Londonrake wrote:Kikapu wrote:So, Ukraine is now openly admitting and gloating about attacking the Crimea Bridge whereas in the past, they would not admit to anything, even if they were responsible for it.
Well, this change with Ukraine is very easy to explained, because Ukraine is desperate to make any claim of success because they have had almost no success with their Spring/Summer offensive for the past 6 weeks as they have lost thousands of soldiers and hundreds of tanks and similar equipment, personnel carriers and aircraft.
However, the truth is, the bridge will be repaired and put back in service again as soon as possible, but there’s no bringing back the destructions Ukraine is suffering by the Russians. The bridge to Crimea is not the life line to the Russians in this war, but just a inconvenience for awhile. Crimea was serviced by Russia by ships for many years before the bridge was built and the ships will be used again until the bridge is repaired and beyond..
Apart from the fact it's been disabled, for a second time, which must at the very least, given the way Putin adopted the project, be "awkward" I'm not really reading anything into the bridge incident. Nevertheless, it's certainly an important strategic target.
Losses are a matter of ..................... what? Neither side tells the truth so can you trust any figures? I find some that have been banded about ridiculous though. Does anybody truly believe that in the 10 month struggle to take Bakhmut the Russians lost only 600? It was seriously posted in here.
Fast rewind.
When, way back, I posted a drone picture - more fool me - of a Russian armoured column that had been destroyed by Ukrainian artillery during an attempted river crossing, you denounced it as a fake. There were no bodies to be seen. That's the level of obduracy which prevails in this thread.
Yes, so far Ukraine hasn't made any significant progress with its offensive. Then again, did the Russians at the beginning of this year? We were certainly getting lots of "Here it comes!" posts last autumn.
Looking at the big picture though. Here we are, 500+ days into this war. Started in order to "De Nazify" and "De militarise" Ukraine. Not forgetting bringing to an end the relentless expansion of NATO. I would suggest wrt those objectives things are not really going too well for Vladimir Putin. Let's not get into how one of several private mercenary armies running around in Russia just started an abortive advance on Moscow.
Despite, as in GR's days, there always tends to be daily good news about how well the Russian army are doing.
repulsewarrior wrote:https://gcaptain.com/why-the-expiration-of-the-black-sea-grain-deal-matters/?subscriber=true&goal=0_f50174ef03-206ebf9ac8-170376050&mc_cid=206ebf9ac8&mc_eid=a636abe87d
...i think Putin has made a mistake. Wheat, its export by sea is not as important to Ukraine, and farmers' yield because of the warring will also be less. Without this Agreement Russia will have to escalate patrols, and being occupied with having to enforce their blockade, they will become perfect targets for Ukraine's Navy drones.
AP Obfuscates The Real Black Sea Grain Deal Numbers
Agreements that the United Nations and Turkey brokered with Ukraine and Russia to allow food and fertilizer to get from the warring nations to parts of the world where millions are going hungry have eased concerns over global food security. But they face increasing risks.
It then asserts:
The Black Sea Grain Initiative has allowed 32.8 million metric tons (36.2 million tons) of food to be exported from Ukraine since last August, more than half to developing countries, including those getting relief from the World Food Program.
Are half of the Ukrainian grain exports really going to 'developing countries'?
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/07/ap-obfuscates-the-real-grain-deal-numbers-.html
The grain deal had two parts. One was the access of ships to Ukrainian harbors. The other was the normal export of grain and fertilizer from Russia.
While Russia had facilitated the first part of the deal the 'West' had collectively blocked the second part.
The lengthy creation of exclusive payment channels that can be blocked and controlled by the 'West', as Guterres now offers, is not a solution that Russia will support.
When you see the next headline about 'Russia blocking Ukrainian exports to hungry people' keep the above in mind.
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/07/grain-deal-shenanigans.html
repulsewarrior wrote:
...i think Putin has made a mistake. Wheat, its export by sea is not as important to Ukraine, and farmers' yield because of the warring will also be less. Without this Agreement Russia will have to escalate patrols, and being occupied with having to enforce their blockade, they will become perfect targets for Ukraine's Navy drones.
Return to Politics and Elections
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests