MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
War on Terrorism (Politics)
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 95, 96, 97 ... 106, 107, 108  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

For heaven's sake it's a football commentator, he has taken the number of Ukrainians in the city, assumed there were zero before the war started, ie ignoring all previous historical ties between Ukraine and Poland and the existing Ukrainian population in the city, and used it to make a point about refugees. There were over 100,000 Ukrainians already in Wroclaw, so this is women and children joining distant relatives to be safe and get support as their men folk/providers are fighting a war.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

I am abashed.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Are you expecting more or less Ukrainians in Poland, Wiley, when Ukraine joins the EU and there is free movement between the two countries? (Assume for the purposes of this exercise that Poland is still in the EU when this happens.)
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Don't know, I would imagine that if Ukraine joins EU, then other nations will be given the normal 5 year opt outs from this "Freedom", which is only for workers anyway. I wouldn't have thought Poland would opt out, they need to replace workers who left Poland for other EU nations.

Ukrainian men, on the other hand, cannot currently leave Ukraine as they are expected to fight, so I am just not sure you will get the sort of exodus you did when Poland joined the EU because even if the war is ended, or stalled, menfolk will be expected to either stay in the army or support Ukrainian Economic Regeneration. I would not expect Ukraine to be able to enact many European-style freedoms as you can't in a war situation?

It is guesswork.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Reporting on the Ukraine War has now settled down, as it does in all lengthy crises, to coverage of 'the human suffering'. This is generally the least relevant but most accessible aspect of events that have to be given screen time because of their overall importance, but when not much is currently going on. Even so, some basic journalistic standards should be observed.

To stand among ruins in Kyiv and announce to camera that 'Russia launched thirty-five drones on the capital, all were intercepted, nobody was hurt but falling masonry from shot down drones is affecting people's livelihood' is borderline.
Send private message
Boreades


In: finity and beyond
View user's profile
Reply with quote

The reporter with the "Russia launched thirty-five drones on the capital, all were intercepted" report counts that as a big success. Every instance of which is added to the list of "We Are Winning - Because Russia Isn't Advancing" reports.

You have to dig deep into the small print, or go elsewhere, to notice that the Russians are launching drones with a unit cost in the order of £1000's, and triggering the Ukraine to intercept them with the NATO-issued interceptors. With a unit cost of c.£1 million+ each. Which is an economically assymetric warfare. Not that we're counting the cost(?).

Only slowly and grudgingly does NATO and MSM report that, just perhaps, every "tactical win" for Ukraine is actually a strategic win for Russia. As Ukraine and NATO is sucked (and suckered) deeper and deeper into a slow grinding and brutal war of attrition. Despite all the promises made (which we hear far less of these days), the promised wunderweapons never turned up fast enough in sufficient volumes, and Ukraine is still burning their way through them faster than we can replenish.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

I keep making these (pathetically obvious) points over on Medium only to be met with a tsunami of denunciations. Nobody, but nobody, ever makes technical evaluations. As long as Saint Ukraine is inching towards its 1991 borders all's right with the world. (Which can go to hell in a handcart for all they care.)
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

The Ukrainians are probably shooting down the drones (not the Cruise missiles) with anti aircraft guns, so once you have the Gepards (Germany has just provided over 40) it's really the cost of the ammunition. It's about $600.00 a round. It really depends on the number of guns and rounds you use, it's a slow moving loud target so not that difficult, but there is damage when the debris falls out the sky. Given that Ukraine is now also using drones against Moscow, as well as lots of other military targets, the costs of offence/defence of drone swarms is likely to be similar on both sides. Both sides are using drones, both need to defend against them.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Yes, this is my impression though I have my doubts that artillery against any flying object ever achieves the near 100% success that appears to be the case. I've never heard of it doing so before. I am slightly puzzled why shot down drones would damage Kyiv, surely they would be intercepted miles away. On the other hand, falling friendly AAA is a known hazard. As with most novel war weapons both sides soon settle down to handling one another's with relative ease.

The truth is -- and I have been banging on about this since 1940 -- any explosive devices aimed at built-up areas (short of firestorms) does little real damage. Hysteria etc, yes. Propaganda etc, yes. Harm to the war effort etc, no.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:
Yes, this is my impression though I have my doubts that artillery against any flying object ever achieves the near 100% success that appears to be the case.


The attacks on Sevastopal naval base and the recapture of the oil and drilling rigs in the Black Sea, previously lost by Ukraine in 2014, show that Russia still does not have a fully funtioning air defence sytem that can pick up threats and fully cover Crimea/Black Sea area. Some Ukrainian missiles and drones will get through unless Russia can improve these defences. The Ukrainians will hit the Kerch bridge again.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

The Ukrainians will hit the Kerch bridge again.

But they should not. Previous attacks have not done much logistical harm but it is so visible it allows the Russians to take reprisals out of all proportion and without too much external criticism. (Officially, the ending of the grain deal is because of the last one..) Of course the bridge will be a permanently vulnerable choke point after the war so long as Ukraine has the good sense to leave the Russians in Crimea. It will make for a spectacular explosion if the Russkies are forced to leave.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

It seems to Wiley that the Russians have not the capability to defend the Kerch Bridge so they must hold the alternate "land bridge" to Crimea through the Zaporozhye Region. If they can't, then it's over. The Russians will be escalating or leaving.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

No, no. There's nothing militarily in Crimea that needs constant replenishment, except the civilian economy and that never counts. You just ferry stuff over at various points as both the Germans and the Russians had to do periodically in WWII.

The situation after the war... now that is different.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Poland has just purchased $ 23.8 Billion worth of weapons from the US. It's basically all the gear that has worked well for Ukraine. That's about a month after they spent $ 12 Billion, again on all the helicopter stuff that is working well in Ukraine. I guess it makes a change for Poland, ie their recent buying tanks from South Korea......

The US is doing very well, thank you very much, by gifting arms to Ukraine to be showcased. Everybody in Eastern Europe wants their Mobile Rocket Launchers and Patriot air defence systems now.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Meanwhile Herr Putin is in the Far East negotiating to buy 1940's munitions from Kim Jong Un.
Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 95, 96, 97 ... 106, 107, 108  Next

Jump to:  
Page 96 of 108

MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group