Ukraine Megathread: Crimea River Build a Bridge, Get Over It

[Bratislavskaya]

As I said: "tend to suggest military rifles". It's more likely than not that they are military grade.

Because instead of buying something useful, they would buy 100 Molot M4 clones, put a third position on the fire select, cover them in dust, and place them in a cache in Donetsk airport, just to show the media. I doubt it. Anyway, the M4s were one example. They also found 155mm shells that had been fired at them, and Ukraine doesn't have any 155mm guns in its inventory, and they must have come from somewhere. I'd link the video, but I can't from my phone (which I have now transitioned to).

You somehow used reverso logic there.

The rebels didn't buy M4s from Molot/Norinco/ATG/etc then cover them with dirt then bring in a camera.

Ukrainian volunteer battalions purchased AR's that were then captured when the airport was taken.

If these weapons were in fact from Western stocks then one would imagine that the rebels would be keen to show off and identify serial numbers. Instead they emerge in a few videos and are never mentioned again.

Literally the two things that Ukraine has no shortage of are small arms and artillery, they are the two least needed items.

Ah. I see what you are saying now. It could make sense that that is the case.

They may not be running low on artillery guns, but they must be getting low on ammo by this point. They have expended vast amounts of munitions in the war, they have near constantly shelling half of Donbass for almost a full year, and the rebels have captured a decent amount of it too. The west cant give them Soviet compatible ammo, so they would have to give them new guns for the new ammo.

[United Marxist Nations]

You somehow used reverso logic there.

The rebels didn't buy M4s from Molot/Norinco/ATG/etc then cover them with dirt then bring in a camera.

Ukrainian volunteer battalions purchased AR's that were then captured when the airport was taken.

If these weapons were in fact from Western stocks then one would imagine that the rebels would be keen to show off and identify serial numbers. Instead they emerge in a few videos and are never mentioned again.

Literally the two things that Ukraine has no shortage of are small arms and artillery, they are the two least needed items.

Ah. I see what you are saying now. It could make sense that that is the case.

They may not be running low on artillery guns, but they must be getting low on ammo by this point. They have expended vast amounts of munitions in the war, they have near constantly shelling half of Donbass for almost a full year, and the rebels have captured a decent amount of it too. The west cant give them Soviet compatible ammo, so they would have to give them new guns for the new ammo.

Bro, are you implying that Soviet stockpiles of ammunition can be expended in less than a year?

[The balkens]

Ah. I see what you are saying now. It could make sense that that is the case.

They may not be running low on artillery guns, but they must be getting low on ammo by this point. They have expended vast amounts of munitions in the war, they have near constantly shelling half of Donbass for almost a full year, and the rebels have captured a decent amount of it too. The west cant give them Soviet compatible ammo, so they would have to give them new guns for the new ammo.

Bro, are you implying that Soviet stockpiles of ammunition can be expended in less than a year?

Probably, considering the favored soviet tactic of massing pieces together and destroying anything that they point at.

[Bratislavskaya]

Ah. I see what you are saying now. It could make sense that that is the case.

They may not be running low on artillery guns, but they must be getting low on ammo by this point. They have expended vast amounts of munitions in the war, they have near constantly shelling half of Donbass for almost a full year, and the rebels have captured a decent amount of it too. The west cant give them Soviet compatible ammo, so they would have to give them new guns for the new ammo.

Bro, are you implying that Soviet stockpiles of ammunition can be expended in less than a year?

At the rate they're going, maybe. Soviet stockpiles are large but not infinite.

[United Marxist Nations]

Bro, are you implying that Soviet stockpiles of ammunition can be expended in less than a year?

Probably, considering the favored soviet tactic of massing pieces together and destroying anything that they point at.

Okay, expended in less than a year in a relatively low-level conflict compared to what the Soviets were preparing their ammo stockpiles for.

I mean, we're talking about the country that just put up to five million guns in a salt mine and called it a day.

[The balkens]

Probably, considering the favored soviet tactic of massing pieces together and destroying anything that they point at.

Okay, expended in less than a year in a relatively low-level conflict compared to what the Soviets were preparing their ammo stockpiles for.

I mean, we're talking about the country that just put up to five million guns in a salt mine and called it a day.

Perhaps you are right then.

[Bratislavskaya]

Probably, considering the favored soviet tactic of massing pieces together and destroying anything that they point at.

Okay, expended in less than a year in a relatively low-level conflict compared to what the Soviets were preparing their ammo stockpiles for.

I mean, we're talking about the country that just put up to five million guns in a salt mine and called it a day.

They didn't inherit all of the Soviet ammunition. Bear in mind that I has also been 20 Years since the fall of the USSR, so some has already been used, and much may be spoilt due to bad storage. Not only that, but almost a full year of near non-stop shelling of multiple places, by multiple units, as well as actual targeted supporting fire takes its toll. Coupled with the rebels capturing literal tons of the stuff and they may be running low.

