No update today.
Links and Stuff
Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict
Add to the above list if you can, thank you.
Resources For Understanding The War Beyond The Bulletins
Defense Politics Asia's youtube channel and their map, who is an independent youtuber with a mostly neutral viewpoint.
Moon of Alabama, which tends to have good analysis (though also a couple bad takes here and there)
Understanding War and the Saker: neo-conservative sources but their reporting of the war (so far) seems to line up with reality better than most liberal sources.
Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict and, unlike most western analysts, has some degree of understanding on how war works. He is a reactionary, however.
On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent journalist reporting in the Ukrainian warzones.
Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.
Telegram Channels
Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.
Pro-Russian
https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR's former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR's forces. Russian language.
https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ Gleb Bazov, banned from Twitter, referenced pretty heavily in what remains of pro-Russian Twitter.
https://t.me/asbmil ~ ASB Military News, banned from Twitter.
https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts.
https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday Patrick Lancaster - crowd-funded U.S journalist, mostly pro-Russian, works on the ground near warzones to report news and talk to locals.
https://t.me/riafan_everywhere ~ Think it's a government news org or Federal News Agency? Russian language.
https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ Front news coverage. Russian langauge.
https://t.me/rybar ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense.
https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.
Pro-Ukraine
With the entire western media sphere being overwhelming pro-Ukraine already, you shouldn't really need more, but:
https://discord.gg/projectowl ~ Pro-Ukrainian OSINT Discord.
https://t.me/ice_inii ~ Alleged Ukrainian account with a rather cynical take on the entire thing.
Yesterday's discussion post.
Ukraine - The U.S. Is Moving Towards Escalation Moon of Alabama
TLDR: There's desperation in Europe and the US, both socioeconomically and politically. Biden and several European leaders appear to be wanting peace, while Boris Johnson appears to want the war to continue for its own gain. In order to save himself, Biden might try to invade a country to boost his appeal, but they obviously can't take on China, nor even really Iran, so Syria is one of the only remaining targets; recent events in the Middle East are beginning to suggest that there's something revving up there.
TLDR the TLDR:
Biden: "Assad must go!"
:who-must-go:
expand
...
FUCK. Stay out of Syria America and Turkish dogs!
I was close to the character limit so I'm putting this here: I hadn't really considered the fact that the US depleting its arsenal, and without the infrastructure to replace it on a reasonable timeframe, means that an actual invasion of Iran (as opposed to trying to bomb it from above until it submits) becomes increasingly more difficult and impractical as every day in this war passes and every billion dollars is spent on it by the US. Doesn't mean they won't try anyway - these wars aren't really about winning, but more about doing well enough to not cause massive unrest back home but never ending it so the MIC can make huge profits off it - but I had always assumed that an invasion of Iran was very much on the horizon, within the next decade, and honestly I think it could have happened by now if coronavirus hadn't happened.
But now... I feel like it's getting pushed increasingly far in the future. If this war ends tomorrow then it could still happen within the next five years or decade, but if it really does last for a year or longer, and the US keeps depleting their arsenal in Ukraine for that whole time (necessarily, because how could Ukraine last that long unless they had western arms being piped in), then who knows? Maybe Iran won't be invaded for a long while. Maybe a bombing campaign or something that ends terribly, but no real boots-on-the-ground stuff.
I wouldn't go that far on the US is running out of weapons idea, this is way too simplistic when you look at what the US is actualy sending.
It is the same mistake as thinking the US can't fight a war because the F-35s would crash immediately after takeoff or something.
The support for Ukraine contains a lot of shit that doesn't matter, javelins don't matter, artillery doesn't realy matter because the US could build those very easily if they realy need to. What else is left? Shitty drones and NATO APCs and tanks. Maybe some EU countries would have some problems if they get rid of the tanks, but not the US.
You see for one thing the only thing I'd say Zelensky is "right" about is that the US support so far is complete worthless shit. Ukraine needs modern fighter jets, even F-16s would do fine. They need modern tanks and APCs not shit from the cold war museums.
Obviously yes they will never get that, and yes obviously they would need months of training. But this is the truth nonetheless and when you look at what the US army actually uses to fight wars it is modern tanks, APCs, modern aviation, modern artillery and an extremely professional army.
So the US imo can still fight any war, Ukraine is not a significant factor beyond the MIC grifting.
Now when it comes to actualy winning a war that is another matter entirely, you know Iran has all the familiar problems of a large somewhat modern capable army and formidable defensive terrain along with a radicalized population. The US indeed would never win an offensive war against Iran.
But that doesn't mean they can't just go out and try and the point here is that IMO all the media talk about depleting weapon stocks is just media fodder for the benefit of the MIC, you know to simply make it easier to justify more spending, not that the US is actually suffering from this in a truly sensible scale.
Put it in another way, the US has thousands and thousands of modern tanks and fighters, bombers, obviously the entire navy still intact. Giving away shitty anti-armor missiles isn't going to change that. It is not as if the javelin is the linchpin of the US army or anything.
deleted by creator
How much material goods is the US actually sending? It looks more like the US is mostly clearing out it's old stockpiles and then also sending a few gee-wiz high tech gizmos for the press to fawn over. Most of the billions the US is spending is going to the MIC in order for them to build weapons to replenish US stockpiles
They've sent a significant amount of their stockpile of Javelins and Stingers, which, as you say, isn't very new stuff, but they are usually reliably good if the people using them have been properly trained and they're fully charged and such. And they're clearly important enough that the US feels the need to build more of them to replenish them, though they say that it'll take over a year to build them back up due to the relative lack of US industry.
Right now, as I say, I don't think it's a significant factor as to whether they invade Iran - but I could imagine a situation where the US tries to even half-way meet Ukraine's needs of like 1000 howitzers and MLRS systems and so on, and maybe even eventually planes and higher-grade stuff, and Russia decides it really will annex all of Ukraine and we're here a year from now and that operation is still underway and America is still sending arms, then I think you could see the US's stockpiles being depleted enough that a plan to invade Iran in early 2024 to boost Biden's ratings could actually become infeasible. That, combined with the shortages of microchips and the metals needed to build weaponry.
The main determining factors for me is a) to what extent the US actually wants to make this Russia's Afghanistan vs if they're just about ready to throw in the towel right now, and b) how far Russia truly intends to go. Only the Donbass? Odessa and Mykolaiv? Central Ukraine? All of Ukraine? Another, non-NATO country that gets wrapped up somehow (e.g. supporting Tranistria?) If Russia says "Fuck it, we're taking all of Ukraine" and then America decides that invading Iran isn't really an option for whatever reason (including if they get a nuke) and so decide to go all-in on defending Ukraine, then I think that Ukraine could become a junkyard for American weaponry, vehicles, and perhaps planes. If the war is over in a month then it won't matter either way, as @BynarsAreOk says in the other comment in this thread. Right now, it looks like the US is edging towards desiring a peaceful solution in the near-to-medium term, but if Kiev and Zelensky are actually under threat, does Biden go "Okay, we're doing it, we're sending you a bunch of planes"?
It's pretty cool how we get to just launch missile strikes on a country we never declared war on then have the nerve to criticize others lol
I don't know that there's much appetite for "boots on the ground" war among the US populace. That could easily change with a false flag of some sort. Exceedingly easy to whip us into a froth.