Russia - threadbanned users in OP

TheValeyard

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119691747#Comment_119691747

It's not going to happen.

greenpilot

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119691688#Comment_119691688

Very good analysis from both of you. More discussion/commentry like this please!

Strazdas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119691747#Comment_119691747

I'm sure they meant 2.5m soldiers, not 25m. But such a mobilisation would cause massive upheaval and disquiet in Russia (these type of mobilisation numbers would be heading towards WW2 levels). It would be so unpopular that it would almost certainly lead to civil unrest and perhaps even strikes and riots.

rogber

Broad, sober and balanced article from the BBC on where things are as winter approaches. Puts a human face on things too. An interesting read for anyone interested in more than just battlefield statistics:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-63089367

Curious_Case

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119691539#Comment_119691539

You were mistaken for another, in a succession of profiles, that seemed heavily invested in diluting the solid concensus against Putin with "two sides" and "what about" arguments. Most of them became increasingly belligerant and were threadbanned.

As another poster said - "Zelensky has property abroad. Slaughter the innocents".

Brussels Sprout

https://twitter.com/SamRamani2/status/1576536187669745665

I'm always intrigued by Montenegro joining NATO. They stuck around in a federation with Serbia for 14 years, right up until 2006. That means they were part of the same country when NATO were bombing Serbian territory in 1998. Not only did they go ahead and join NATO after gaining independence but now they're in the grouping of the most hawkish nations when it comes to Russia (Serbia's traditional ally). Can anyone fill me in on what that's all about? Do themselves and Serbia still get along?

Dyr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119691688#Comment_119691688

Very real possibility that Ukraine will give the civilians a clear heads up to get the **** out of dodge while they can and then thoroughly soften up any stronghold with arty. Actually, I dont think a lot of the civvies will need a heads up, they'll be hightailing it to the border, they know a lot of scores are going to be settled if Ukraine take control back.

I doubt there will be any appetite to go into Luhansk with kid gloves.

Curious_Case

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119691910#Comment_119691910

I think the population is 145 million so a pool of 25 million is indeed conceivable although unlikely to ever be realised.

This will have huge impact on the russian economy and future of civilian aviation

https://twitter.com/ZMiST_Ua/status/1576271895057485824?s=20&t=RyWmkezmId4cdnqv3NMkWA

GM228

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119691520#Comment_119691520

Membership "requires" nothing other than every member state agreeing.

This is not true, there is no "fixed or rigid list of criteria for membership" other than the aspiring member must:-

1. Demonstrate that they are in a position to further the principles of the Washington Treaty, and;

2. Meet certain political, economic and military criteria as per the Study on NATO Enlargement.

Don't let the "study" in the title mislead into thinking that it's some academic or scholarly article, it's not.

So yes there is requirements for membership, the "open door" policy of NATO is not a blank cheque. Yes every member state must agree to membership, and each application is on a case by case basis, but that's subject to some conditions and every member state agreed to the Study on NATO Enlargement as being a requirement for membership, this was agreed subsequent to the 1994 Brussels Declaration, the Study on NATO Enlargement very clearly states that resolution of disputes is a deciding factor on membership.

Chapter 2, paragraph 29 also states:-

Chapter 2: How to ensure that enlargement contributes to the stability and security of the entire Euro-Atlantic area, as part of a broad European security architecture, and supports the objective of an undivided Europe

D. Effects of the decision-making process on European security and stability

29. The decision-making process on enlargement will be in accordance with the Washington Treaty. Each invitation will be decided on its own merits, case by case, and in accordance with the principles identified in this study, taking into account political and security related developments in the whole of Europe. It will be important, particularly in the meantime, not to foreclose the possibility of eventual Alliance membership for any European state in accordance with Article 10 of the Washington Treaty.

If that's not enough even NATO themselves states the principles of the study must be followed for membership in the appropriate section of their website:-

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_49212.htm

Aspirant countries

Countries that have declared an interest in joining the Alliance are initially invited to engage in an intensified dialogue with NATO about their membership aspirations and related reforms.

Aspirant countries may then be invited to participate in the MAP to prepare for potential membership and demonstrate their ability to meet the obligations and commitments of possible future membership. Participation in the MAP does not guarantee membership.

Countries aspiring to join NATO have to demonstrate that they are in a position to further the principles of the 1949 Washington Treaty and contribute to security in the Euro-Atlantic area. They are also expected to meet certain political, economic and military criteria, which are laid out in the 1995 Study on NATO Enlargement.

And

Accession Process

Once the Allies have decided to invite a country to become a member of NATO, they officially invite the country to begin accession talks with the Alliance. This is the first step in the accession process on the way to formal membership. The major steps in the process are:

1. Accession talks with a NATO team

These talks take place at NATO Headquarters in Brussels and bring together teams of NATO experts and representatives of the individual invitees. Their aim is to obtain formal confirmation from the invitees of their willingness and ability to meet the political, legal and military obligations and commitments of NATO membership, as laid out in the Washington Treaty and in the Study on NATO Enlargement.

The talks take place in two sessions with each invitee. In the first session, political and defence or military issues are discussed, essentially providing the opportunity to establish that the preconditions for membership have been met. The second session is more technical and includes discussion of resources, security, and legal issues as well as the contribution of each new member country to NATO’s common budget. This is determined on a proportional basis, according to the size of their economies in relation to those of other Alliance member countries.

Invitees are also required to implement measures to ensure the protection of NATO classified information, and prepare their security and intelligence services to work with the NATO Office of Security.

The end product of these discussions is a timetable to be submitted by each invitee for the completion of necessary reforms, which may continue even after these countries have become NATO members.

As you can see it's pretty clear there are rules for acceptance, one of those is accepting the political, economic and military criteria of the Study on NATO Enlargement.

Hobgoblin11

BLOODY LEGACY Cancer-stricken Putin’s body language ‘reveals he’s in crippling pain’ – as despot rushes to cement his place in history

https://www.thesun.ie/news/9499124/cancer-stricken-putin-crippling-pain-cement-legacy/

Wibbs

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119691982#Comment_119691982

Yep and like I was saying earlier IMHO that kneejerk decision by Russia was one of their stupidest mistakes - and there have been a few - in this whole conflict. It fecks their civil aviation, but it also has far reaching impacts across the board. They can wave goodbye to any international leasing, investment, insurance and accreditation for the foreseeable.

briany

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119692001#Comment_119692001

Cancer thing has been claimed again and again. I certainly hope he has terminal cancer and that it is causing him great suffering, because that's all he deserves at this point. He's the epitome of 'hope you die roaring'. However, it's all immaterial to what the Ukrainian forces and NATO have to do and the threat that faces them right now.

GM228

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119691982#Comment_119691982

That Tweet is not entirely accurate, I posted about it yesterday (see below), they have been voted out of the Tier 1 group of the ICAO, they may still get a place on the Tier 3 group for geographical representation.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119690032#Comment_119690032

rogber

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119692001#Comment_119692001

Oh here we go again. I don't know which rumour has been posted more in the last 7 months: that Putin has untreatable cancer or Belarus is about to enter the war. Can we just stop posting these crap links?

Kermit.de.frog

The Ukraine application to NATO is a red herring. They know it can't be accepted even down the road.

The fact is the country is partitioned and so would always be on the precipice of war until Russia is cleared out of these regions and Ukraine had secured them.

Crimea is a catastrophic example of this. I don't see Russia ever giving up Crimea. It's too strategically important. I reckon they'd lash out but hold their noses if evicted from the other regions. I think they'd use weapons of mass destruction if Sevastapol was under imminent threat of falling.

NATO would have to intervene directly to protect it's member so Russia would be in direct conflict with NATO.

That's just not going to happen. It's too dangerous.

The best case for Ukraine is continued proxy support.

cnocbui

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119691968#Comment_119691968

Russian agencies attack key IT systems in Montenegro

Montenegro: Russian diplomats expelled amid spying suspicions

Fourteen people were found guilty and sentenced in Montenegro for a plot to overthrow the government in 2018. Those convicted included two alleged agents of Russian military intelligence. Prosecutors believe they were trying to stop the Balkan country's membership in NATO.

Russia trying the Ukrainise stuff on them wasn't well received, and it's still ongoing, even as of two days ago.

That list seems to be rubbish. Canada is onside as well.

cnocbui

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119692043#Comment_119692043

Stop gatekeeping. No one asked you or cares about your triggers.

