Russia's War Against Ukraine

[MengJiao]

I think that the effects of massive EMP blasts are going to be a lot less effective today then they would have 10 or 20 years ago.

  The masses of unsheilded transitors are very vulnerable.  I'd say we are much more vulnerable now to EMP, but that's just a guess.

   Meanwhile the Russians are offering a look at their terms:

Russia has told Ukraine it is ready to halt military operations "in a moment" if Kyiv meets a list of conditions, the Kremlin spokesman said on Monday.

Dmitry Peskov said Moscow was demanding that Ukraine cease military action, change its constitution to enshrine neutrality, acknowledge Crimea as Russian territory, and recognise the separatist republics of Donetsk and Lugansk as independent states.

It was the most explicit Russian statement so far of the terms it wants to impose on Ukraine to halt what it calls its "special military operation", now in its 12th day.

Peskov told Reuters in a telephone interview that Ukraine was aware of the conditions. "And they were told that all this can be stopped in a moment."

There was no immediate reaction from the Ukrainian side.

Russia has attacked Ukraine from the north, east and south, pounding cities including Kyiv, Kharkiv and the port of Mariupol. The invasion launched on Feb. 24, has caused the worst refugee crisis in Europe since World War Two, provoked outrage across the world, and led to heavy sanctions on Moscow.

But the Kremlin spokesman insisted Russia was not seeking to make any further territorial claims on Ukraine and said it was "not true" that it was demanding Kyiv be handed over.

"We really are finishing the demilitarisation of Ukraine. We will finish it. But the main thing is that Ukraine ceases its military action. They should stop their military action and then no one will shoot," he said.

  So if Ukraine surrenders, they get to surrender and hope for the best.  However, the Russian record suggests they are not at all trustworthy.  Even in the Russo-Georgian war of 2008, most
Georgian military equipment was destroyed AFTER THE CEASEFIRE to "demiliarize" Georgia.  So, really, no point in surrendering or even getting a ceasefire since the Russians are going to "Demiliarize" you anyway even if you give them what they supposedly want.

[GDS_Starfury]

heres a thread with some very good maps and information:

https://twitter.com/JominiW/status/1500686525436149761/photo/1

[solops]

maybe on a good day have 50% work.

That's still nearly 3000.

with 3000 warheads, not launch vehicles, that then gets spread out into the russian triad.
with that most are still going to be ssbns.  Im willing to discount russian bombers doing fuck all.
so now were down to roughly 2500.  russia has 400 ICBM with 3 nukes each.  thats half of what they can deliver globally. 
Im not trying minimize the absolute suck of it all but I am looking at what the actual throw weight can realistically be.
these are the mental exercises I can afford myself because I have no kids.

Let's not forget about the very real possibility of an emp blast over the continental United States. It's estimated that a single warhead, depending on yield, could take down most of our electronics, communications and power grids, effecting hundreds of millions, causing $1 to $2 trillion in damages and taking between 4 and 10 years to recover. Thus, our country could virtually be destroyed without directly killing a single soul. For the most part, we're completely defenseless to such an attack.

Years ago I read a Scientific American article that said eleven warheads, properly spaced, would blanket the continental USA. It discussed hardening and the use of elements other than silicon for chips that were more resistant to EMP. Long time ago, in the 90s. Maybe things changed.

[Jarhead0331]

maybe on a good day have 50% work.

That's still nearly 3000.

with 3000 warheads, not launch vehicles, that then gets spread out into the russian triad.
with that most are still going to be ssbns.  Im willing to discount russian bombers doing fuck all.
so now were down to roughly 2500.  russia has 400 ICBM with 3 nukes each.  thats half of what they can deliver globally. 
Im not trying minimize the absolute suck of it all but I am looking at what the actual throw weight can realistically be.
these are the mental exercises I can afford myself because I have no kids.

Let's not forget about the very real possibility of an emp blast over the continental United States. It's estimated that a single warhead, depending on yield, could take down most of our electronics, communications and power grids, effecting hundreds of millions, causing $1 to $2 trillion in damages and taking between 4 and 10 years to recover. Thus, our country could virtually be destroyed without directly killing a single soul. For the most part, we're completely defenseless to such an attack.

Years ago I read a Scientific American article that said eleven warheads, properly spaced, would blanket the continental USA. It discussed hardening and the use of elements other than silicon for chips that were more resistant to EMP. Long time ago, in the 90s. Maybe things changed.

As far as I know, not much has changed and for the most part, we are very exposed.

