Current Affairs Ukraine

[Kharkiv]

today the Armed Forces of Ukraine counterattack and liberate the settlements of the Kharkiv region - Bazaliyivka, Lebiazhe, part of Kutuzovka, in the area of Malaya Rogan have moved east in the direction of Izyum

 

[Glasshalffull]

Maybe this is a pedantic point, and possibly outright wrong, but I'm not sure that NATO has actually done anything at all in this war. Various countries who are NATO members have done stuff, probably in coordination, but not necessarily NATO, itself. Conceivably, countries outside NATO have also helped out Ukraine. Putin is probably not concerned with such precision, but I just thought it worth making the point.

 

[devogue]

Maybe this is a pedantic point, and possibly outright wrong, but I'm not sure that NATO has actually done anything at all in this war. Various countries who are NATO members have done stuff, probably in coordination, but not necessarily NATO, itself. Conceivably, countries outside NATO have also helped out Ukraine. Putin is probably not concerned with such precision, but I just thought it worth making the point.

NATO has been sending equipment to Ukraine. You can probably find NATO transport planes on flight tracker right now heading towards Poland to drop stuff off to be carried over the border.

 

[Glasshalffull]

NATO has been sending equipment to Ukraine. You can probably find NATO transport planes on flight tracker right now heading towards Poland to drop stuff off to be carried over the border.

Do they have 'NATO' on the side, though?

 

[PhilM]

Maybe this is a pedantic point, and possibly outright wrong, but I'm not sure that NATO has actually done anything at all in this war. Various countries who are NATO members have done stuff, probably in coordination, but not necessarily NATO, itself. Conceivably, countries outside NATO have also helped out Ukraine. Putin is probably not concerned with such precision, but I just thought it worth making the point.

They have, see below, yet unless someone is an expert it may be sometimes to difficult to distinguish between NATO support or a NATO member's support.

For example, some NATO members are doing more than others.

Relations with Ukraine

Since 2014, in the wake of Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea, NATO-Ukraine cooperation has been intensified in critical areas. Since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine starting in February 2022, NATO and Allies have provided unprecedented levels of support to Ukraine.

www.nato.int

 

[Mutzo Nutzo]

NATO is sharing intelligence data directly with Ukraine. This is a capability that Kyiv lacked and has proved vital during the war.

NATO is also providing a heavy air-lift capability for counties who are contributing to Ukraines call for equipment but do not have that air lift capability themselves.

NATO is also stretching Russias military resources by deploying multiple carrier battle groups in the Med, Arctic and Baltic seas. These deployments mean Russia must commit forces and further expense to monitoring and keeps them away from Ukraine.

 

[Deleted member 48881]

I take the view that the original plan was actually a massive bluff.

Russia was and is concerned with NATO’s expansion eastward so set out to end it. So they mass a load of troops and equipment on the border with Ukraine, make a lot of threats and request a meeting with NATO with conditions that NATO do not admit Ukraine, Finland or Sweden ever.

NATO for once seem to have called their bluff and now Putin is left with a stark choice.

1. Pull back his troops and accept NATO’s expansion. This will be a massive loss of face for Putin and make Russia appear weak.

2. Invade eastern Ukraine and create a land corridor to Crimea. Risky as this would incur massive sanctions, effectively isolate Russia from the world and risk all out war with NATO.

Tricky one

Crazy that this happened (2.) and you were absolutely spot on..

Maybe even you did not think they would touch Kyiv/Lviv etc?

 

[PhilM]

And…



@Toast would be a man here for observations.

 

[Toast]

And…



@Toast would be a man here for observations.

I’d say there appears to have been a fire in the engine rooms caused by any missile strike.
What looks like holes in the port side of the ship close to the funnel area shouldn’t be enough to sink a warship in those conditions.
That is, unless the crew just legged it as soon as the missile struck and didn’t fight to save her.

 

[PhilM]

I’d say there appears to have been a fire in the engine rooms caused by any missile strike.
What looks like holes in the port side of the ship close to the funnel area shouldn’t be enough to sink a warship in those conditions.
That is, unless the crew just legged it as soon as the missile struck and didn’t fight to save her.

Based on how their AF have historically performed, you wouldn’t put it past them or the procedures and safety in place simply wasn’t good enough.

 

[JammyP]

Latest news & breaking headlines

The latest breaking UK, US, world, business and sport news from The Times and The Sunday Times. Go beyond today's headlines with in-depth analysis and comment.

www.thetimes.co.uk

 

[tsubaki]

And…



@Toast would be a man here for observations.

TBF the video I linked to before did say that the OSA at least are pop up weapons, and the S-300s are VLS. We don’t know how long after the strike that was (it was probably hours) so the radars could have been directed to those positions.

 

[Deleted member 48881]

 

[Deleted member 48881]

 

[PhilM]

Oh certainly. He wants a success by then, but the war will continue after that. In fact, if there isn’t success by then it may ultimately mean they’ll double down.