According to my sources, many of those sr positions are still occupied by friends of friends type credentials - old soviet trained or sticking to the old doctrine. These younger ones have had exposure/training with the west and have shown results.
The key with these is results while keeping economy of lives/effort in their operations; as well as getting rid of those whose only merit is being “connected”.
8 Likes
They won’t hit Elon’s feed, Musk has unwittingly made himself responsible for everything that happens for the next four years.
Saved himself a few billion in taxes at the cost of his brand and his business interests.
2 Likes
Nah, he picks up every farkputin talking point that is anti biden, and for me people in general and the US for sure are just so farked up they don’t care anymore + theres too many businesses left to try and boycott so they’ll keep buying.
1 Like
Frontline update - 1 hour ago
Russia-Ukraine war: Frontline update as of November 30
SAT, NOVEMBER 30, 2024 - 23:54
As of 22:00 on November 30, 211 combat engagements took place in the frontline since the beginning of the day. The largest number of engagements was recorded in the Pokrovsk and Kurakhove sectors, according to the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
Enemy shelling
Today, the enemy launched two missile attacks on the territory of Ukraine and used 503 kamikaze drones. They also fired more than three thousand times at Ukrainian troops’ positions and populated areas.
Situation at the frontlines
In the Kharkiv direction, the Russian troops unsuccessfully attacked the defensive lines of Ukrainian units near Vovchansk, Kozacha Lopan, and Hoptivka eight times, and one more clash is ongoing.
In the Kupiansk direction, Ukrainian troops repelled seven enemy attacks near Pishchane, Kolisnykivka, Lozova, and Zahryzove.
In the Lyman direction, the invading army carried out 19 assault and offensive actions near Hrekivka, Druzheliubivka, Novoyehorivka, Zarichne, Terny, and Torske.
Our defenders repelled 16 enemy attacks in the Kramatorsk direction, near Chasiv Yar, Predtechyne, and Stupochky.
In the Toretsk direction, 10 firefights continue near the settlements of Toretsk, Nelipivka, and Shcherbynivka, and six enemy attacks were stopped by our defenders.
The enemy tried to break into our defense in the Pokrovsk direction 46 times. Since the beginning of the day, the enemy has attacked near the settlements of Myroliubivka, Promin, Myrnohrad, Lysivka, Krasnyi Yar, Dachenske, Zhovte, Chumatske, Yelyzavetivka and Novyi Trud. Thirty-nine enemy offensives were stopped by the Defense Forces, seven attacks are still ongoing.
“The enemy is suffering significant losses - according to preliminary information, our troops neutralized over 250 militants in this sector today, 160 of them irreversibly. One armored combat vehicle, two units of automotive, and three units of motorized vehicles of the occupants were destroyed, one unit of automotive equipment and one buggy were damaged,” the General Staff informs.
In the Kurakhove direction, the enemy attacked our positions near Sontsivka, Berestky, Zorya, Novodmytrivka, Kurakhove, Dachne, Dalne, Katerynivka, Romanivka, Antonivka, Hanivka, Yelyzavetivka, and Uspenivka. Ukrainian troops have repelled 37 attacks so far, and 11 engagements are still ongoing.
“Enemy losses in this sector since the beginning of the day amounted to 43 soldiers killed and 64 wounded, two armored personnel carriers, 4 motor vehicles, and one portable electronic warfare station destroyed,” the statement said.
In the Vremivka direction, our troops repelled enemy attacks near the settlements of Veselyi Hai, Kostiantynopolske, Rozlyv, Velyka Novosilka, Novodarivka, and Novopil - eight attacks were repelled, seven attacks are still ongoing.
In the Prydniprovskyi direction, the Defense Forces repelled three enemy attacks.
The enemy did not conduct any active actions in the Siversk, Orikhiv, and Huliaipole sectors today.
Ukrainian Defense Forces continue to conduct operations in the Kursk region, as of today, 22 firefights and 299 attacks on settlements and positions of our units are reported.
“Today, the soldiers of the 65th separate mechanized brigade, the 126th separate territorial defense brigade, the 38th separate marine brigade, the 68th separate hunting brigade named after Oleksa Dovbush, and the 14th operational brigade named after Ivan Bohun, who effectively destroy the enemy, inflict losses in manpower and equipment, should be noted for their effective and professional combat work,” the General Staff summarized.
A total of 192 combat engagements took place at the frontline over the past day, November 29. The Armed Forces of Ukraine struck a number of times at the enemy, including at an important facility. Read more about this in RBC-Ukraine’s article.