With respect to Moscow's recent demands per Meng's post, I think Ukraine should agree to neutrality and perhaps recognize Donbas independence, particularly if that is what the majority of the residents there desire. However, Crimea is a much more difficult proposition. it should really be returned to Ukraine, but I do not seer that happening, so perhaps they agree to status quo.

I see this overall as a positive development.

[ArizonaTank]

I think that the effects of massive EMP blasts are going to be a lot less effective today then they would have 10 or 20 years ago.

I don't know about that...  We are mostly electronic currency these days. I am wondering if just about every civilian vehicle built in the last 5 years may not even start after an EMP blast. What's the effect of EMP on data storage? SSDs and HDs?  I really don't know. Asking for a friend.

[Pete Dero]

Russia has told Ukraine it is ready to halt military operations "in a moment" if Kyiv meets a list of conditions, the Kremlin spokesman said on Monday.

Dmitry Peskov said Moscow was demanding that Ukraine cease military action, change its constitution to enshrine neutrality, acknowledge Crimea as Russian territory, and recognise the separatist republics of Donetsk and Lugansk as independent states.

It was the most explicit Russian statement so far of the terms it wants to impose on Ukraine to halt what it calls its "special military operation", now in its 12th day.

Peskov told Reuters in a telephone interview that Ukraine was aware of the conditions. "And they were told that all this can be stopped in a moment."

There was no immediate reaction from the Ukrainian side.

Russia has attacked Ukraine from the north, east and south, pounding cities including Kyiv, Kharkiv and the port of Mariupol. The invasion launched on Feb. 24, has caused the worst refugee crisis in Europe since World War Two, provoked outrage across the world, and led to heavy sanctions on Moscow.

But the Kremlin spokesman insisted Russia was not seeking to make any further territorial claims on Ukraine and said it was "not true" that it was demanding Kyiv be handed over.

"We really are finishing the demilitarisation of Ukraine. We will finish it. But the main thing is that Ukraine ceases its military action. They should stop their military action and then no one will shoot," he said.

They forgot to ask for denazification but I guess it is hard to keep up with your own lies.

[GDS_Starfury]

Im still not to worried about an EMP attack.  mainly because I dont see it happening by itself but as the opening of a massive first strike in which case were truly fucked already.

[GDS_Starfury]

and a slight sidetrack to an emp i just dug up
https://www.quora.com/How-long-can-the-United-States-survive-after-being-hit-with-an-EMP-weapon

[Pete Dero]

Im still not to worried about an EMP attack.  mainly because I dont see it happening by itself but as the opening of a massive first strike in which case were truly fucked already.

In the movie Threads (1984) there is an EMP attack (nuclear detonation in the air) to disable all communications followed by nuclear strikes on the ground.  I don't know if that was based on Soviet doctrine then in use.


Today Russia's defense ministry announced it would be opening supposedly safe "corridors" from several Ukrainian cities, including the capital Kyiv, that only lead to Russian or Belarusian territory. The cynical plan was immediately called out by Ukraine and its western allies. A spokesperson for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky condemned the plans as "completely immoral" and accused Russia of attempting to "use people's suffering to create a television picture." U.K. government minister James Cleverly told BBC News that the corridor announce was "cynical beyond belief." He added: "Providing evacuation into the arms of the country that is currently destroying yours is a nonsense."

The director of the International Committee of the Red Cross told the BBC  that even if the ceasefire is honored, the way out is extremely dangerous. Some of his staff were trying to leave town along a path designated safe only to find it had been laced with land mines.

[ComradeP]

Looking at footage of the fighting in and east of Kherson, it seems the Russians captured the Dnieper bridges intact. That surprised me, the Ukrainians should've had plenty of time to drop them in the river. Maybe there were political considerations involved.

Looking at the maps on the Twitter feed Starfury linked to, the long term prospects of the Ukrainian forces don't seem too good, with the bulk of the mobile forces in a position where they can't influence fighting west of the Dnieper. It remains to be seen if Western supplies are actually reaching the frontline east of the Dnieper.

Unless the Ukrainians established large ammo dumps and fuel depots in the major cities currently (being) encircled, the defenders won't be able to keep up the current resistance. A strategic downside to the Ukrainian strategy of defending cities is that more and more forces will become holed up in locations from where they can't influence fighting in other sectors. The ability to launch raids above nuisance level would depend on fuel supplies as well as repair facilities.

It also makes civilian buildings legitimate targets in cases where the Ukrainian army or paramilitary forces attack from them. In terms of loss of human life, there's a big downside to fighting in urban areas.

[MengJiao]

maybe on a good day have 50% work.

That's still nearly 3000.

with 3000 warheads, not launch vehicles, that then gets spread out into the russian triad.
with that most are still going to be ssbns.  Im willing to discount russian bombers doing fuck all.
so now were down to roughly 2500.  russia has 400 ICBM with 3 nukes each.  thats half of what they can deliver globally. 
Im not trying minimize the absolute suck of it all but I am looking at what the actual throw weight can realistically be.
these are the mental exercises I can afford myself because I have no kids.

Let's not forget about the very real possibility of an emp blast over the continental United States. It's estimated that a single warhead, depending on yield, could take down most of our electronics, communications and power grids, effecting hundreds of millions, causing $1 to $2 trillion in damages and taking between 4 and 10 years to recover. Thus, our country could virtually be destroyed without directly killing a single soul. For the most part, we're completely defenseless to such an attack.

Years ago I read a Scientific American article that said eleven warheads, properly spaced, would blanket the continental USA. It discussed hardening and the use of elements other than silicon for chips that were more resistant to EMP. Long time ago, in the 90s. Maybe things changed.

As far as I know, not much has changed and for the most part, we are very exposed.

With respect to Moscow's recent demands per Meng's post, I think Ukraine should agree to neutrality and perhaps recognize Donbas independence, particularly if that is what the majority of the residents there desire. However, Crimea is a much more difficult proposition. it should really be returned to Ukraine, but I do not seer that happening, so perhaps they agree to status quo.

I see this overall as a positive development.

  The problem is the "demilitarization"...In the case of Georgia in 2008, despite a ceasefire, the Russians "demiliarized" Georgia by continuing the war.  I'm sure at this point Ukraine would love to be
neutral, but even if they completely surrendered in effect the war would continue until the Russians destroyed anything they felt like destroying.  It's not Putin who doesn't have an "out"...its the Ukrainians...surrrendering or not gets the same result: the Russians destroy everything in Ukraine that they think needs to be destroyed.  This might take them years in either case so I don't see how
the Ukraine can surrender or be neutral without some international supervision of the Russian withdrawal which the Russians will not agree to.  It's kind of like the Italians surrendering to the Germans on Rhodes: the Italians surrendered and the Germans still killed anyone they felt like killing so it would have been better for the Italians to have fought.  Ukraine is in the same bind: if they surrender they still get destroyed.

[solops]

If there is a negotiated peace, it will not matter. Putin will be back in a year or five years. He won't quit. And Ukraine will not be  the "last territorial demand." We have seen this show before. I hope this re-make has a better ending and is not just a repeat.

[MengJiao]

If there is a negotiated peace, it will not matter. Putin will be back in a year or five years. He won't quit. And Ukraine will not be  the "last territorial demand." We have seen this show before. I hope this re-make has a better ending and is not just a repeat.

  I suspect the situation is worse than that.  Putin won't have to be back -- he just won't leave until Ukraine is "demilitarized"...the "negotiated" deal (and I'm sure the Ukrainians know this) goes:
1) there's some kind of ceasefire  2) The Russians don't leave 3) and the Russians go on with "demilitarizing"...I guess the tricky part (though I don't know who would fall for this) is that if the
Russians say the Ukrainains can stop (the war or whatever) just by "stopping" (ie surrendering) then supposedly the ( war or whatever) is the Ukrainians' "fault"...right?  They could stop it all
by surrendering any time (and allowing the Russians to "demilitarize").  Of course the Russians could either not have invaded or just leave but I guess that's not going to happen.  So the Ukrainians
effectively can't surrender even if they surrender.

[Gusington]

Similar to how a terrorist says to a hostage 'you can make this all go away by just giving us what we want.'

[Sir Slash]

Right. Kind of like when I was a kid my older brother used to take my hands and hit me in the face with them and say, "Stop hitting yourself. Why are you hitting yourself"?  >:( 

I can foresee one way America and possibly Europe could become directly involved in this war. The price of gas here has hit $4 a-gallon and will continue to rise. At some point this will result in economic slow-down, or out right Recession, and continued inflation. And since all of this is being blamed on Putin and the war, There will be growing demands for leaders around the world to, 'Do Something' about it, especially in an election year here in the U.S.

This will be made worse when the food Ukraine usually produces can't get to market. Wide-spread hunger and massive Social Unrest will call for a more direct confrontation and maybe even violence to stop Putin's War. Thus leaders may listen to the Hawks in their respective nations and appease their many unhappy voters, and then it becomes, 'Ultimatum Time'. A real shooting war could only be one step away. 

My 2 cents. And I hope I'm very wrong.