Russian invasion of Ukraine

[jagfox]

 

[TxRover]

25 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

a couple of threads about the Crimea Bridge attack - first one makes the case for the attack being a tactical ballistic missile, the second a truck bomb.

 

 

Nothing on the possible naval drone, eh?

So the three day backup of trucks is about 200 miles from the frontlines, eh? If Ukraine does actually have some ATACMS now, that range is 190 miles…sounds like those Russians that are falling back toward Kherson might just need to hold the line, or else.

[jagfox]

SPIRITUAL MOBILISATION!

 

[jagfox]

 

[jagfox]

 

[deegee]

We really do seem to be creeping to an all-on WW3, with no pretence of NATO involvement. If US/ NATO go in properly, Russia will be obliterated in days.

[welshbairn]

1 hour ago, deegee said:

We really do seem to be creeping to an all-on WW3, with no pretence of NATO involvement. If US/ NATO go in properly, Russia will be obliterated in days.

Easy to say, but much harder to do. Map of Ukraine superimposed in grey on Russia to give a clue about the task. Russians wouldn't meekly accept new rulers, as we found Afghanis and Iraqis didn't.

 

[DiegoDiego]

Easy to say, but much harder to do. Map of Ukraine superimposed in grey on Russia to give a clue about the task. Russians wouldn't meekly accept new rulers, as we found Afghanis and Iraqis didn't.
 

Would NATO be installing a puppet regime though? Is the main target of the "obliteration of Russia" idea not simply to give them the mother of all smackdowns so whoever they choose afterwards would never consider something like the Ukraine invasion?

Also, the projection of that map makes Russia seem far larger than it is, it's also largely empty, even the area covered by the grey Ukraine is not much more populous than Scotland despite containing the biggest city in Siberia.

[welshbairn]

Only 4 countries back Russia in their annexation of the 4 Ukrainian districts at the UN; North Korea, Syria, Nicaragua and Belarus.

[TxRover]

3 hours ago, welshbairn said:

Easy to say, but much harder to do. Map of Ukraine superimposed in grey on Russia to give a clue about the task. Russians wouldn't meekly accept new rulers, as we found Afghanis and Iraqis didn't.

 

Of course, Russia is much less densely populated. Russia has about 143m population, while Ukraine is about 44m. The upper portion of Russia on this map is unduly enlarged due to the Mercator projection, but landwise it is indeed massively larger. Honestly, if the central Russian government is smacked down, we’ll have a number of independent states pop up, several with nukes…fun, fun.

[Stellaboz]

3 hours ago, welshbairn said:

Only 4 countries back Russia in their annexation of the 4 Ukrainian districts at the UN; North Korea, Syria, Nicaragua and Belarus.

Hope we get Nicaragua at the next World Cup. b*****ds!

[LongTimeLurker]

They are more into baseball so unlikely.

[The DA]

2 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said:

They are more into baseball so unlikely.

And we are more into losing, so doubly unlikely.

[Hillonearth]

4 hours ago, welshbairn said:

Only 4 countries back Russia in their annexation of the 4 Ukrainian districts at the UN; North Korea, Syria, Nicaragua and Belarus.

Their Eritrean sock puppets not voting for them must be a sign the baw's up on the slates.

[hk blues]

41 minutes ago, The DA said:

And we are more into losing, so doubly unlikely.

And in Central America so triply unlikely

[jagfox]

 

[vikingTON]

23 hours ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

 

 

If I wasn't making myself clear I meant should other action be taken if pursuing Russian war crimes to The Hague is a no go?

You've said yourself here that the current sanctions are ineffective - are you saying that there are other sanctions that could be imposed (in addition to diplomacy) or is diplomacy alone the best option?

 

Of course there are other sanctions. Russian financial institutions haven't been removed from SWIFT to name just one sanction, that would have a material impact. What's also true about all sanctions is that a) they have impacts both ways and b) they're not a magic bullet that's going to force Russia to roll over. 

If you want to target war crimes by the Russian state though, that is the only realistic option you can choose. Squealing nonsense about Putin being indicted achieves nothing and only convinces the regime to entrench itself further. Geopolitics by Twitter likes is not a credible approach. 

[vikingTON]

22 hours ago, Melanius Mullarkay said:

Define extensive.

Extensive enough to be awarded a PhD under examination is the most straightforward definition. Because if your research is not deemed to be extensive enough, it can be dunted down to a Masters award instead. 

20 hours ago, renton said:

So, is this a one off deal or an ongoing thing? Like, if you do your extensive and novel research once does that get you an equity card for life? Or do you have to have some kind of semi regular output, and if so on what cadence? 

So long as the work is extensive and novel research then the person who completed it remains a historian. They will be cited as such by others in their discipline as a historian, and it contributes to the historiography of their topic for decades if not more (depending on quality and impact). 

You can create an extra distinction for an 'active' historian who has that semi-regular, ongoing research output as well, but that's about it. 

[jagfox]

 

[ICTChris]

 

Fucking hell. Assume more stuff like this will happen when more of the mobilised enter the fight.