3 Likes
Zelenskyy needs some fresh strategic impetus at this critical juncture of the war so hence the elevation of Drapatyi. Lt. Gen. Oleksandr Pavlyuk is also deputy minister for defence, focusing on mobilization and manpower, so losing the post of commander of the land forces could also be seen as just a ‘slimming down’ of his portfolio of responsibilities rather than a professional slap in the face or a demotion, per se.
2 Likes
(I’m not going to sideline this thread but I’m posting about Syria here because russia is involved in and so is relevant to Ukraine)
Meanwhile…
Cᴀʟɪʙʀᴇ Oʙsᴄᴜʀᴀ on X: “Palace Coup, Cells Activated, or something else?” / X
4 Likes
PYROTECHNIC MLRS: DEPLOYED
2 Likes
“Working directly with Trump” I figure, would most often be considered a worse case scenario. Unfortunately, a battered and bruised Zelensky has reached that worse case scenario.
If Trump gets his way for peace…
Not a bad article. Its point of interest being that Trump may take, or be forced to take, a ‘support Ukraine’ but wait and see approach to the conflict.
1 Like
I thought this article of such interest - I’d post the whole text.
NATO member states’ biggest problem is Article 5 test - politician
30 November, 2024 Saturday, 20:00
Politician Oleh Rybachuk says that Russian dictator Vladimir Putin’s goal is to destroy the system of security and solidarity in Europe
He said this in an interview with Antin Borkovskyi, host of the Studio West program.
“More and more European countries are realizing that Putin is unpredictable, and U.S. officials say that he only understands the language of force. Allowing such escalation now is simply strange. And this is happening amid constant attempts to avoid provoking or irritating Russia, which raises the stakes even without any provocation. I have the impression that Putin, fully understanding the psychology of many Americans, is actually using these threats to scare them specifically," the politician remarked.
In his opinion, the biggest issue currently facing the European Union and NATO member states is the test of Article 5. Experts are modeling scenarios where Russia, under the guise of protecting Russian-speaking populations in one of the neighboring NATO countries, might carry out a localized operation with “little green men.” Discussions have long suggested that Putin’s goal is to undermine the sense of security and solidarity within Europe.
“NATO has modeled a scenario where, if Russia suddenly uses nuclear weapons against Ukraine, it was stated that NATO forces would immediately destroy Russia’s armed forces, their Black Sea Fleet, and all known Russian assets located in occupied Ukraine and Crimea using conventional precision weapons within minutes. This is what was promised to Putin: if you use tactical nuclear weapons, you will lose everything—Crimea, the military fleet, and your troops stationed in occupied Ukrainian territory. Such discussions have taken place, but the question arises again: how serious is this, and is NATO ready to act accordingly? This would involve combined NATO forces delivering such strikes. This scenario is very realistic because if you calculate the missile carrier capabilities that Alliance countries can deploy in the air and what the Americans can launch from their fleets, it becomes a very, very real possibility,” emphasized Oleh Rybachuk.
- On November 26, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said that the Allies should “go further to change the trajectory” of Russia’s war against Ukraine.
- During the plenary session of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, members adopted a resolution calling on the coalition countries to accept Ukraine into the Alliance as soon as possible.
6 Likes
He’s still working the situation as much to Ukraine’s advantage as possible
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/11/30/this-is-a-political-masterstroke-by-president-zelensky/
If they are ceded, you would expect some Maidan-style protests down the line similar to what is currently happening in Georgia
3 Likes
Bryansk region
2 Likes
Summary:
Freeze the borders where they are now, remove Russian sanctions, and to stop Russia from further encroaching and destabilising Ukraine, Ukraine must join NATO.
Leaders | The least bad deal for Ukraine
How to make a success of peace talks with Vladimir Putin
The key is robust security guarantees for Ukrainians
image: Justin Metz
Nov 28th 2024
FOR TWO years the war in Ukraine has been fought metre by blood-soaked metre. Suddenly, dramatic change is at hand. One reason is that Russia’s grinding advance has exposed grave weaknesses in manpower and morale that could eventually lead to a collapse in Ukraine’s lines. More urgent, Donald Trump has made clear that, as president, he will be impatient for the shooting to stop.
