Great clip going into details about this so called "partial mobilization"

Just seen that Russia has used an artillery strike against civilians fleeing Zaporizhzhia, 23 people killed including young children. Supposedly the column of refugees leaves everyday to cross into Ukrainian held territory.
(Don't search for it on Twitter, the pixilated images are horrific - it came onto my feed from someone I follow).

Perhaps its time for a signal to Russia that murder on a grand scale is going to be punished.
The UN should be recalled and Russia thrown off the Security Council, while an unexplained event should happen within ATACAMS full range, like the destruction of a big bridge, of a major rail hub, a ten ship strike on a Russian Artillery division followed by hours of HIMARs strikes to litterly wipe the feckers into history.

Everyone is banging on about this Russian tactic of 'Escalate to De-escalate' which is playing into Putes hands. The West should escalate in a hidden way by sinking several Russian Boomers and put out a press release - "What happened? Oh dear, how sad, never mind."

I can understand the emotional response to Putin's war crimes, however a military action against a part of Putin's Strategic forces would be an act of war, which would be highly likely to start WW3.

Destroy the rail link of the Kerch bridge, and major rail hubs, plus striking any rail links from Russia into Donbas or Crimea into Zaporizhia would be a legitimate and effective response.

Removing Russia for the UN SC would also be legal and appropriate.

Russia is losing and losing badly, both militarily, economically and demographically. It seems insane that he has risked all of this for what, to prove Russia is still a force to be reckoned with, a player on the world stage? Its certainly nothing to do with imagined threats emanating from Ukraine or sleights against ethnic Russians. The scale of the response has gone waay beyond whatever was ever justifiable within even your average Russian's mind.

I agree that a single tactical nuke would change very little militarily and would only be used as a means to force a diplomatic resolution. Of course Biden and others have stated (rightly so) that any such use couldn't go unanswered, so where does this leave Russia? How would they in return respond to a NATO likely conventional strike - some direct action against a NATO target or member state? So then we will definitely into Article V territory. Putin - along with the rest of us - must be uncertain how this will play out and is likely also fearful it could spiral out of control, with devastating consequences for Russia in particular, given they'll likely be on the back-foot in any wider conflict.

I'll say it again - the role of China is critical here. They've stated publicly that any use of WMD is unacceptable. I contend that Putin is probably more worried about losing them as an ally than he his about his forces in Ukraine being swept aside by NATO.

The attack on NS1 was noteworthy in that it demonstrates that, despite his rhetoric, Putin is still wary of doing anything too overt or within the territory of a NATO member state. Its pretty apparent they carried out the attack, but the absence of any response from the west (other than yet more sanctions) must be infuriating for him: "When will they back down??"

Another thought. In response to Putin's annexation to Ukraine's territories, perhaps NATO should declare that the rest of Ukraine a NATO protectorate or safe haven, and move its forces in to assist with its defence? Putin couldn't argue with this, could he? It would be hypocritical if he did.

Sanctions would continue in perpetuity, and Putin could kiss goodbye forever to his ambitions in Europe.

“Enjoy whatever time you have left before the nuclear apocalypse, otherwise it would a shame”

Just another day on Russian TV…..

In my opinion, the use of a nuclear weapon is an admission of failure, military failure, international diplomatic failure and political failure. I'm not sure that Putin would see it like that, I believe that his focus now is on his survival and by extension the survival of the Russian Federation, any threat to that could trigger a nuclear escalation. That really only leaves the option of a military defeat outside his borders and/or his political defeat inside his borders. The latter would probably end the war in Ukraine, but only if his successor(s) have a suitable spin for their population. At the moment there doesn't seem to be any visible progress in this direction but that doesn't mean that it's not happening. I hope that Russia's 'non aligned' friends are taking and giving appropriate advice and counsel.

I'd suggest that re-locating his forces away from Kyiv in the early days of the war was an admission of failure, as were the war crimes in the occupied regions, the terror strikes against civilian cities, and the mobilisation of 300,000 untrained civilians/reservists when his supposedly modern and well equipped army had failed to achieve his objectives. In fact, the entire conduct of Russia's war has been an admission of Putin's failure, but that hasn't stopped him from escalating previously and doubt it will do so this time.

Regarding what NATO would do in case of Putler tossing nukes.
Polish Foreign Minister Zbigniew Rau said in an interview with Polish radio RMF FM that NATO would have a conventional response to a possible Russian nuclear attack against Ukraine.

Just to make the obvious point that whilst Russia has nukes, Belarus doesn’t.

In which case allied nations. (It doesn’t have to be NATO)) should make it clear they have UKR’s back and, if Belarus armed forces attack, they will use all weapons available to destroy them.

I feel sure that in both diplomatic and also back channels to the Belarus government, ORAC's point will have been made in spades.

How the armed forces of Belarus will respond to an order to invade Ukraine, from the military generals down to the enlisted men is another unknown, both to us and probably to president Lukashenko.

And I wonder if the three Su30SM aircraft which arrived in Belarus were part of an attack force or a desertion. In this war you can never be sure...

May we live in interesting times
 

I think we can be sure that a Russian pilot looking to defect would want to go to any country other than Belarus.

"Norway to deploy military to protect its oil and gas installations against possible sabotage following the Nord Stream pipeline attacks."


Link:

Twitter

Twitter

Will send some OPVs, no doubt.

The cream of Russian mobiz have arrived.

UKR receive anti-personnel MLRS rounds…

This relates back to the reason why NATO dropped Tripwire and moved to Flexible Response and deployed battlefield. & INF nukes in Europe to provide coupling & uncertainty.


Sergei Karaganov says that he is 99% sure that the U.S. will not retaliate if Russia launched a nuclear strike on a NATO country that supports Ukraine.

Karaganov's scenario appears to be in relation to Poland, as he says it would take a "madman" in the White House who "hates America" to sacrifice Boston for Poznan

Karaganov has made similar claims in the past about Article 5 of NATO having little practical value….

The expression "pissed as a rolling fart" would seem appropriate.