Hobgoblin11

https://twitter.com/GirkinGirkin/status/1576555192157237248

Ukrainian military in Torske, east to Lyman, next stop Lysychansk, Lysychansk is a city in the Sievierodonetsk 

cnocbui

Torske Photo of fighters. We are waiting for official confirmation.

And the juggernaut rolls on.

Asdfgh2020

Russian troops keep getting encircled and pushed back/retreat etc…..is it not a sign that they are just gearing up For a massive new phase involving chemical/biological and nuclear type weapons in retaliation……putin is capable of anything as he has shown time and time again

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119691994#Comment_119691994

And if every member wants to ignore that, they will - much like 9 states already have.

But beyond that, the commitment to resolve disputes peacefully in the Study simply does not mean getting invaded makes you automatically ineligible. That would be the height of nonsense. Again, if Russian troops moved into Lapland, the Finnish accession would not suddenly be put on hold.

The problem with suggesting it is some technicality that is stopping Ukrainian accession is that it suggest if they solve this problem they could get in (i.e. some people suggesting the apply "sans the 4 republics") which is deeply wrong.

Lawlesz

Stupid question... I've enjoyed reading the updates from the guys who know what they're talking about (special mention to greenpilot) for keeping us all in the loop. But how do things actually happen on the ground, realistically.

When Ukraine liberate a town, what's the process? Are they traveling in convoy, inching forward and attacking from range while the Russians retreat? Do they attack from various arteries and roads into a town? Are they crossing countryside, farm and field in formation?

We hear a lot about movements and front lines but I wonder how it is working in reality?

Like I said, stupid question maybe

Francie Barrett

https://twitter.com/ArtisanalAPT/status/1576338018654654465

Interesting thread on why Russia are losing so much ground in the area around Lyman.

If you don't want to click, the answer is that Russia simply haven't bothered fortifying their positions. This is in contrast to Kherson, where the Russians have multiple lines of defence which are several km long.

Tony EH

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119691277#Comment_119691277

Yeh, you're right. It's way off topic. 👍️

cnocbui

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119692302#Comment_119692302

The Russians are probably keen to know all such details also.

Lawlesz

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119692385#Comment_119692385

😂😂

Fair enough

briany

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119692072#Comment_119692072

If Putin uses nukes at any point, the US has leaked that sinking the Russian Black Sea fleet is one of the retaliation options. If that were to happen, it would make the message very clear: Russia have no control over the Black Sea with Sevastopol or without, when push comes to shove.

GM228

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119692258#Comment_119692258

And if every member wants to ignore that, they will - much like 9 states already have.

9 states (10 now I think) can support the application all they want, but, there's a difference between several states supporting and all states consenting to change their own rules and invite Ukraine to join.

And yes of course rules can indeed be changed (like for any organisation, group, Government etc), but it will require consensus from all NATO states, that simply is not going to happen.

But beyond that, the commitment to resolve disputes peacefully in the Study simply does not mean getting invaded makes you automatically ineligible. That would be the height of nonsense. Again, if Russian troops moved into Lapland, the Finnish accession would not suddenly be put on hold.

Why would that be nonsense? It makes perfect sense not to allow a state join when there is a dispute! Why risk dragging the entire NATO into a conflict which when it started was involving a non NATO state?

If Russian troops invaded Lapland indeed it wouldn't (or at least shouldn't) affect Finland's application because they are now at the invitee stage and past the initial application stage, the Study deals with the steps before becoming invitees.

The problem with suggesting it is some technicality that is stopping Ukrainian accession is that it suggest if they solve this problem they could get in (i.e. some people suggesting the apply "sans the 4 republics") which is deeply wrong.

Yes they could get in if they solve the problem (as well as any other issues there may be) - as in resolve the territorial dispute, a "sans the 4 republics" solution would never be accepted (and I very much doubt Ukraine would even consider such application in the first place) by NATO, it isn't a viable "solution" to allow membership.

Francie Barrett

Kherson region.

Northeast. Direction n.p. Shevchenkovka-Zolotaya Balka (https://t.me/dva_majors/2808).

The situation is critical

Relevance at 17:00.

Reliably.

This just in. Ukraine did make an advance here yesterday, so something is definitely going on in this area.