[Estruia]

Okay, expended in less than a year in a relatively low-level conflict compared to what the Soviets were preparing their ammo stockpiles for.

I mean, we're talking about the country that just put up to five million guns in a salt mine and called it a day.

They didn't inherit all of the Soviet ammunition. Bear in mind that I has also been 20 Years since the fall of the USSR, so some has already been used, and much may be spoilt due to bad storage. Not only that, but almost a full year of near non-stop shelling of multiple places, by multiple units, as well as actual targeted supporting fire takes its toll. Coupled with the rebels capturing literal tons of the stuff and they may be running low.

Do you have any credible sources that claim Ukraine is running low on ammunition? If you don't, arguing this is sort of pointless. you know?

[United Marxist Nations]

Okay, expended in less than a year in a relatively low-level conflict compared to what the Soviets were preparing their ammo stockpiles for.

I mean, we're talking about the country that just put up to five million guns in a salt mine and called it a day.

They didn't inherit all of the Soviet ammunition. Bear in mind that I has also been 20 Years since the fall of the USSR, so some has already been used, and much may be spoilt due to bad storage. Not only that, but almost a full year of near non-stop shelling of multiple places, by multiple units, as well as actual targeted supporting fire takes its toll. Coupled with the rebels capturing literal tons of the stuff and they may be running low.

They inherited the ones inside their borders, which was a fucking lot. The rebels captured tons of the Ukraine's stuff and still left it with the majority of its stockpiles. The Soviets had more tanks in storage alone than there even are tanks outside of those stores!

[Arkolon]

What do you guys think the West should do, if anything at all, about the situation in Ukraine? I'm totally torn on the issue.

[The balkens]

What do you guys think the West should do, if anything at all, about the situation in Ukraine? I'm totally torn on the issue.

Support the government, reach for the peaceful solution, sanction the shit out of Russia for escalating it by handing the rebels weapons, sanction it harder, give economic advice( does not mean austerity) to try and jumpstart the uke economy.

[Arkolon]

What do you guys think the West should do, if anything at all, about the situation in Ukraine? I'm totally torn on the issue.

Support the government, reach for the peaceful solution, sanction the shit out of Russia for escalating it by handing the rebels weapons, sanction it harder, give economic advice( does not mean austerity) to try and jumpstart the uke economy.

Might as well play devil's advocate, because I'm trying to see the situation without my biased European perspective: I know it's almost definite Russia's arming the rebels, despite no official remarks, but isn't it still a very shaky path to take in terms of foreign policy? And those rebels could always be fighting for what they really believed in, with their ethnic majorities ^{[citation needed]} and pro-Russian sentiments. I just want to be 100% sure the West isn't demonising Russia simply because it's Russia, and that Russia really is the bad guy in Ukraine. I mean, if the roles were reversed and it was Ukrainian rebels fighting for accession of their de-facto-Russian region into Ukraine, the West would still demonise Russia (or would it?) despite the exact same situation happening.

I admit there's not a lot I know for sure about the situation over there. I'd like to know more about it, and more specifically ideas on how to fix it. Would this be a signal for the EU to harmonise its foreign policy as well?

[Herargon]

What do you guys think the West should do, if anything at all, about the situation in Ukraine? I'm totally torn on the issue.

Support the government, reach for the peaceful solution, sanction the shit out of Russia for escalating it by handing the rebels weapons, sanction it harder, give economic advice( does not mean austerity) to try and jumpstart the uke economy.

Pft, sanctions. Let's climb in the mind of an average Cold War politician.

Arm Ukraine; send self-destruction instructions with the weapons, so if these weapons fall in the hands of the rebels, they can't use it since it will be destroyed.

Support Ukraine's economy by investing in Western companies that go to Ukraine.

Sanction Russia even harder and send China trade offers that are more desirable than the trade offers Russia has for China.

Send an ultimatum to the rebels that if they don't capitulate within 24 hours, they will face NATO intervention. (Of course, this only is a threat, but if the rebels still doesn't listen, intervene with "contrarebellious support for humanitarian intervention").

Send Russia the offer to stop the sanctions if all rebels go out Ukraine within 48 hours, excluding the Crimea.

This is my idea of how we would have reacted if this indeed is Cold War II.

[Cyrisnia]

Bro, are you implying that Soviet stockpiles of ammunition can be expended in less than a year?

Probably, considering the favored soviet tactic of massing pieces together and destroying anything that they point at.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pd472eOMxrs

[United Marxist Nations]

Probably, considering the favored soviet tactic of massing pieces together and destroying anything that they point at.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pd472eOMxrs

+10 for Soviet anthem.

[The balkens]

Probably, considering the favored soviet tactic of massing pieces together and destroying anything that they point at.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pd472eOMxrs

I love you.

[Constantinopolis]

What do you guys think the West should do, if anything at all, about the situation in Ukraine? I'm totally torn on the issue.

Here's the key question: Is the West willing to spend a large amount of money - without expecting any of it back - to get the imploded Ukrainian economy back on its feet?