The great worry is that Mr Trump will impose a disastrous deal on Ukraine. Vladimir Putin says he might be willing to freeze the front lines, though Russia occupies just 70-80% of four Ukrainian provinces it has annexed. But he is also demanding that the West should lift sanctions; that Ukraine should renounce NATO membership; that it be demilitarised and formally neutral; that it “denazify” itself by jettisoning its leaders; and that it protect the rights of Russian-speakers.
Should Mr Trump back this, Mr Putin would have achieved most of his war aims and Ukraine would have suffered a catastrophic defeat. What is more, Russia’s president would not respect a piece of paper. He would hope that post-war Ukraine, consumed by infighting and recriminations against the West, would fall into his lap. If it did not, he might seize more territory by force. As the self-appointed guardian of Ukraine’s Russian-speakers, he could easily concoct a pretext.
That is the fear. But it is not inevitable, nor even the likeliest outcome. Capitulation to Mr Putin would be a public defeat for America and Mr Trump. It would spill over into Asia, where America’s foes might become more aggressive and its friends might lose confidence in their ally and curry favour with China instead. And Mr Trump would surely want to avoid the humiliation of being known as the man who lost Ukraine by being out-negotiated by Mr Putin. It is in his own narrow interest to forge a deal that keeps Ukraine safe for at least the four years of his term. In that time Ukraine can accomplish a lot.
Mr Trump has leverage over Russia if he wants to use it. Because he is unpredictable, he could threaten to go all-in with Ukraine by sending it more and deadlier weapons, and Mr Putin would have to take him seriously. In addition, the Russian economy is hurting, the rouble is tumbling and Russians are tired of fighting. Although Mr Putin could sustain the war for another year or more, he might also benefit from a pause. As Mike Waltz, Mr Trump’s incoming national security adviser, has suggested, America can therefore also threaten to use sanctions to make that pain worse.
What, then, should a deal aim for? Restoring the borders of 1991 is a pipe dream. Morally and legally, all that land belongs to Ukraine, but it does not have the soldiers, arms or ammunition to recapture it. Instead, the aim should be to create the conditions for Ukraine to thrive in the territory it now controls.
For that it will require stability and reconstruction, both of which depend on being safe from Russian aggression. That is why at the heart of the talks will be how to devise a credible and durable framework for Ukrainian security.
The Economist has argued that the best way of protecting Ukraine would be for it to join NATO. Membership would help prevent it from becoming unstable, embittered and vulnerable to co-option by Mr Putin in pursuit of his ultimate aim, which is to destabilise and dominate Europe. It would also bring Europe’s largest, most innovative and battle-hardened army and defence industry into the alliance—something that Mr Trump might welcome, because NATO would then need fewer American troops.
Membership raises hard questions, because of the alliance’s “Article 5” pledge that an attack on one member is an attack on all. But answers exist. The guarantee need not cover the parts of Ukraine that Russia now occupies—just as it did not cover East Germany when West Germany joined in 1955. Troops from other NATO countries may not need to be based in Ukraine in peacetime, as when Norway joined in 1949.
We still favour these arguments. However, for Ukraine to be in NATO requires the backing of all its 32 members, including Hungary and Turkey, which delayed the accession of Sweden and Finland. As our reporting shows, some countries, including the front-line states, plus Britain, France and, under a new chancellor, Germany, may therefore be open to bilateral deals in which they base their troops in Ukraine as a tripwire force . In effect, they would be seeking to deter Mr Putin with the threat that further Russian action could bring them into the war.
It looks like an elegant solution, but a tripwire force would amount to an Article 5 guarantee by another name. Countries should not offer such a promise to Ukraine unless they are ready to honour it—as walking away under Russian fire would undermine them as members of NATO, too, perhaps fatally. Simply because it was new, the tripwire force would be likely to be probed and tested for weak points by Mr Putin. To be credible it would need formal backing from Mr Trump, even if he provided no troops, because Europe still depends on America to fight wars, especially against an adversary as big as Russia.
It would also need a change of approach in Europe, particularly in Germany. To signal to Mr Putin that they were serious, European countries would need to demonstrate their support for Ukraine. That would involve massive aid for rebuilding the country and weapons, as well as progress in EU accession talks. To signal to Mr Putin that they would fight back if he attacked, they would need to dramatically increase their own defence spending and overhaul their arms industries . Mr Trump, who has long urged bigger European defence budgets, ought to welcome such an outcome.
A ceasefire would present two competing visions of Ukraine’s future. Mr Putin’s calculation is that he will win from a deal because Ukraine will rot, Russia will re-arm and the West will lose interest. But imagine that, with Western backing, Ukraine used the lull to rebuild its economy, refresh its politics and deter Russia from aggression. The task is to ensure that this vision prevails over its grim alternative. ■
6 Likes
The potential “spanner in the works” of that plan
2 Likes
The head of a decapitated statue of former Syrian President Hafez al-Assad sits on the streets of Aleppo on November 30 [Omar Albam/AP Photo]
SYRIAN CIVIL WAR: LIVE FEED
2 Likes
2/ Defence policy expert Pavel Luzin, speaking at the “Country and World: Russian Realities 2024” conference in Berlin, says that Russian arms exports will have fallen 14-fold between 2021, the last pre-war year, and the end of 2024.
3/ He calculates that revenue from the sale of Russian weapons by the end of 2024 will amount to less than $1 billion. It has fallen precipitously from $14.6 billion in 2021, $8 billion in 2022, and $3 billion in 2023.
4/ Luzin says: "We see that Russia as an arms exporter has generally failed. It is clear that the military-industrial complex is counting on a halt, a freeze, an end to the war in order to return to fulfilling export contracts…
5/ “…because they provided a good inflow of hard currency, among other things”.
He notes that the reduction in exports has enabled Russia to produce more weapons to supply domestic needs related to the war in Ukraine.
7/ According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), in 2023 Russia fell into third place behind the US and France in the list of the world’s top arms exporters. The latest fall comes after Russian arms exports had already halved between 2014-2018.
8/ In 2019, Russia supplied weapons to 31 countries, while in 2023, it will only supply twelve.
Sergei Chemezov, the CEO of the state-owned conglomerate Rostec, released figures last week which show a comparable drop in exports.
9/ He disclosed that Russia had sold $15 billion worth of weapons in 2021, $7 billion in 2022, and $6 billion in 2023. Figures for 2024 have not been released yet but are forecast to be even lower.
Source:
Агентство. НовостиЭкспорт российского оружия по итогам года рухнет в 14 раз по сравнению с 2021 годом Россия фактически перестанет быть значимым экспортером оружия по итогам 2024 года, сократив его поставки в 14 раз п…https://t.me/agentstvonews/8320
• • •
3 Likes
A short article saying Putin has the West bluffed and doesn’t need peace deals.
An article confirming USA’S blackmailing tactic that was presented to Zelensky, so as to facilitate ‘Trump’s peace in Europe’.
Another article confirming the ‘turret toss’ champion.
T-90 not much better.
A veritable ‘who’s in, and who’s out’ regarding the Ukrainian war.
All power to Ukrainian women.
What could possibly go wrong/right?
This article is ‘kind of’ related to Russia.
Latest articles on the Russian economy.
An intersting article stating that the West is frightened by Putin’s Russia and that NATO is unprepared for any hostilities.
Atlanticists Mobilize To Salvage NATO As Russia Toughens Its Stance – OpEd
Birds of a feather…
Russia Increases Ties With Iran’s Axis Of Resistance – Analysis
https://www.eurasiareview.com/01122024-russia-increases-ties-with-irans-axis-of-resistance-analysis/
Anxiety for Kyiv, relief for Seoul.
Of course he does. Even if he admits troop deployment, what would the UN do anyways?
NK envoy sidesteps question on troop deployment to Russia at UNSC meeting
An article reviewing the Russian development and use of the oreshnik missile.
2 Likes
I’m so used to my paywall blocker doing it automatically I don’t even realise lol
2 Likes
KYIV, Nov 30 (Reuters) - Fifteen of Ukraine’s civilian airports have been damaged since Russia invaded the country in February 2022, Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal was quoted as saying by local media on Saturday.
Ukraine, which the state aviation service says has 20 civilian airports, has been exploring avenues to partially open its airspace. It has been completely closed since the start of the war.
Ukrainians who want to fly abroad currently have to go via road or rail to neighbouring countries to catch flights. For those living in the east, the journey out of Ukraine can take a day in itself.
“We conducted a risk assessment and determined the needs of the air defence forces to partially open the airspace,” local news agency Ukrinform quoted Shmyhal as saying at a transportation conference.
“Security issues and the military situation remain key to this decision,” he said.
Shmyhal added that Russia had attacked Ukraine’s port infrastructure nearly 60 times in the last three months, damaging or destroying nearly 300 facilities and 22 civilian vessels.
A senior partner at insurance broker Marsh McLennan told Reuters earlier this month that Ukraine could reopen the airport in the western city of Lviv in 2025 if regulators deem it safe and a political decision is made.
2 Likes