

 

[Microsoft]

Racist Ukranians:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1500153632469233664

 

[Wergeland 2.0]

The hostile acts between the blocks are getting more intense day by day.

Soon both USA and Russia will have to decide if its worth or not, to declare a full spectrum warfare for the sake of Ukraine.

 

[Hassan Al-Somal]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1500139357658832897

 

[tower9]

None of the big news organisation (non biased one not like Fox or MSNBC) said Mariupol has felt, The Ukrainian internal ministry has not said Mariupol had failed. While I still cannot connect to people I know in Ukraine to verify whether or not Mariupol had felt, I would say this is not yet fallen.

It take Russian force 9 days to take Kherson, and Odessa is about 5 times as big (900,000 resident vs 200,000 resident), it would probably be next month if and when Odessa fall.

The Ukrainian "winning" is coming from the lack of progress on the Russia side, a fact reflected very clearly on the losing of 3 Russian general on the front line. General don't usually tour the frontline unless there is a problem of the offensive, and the fact that the 3 was killed means stuff is not at all going in the Russian direction.

On the other hand @tower9 said, this is a no sum game for the Russia, even if Russia did manage to conquer Ukraine, ignoring the fact that there are going to be a long and unwieldly insurgency, let's set that aside for a moment, it actually make Russian situation more dire instead of better, NATO is going to step up, Russia lost a chunk of economy, possibly cannot be recover from (Depends on how deep the Chinese want to go to help them) and then they would most likely ended up with MORE NATO border instead of less. I think on a strategic level, Russia already had lost, it's just how they salvage the situation in term of scoring a tactical victory is what left to be discovered.

At this point, this talk about what ground was captured or not is pointless. Russia is many times more powerful than Ukraine, of course, it will win the war. However, I just can't see how the world after this war would be more advantageous for Russia. I just don't see it. Does Putin have some ace up his sleeve that we don't know about or has he really gone nuts?