If the answer is "yes", then it would make sense to follow the suggestions of others in this thread.

But if the answer is "no", then the West needs to (privately) admit that it doesn't really care about the Ukrainian people, and therefore stop interfering, lift all sanctions, and let Russia win.

And I think we both know the real answer to the above question.

(for the record, Russia is - or at least was, a year ago - willing to spend a large amount of money to help the Ukrainian economy; that's one of the reasons why I'm convinced the pro-Russian option is the better one for the Ukrainian people)

[Estruia]

What do you guys think the West should do, if anything at all, about the situation in Ukraine? I'm totally torn on the issue.

Here's the key question: Is the West willing to spend a large amount of money - without expecting any of it back - to get the imploded Ukrainian economy back on its feet?

If the answer is "yes", then it would make sense to follow the suggestions of others in this thread.

But if the answer is "no", then the West needs to (privately) admit that it doesn't really care about the Ukrainian people, and therefore stop interfering, lift all sanctions, and let Russia win.

And I think we both know the real answer to the above question.

(for the record, Russia is - or at least was, a year ago - willing to spend a large amount of money to help the Ukrainian economy; that's one of the reasons why I'm convinced the pro-Russian option is the better one for the Ukrainian people)

Did you miss the part where Putin rescinded the offer to bailout the Ukrainian economy, because Ukraine was also going to sign a Free Association Treaty with the EU. Putin wanted total control over Ukraine's economy. He didn't want what was best for Ukraine. He wanted what was best for his own political agenda.

[West Aurelia]

Russia planned to annex Crimea and eastern Ukraine before Yanukovych fled.

[Constantinopolis]

Here's the key question: Is the West willing to spend a large amount of money - without expecting any of it back - to get the imploded Ukrainian economy back on its feet?

If the answer is "yes", then it would make sense to follow the suggestions of others in this thread.

But if the answer is "no", then the West needs to (privately) admit that it doesn't really care about the Ukrainian people, and therefore stop interfering, lift all sanctions, and let Russia win.

And I think we both know the real answer to the above question.

(for the record, Russia is - or at least was, a year ago - willing to spend a large amount of money to help the Ukrainian economy; that's one of the reasons why I'm convinced the pro-Russian option is the better one for the Ukrainian people)

Did you miss the part where Putin rescinded the offer to bailout the Ukrainian economy, because Ukraine was also going to sign a Free Association Treaty with the EU. Putin wanted total control over Ukraine's economy. He didn't want what was best for Ukraine. He wanted what was best for his own political agenda.

Yes, Putin wanted to give Ukraine vast amounts of money and in return Ukraine would have to join the Russian sphere of influence (and the future Eurasian Union) and go against the West. That was the deal Putin offered.

And it was a good deal for Ukraine. It was mutually beneficial for both the Ukrainian people and for Putin. The Ukrainian people gets better living conditions in an improving economy, and Putin gets to play his geopolitical game. What exactly is the problem with it? It hurts nationalist pride? It hurts Western interests? Why should Ukrainians care about those?

It's certainly the best deal Ukraine was ever going to get from anyone. The West is simply not offering the same kind of bailout.

[The Justinian Horde]

Russia planned to annex Crimea and eastern Ukraine before Yanukovych fled.

That explains why it was so succesfull

[Jinwoy]

Russia planned to annex Crimea and eastern Ukraine before Yanukovych fled.

This changes everything!
No, I'm being sincere this time!

[Germanic Templars]

Russia planned to annex Crimea and eastern Ukraine before Yanukovych fled.

Ohhhhh.....Snapple muh apple... That is....

Well lemme just say that i do applaud for the well execution of plans. Never thought it could work this well..

[Constantinopolis]

Russia planned to annex Crimea and eastern Ukraine before Yanukovych fled.

This changes everything!
No, I'm being sincere this time!

Uh, it's one document published by an anti-Putin newspaper in Russia (founded and part-owned by Mikhail Gorbachev, no less), which claims to have "obtained" the document somehow, without giving any details or any evidence that the document is genuine.

Unless some shred of evidence is provided, I'm going to assume this is a forgery.

Besides, if Russia was really planning to annex Novorossiya, they would have done it by now. Putin's goal is obviously to create a Transnistria-like frozen conflict in Eastern Ukraine, not to annex bits of it.

[Constantinopolis]

Russia planned to annex Crimea and eastern Ukraine before Yanukovych fled.

Ohhhhh.....Snapple muh apple... That is....

Well lemme just say that i do applaud for the well execution of plans. Never thought it could work this well..

Actually, IF this document is genuine (and, like I said, there is absolutely zero evidence for it being authentic, unless you're willing to just take a newspaper's word for it), then either the Russians gave up on half of those plans, or they completely forgot their geography, because the document says:

"The dominant regions for applying efforts must be the Crimea and Kharkiv Region in which exist fairly strong support groups of the idea of maximum integration with the Russian Federation."

Crimea and... Kharkiv Region? Okay... the document does not mention any specific plans for Donbass at all.