The occupied territories are evacuating its civilians to Russia. That is a very interesting one quite frankly. What are they planning? Best case scenario for Putin would be if he can lure Ukranian army into Donetsk and Lugansk. Perhaps he's got private battalions in Ukraine on payroll. Would be hard to call it false flag operation if Ukranian army literally invades the self proclaimed republics.
Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar
- Thread starter areksnumbr1sxylady
- Start date
- Status
Man of Honour
It feels more likely that something's going to happen now; it felt earlier in the week like the Russians would pull back but the last day or so seems to be an effort to escalate
I think they need something more substantial. Victory Cake would be to get Zelenskiy to declare another anti-terrorists operation and move into DNR and LNR.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 12,453
With Vlad personally overseeing his forces "training" surely he attacks in the next 24hours ?
We estimate the probability of the Russian invasion of Ukraine as low, - Reznikov
The Ukrainian side currently estimates the probability of a full-scale invasion by Russia as low.
The Minister of Defense Alexey Reznikov declared it today during an hour of questions to the government, informs Censor.NET.
"Different dates and different scenarios can be announced now. Ukraine is ready for all these scenarios. We do not underestimate the threat. But we still estimate the probability of large-scale escalation as low in relation to the invasion of Ukraine as a whole," he said. Source: https://censor.net/ua/n3317029
The Ukrainian side currently estimates the probability of a full-scale invasion by Russia as low.
The Minister of Defense Alexey Reznikov declared it today during an hour of questions to the government, informs Censor.NET.
"Different dates and different scenarios can be announced now. Ukraine is ready for all these scenarios. We do not underestimate the threat. But we still estimate the probability of large-scale escalation as low in relation to the invasion of Ukraine as a whole," he said. Source: https://censor.net/ua/n3317029
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 12,453
Is this the start ?
Soldato
Possibly to clear the way for military invasion with minimal civilian collateral? I'd imagine that there would be a lag time between this and any actual movement of forces to give them time to get out, if this is what they plan to do.
All they are going to achieve is to cement Ukraines inability to join NATO as they would always have occupied territory, which seems to be their aim.
For which military's? Ukranian? Why would Russia invade its puppet controlled territory that would cause casualties?
Caporegime
It's nice that there's a warning for anyone there....
I still do not see why Russia would need to invade further. What has changed since 2014? The only thing I can think of is Ukraine will start domestically producing Turkish drones. So their capabilities will increase significantly. We saw just how effective they were in Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and Norther Syria.
If Russia feels that those drones will allow Ukrainian forces to reclaim Donbas then it would make sense to pre-emtively do something but from my perspective taking Kyiv is not feasible, they would not be able to occupy hostile populace for long so any supposed constitutional changes will not be long term.
Other option is to enlarge occupying territory but that would not prevent eventual retaking of Donbas by Ukraine.
I can't quite figure out why the invasion is plausible, hence still think this is a bluff to force dialogue...even though I do not think this dialogue will go anywhere, US/NATO has nothing to gain in these negotiations, so there is no reason for NATO to yield strategic advantage to Russia.
If Russia feels that those drones will allow Ukrainian forces to reclaim Donbas then it would make sense to pre-emtively do something but from my perspective taking Kyiv is not feasible, they would not be able to occupy hostile populace for long so any supposed constitutional changes will not be long term.
Other option is to enlarge occupying territory but that would not prevent eventual retaking of Donbas by Ukraine.
I can't quite figure out why the invasion is plausible, hence still think this is a bluff to force dialogue...even though I do not think this dialogue will go anywhere, US/NATO has nothing to gain in these negotiations, so there is no reason for NATO to yield strategic advantage to Russia.
Caporegime
Internal politics, approval ratings, wanting to keep power, gas price is high so might be less consequence, Europe / US relations was looking disjointed, war is a great distractor from other problems.
Anyone else thinks its fishy that the shell/rocket took out stukko or siding whatever but did not burst the window? Very strange.
I thought it looks a bit fishy, but I'm no expert. It looks to me like someone drove a tank barrel trough a wall. Wouldn't a shell have caused an explosion after penetrating the wall?
Caporegime
There are so many variables with that, it's impossible to say.
Anyone else thinks its fishy that the shell/rocket took out stukko or siding whatever but did not burst the window? Very strange.
Not really. Arty shells have different types but that damage is inline with cheap shell damage given the wall has about 3 layers of brick. Remember most arty shells you could pick up so they're not like a aircraft bomb. It could be the layers of brick that protected the windows.. but I see your point you'd expect a crack or two.
Also for 'separatists' to shell something I suspect they'd use small calibre artillery such as the truck drawn howitzers. The only issue is that it's difficult to tell who owned the shell because both Ukraine and Russia-backed rebels use the same systems.
Now if that was a large Russian artillery piece, then I suspect a little more than the windows would be broken.
If it was smaller it may even have been a mortar. Only other option is a solid inactive tank shell - I'd have expected more internal penetration damage for AP and more more visible burn/scarring for high explosive. From what I've seen of tank/arty shells and rendered walls, the render soaks the pitting and drops off - almost like armour, leaving the hole behind. If there's nothing to reflect the blast wave back to the windows then it may have spread out away from them. There's no detention within to blast the windows out. Anyone close to that edge of building outside would have been shredded and blasted apart.
Although the inside looks very clean with a lack of dust..
Last edited:
Then why is nato helping a non member ukraine? Waste of manpower and money?
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 12,453
https://www.news.com.au/world/europ...k/news-story/7f1497cecd15bba9d759690dd5e759a1
Better pictures, doesn't look like an explosive round although it's odd because it's supposed shelling from mortar if you look at the video and that wall shot doesn't look like the correct trajectory for a mortar shell, I can understand no explosion because it could have been a dud round but the trajectory don't make sense
Better pictures, doesn't look like an explosive round although it's odd because it's supposed shelling from mortar if you look at the video and that wall shot doesn't look like the correct trajectory for a mortar shell, I can understand no explosion because it could have been a dud round but the trajectory don't make sense
It's not really about "need" per se, Putin and chums still have an old mentality re: spheres of influence and Ukraine is in Russia's sphere of influence as far as he's concerned, Ukraine getting closer to the West isn't something he's a fan of, the guy is still bitter about 1989, the fall of the Berlin Wall and the subsequent downfall of the USSR.
In practical terms, Crimea has a water issue thanks to Ukraine shutting off the canal so I suspect IF there was an invasion then getting a land bridge to Crimea, solving that water issue and perhaps expanding the two Eastern rebel-held areas would be conservative goals.
As we've seen with Georgia invading and causing damage then later pulling back is something Russia is happy to do, he invaded and took several Georgian cities before later withdrawing in 2008. In this case, there was recently allegedly a plan to install a puppet regime in Kyiv, perhaps there still is.
He certainly has enough troops to keep open the option of invading most of the country including taking Kyiv if he wants to, obviously holding onto the country post-invasion is another matter entirely but I presume that (aside from perhaps forcing regime change) he probably doesn't intend to.
- Status