|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Zitat von seastorm
Storytime! Bisher war er für mich nur ein netter Erzählonkel.
| |
Gibt es nicht viel Stories zu. Ich hatte vorher durch das Fernsehen auch ein positiven Eindruck von ihm.
Aber im Studioumfeld war er ein nerviger Besserwisser, der sich gerne überall eingemischt hat. Grade bei Abläufen, die nichts mit ihm zu tun hatten oder seiner Meinung bedurften.
Genaueres fällt mir aus dem ff nicht mehr ein, aber das Bauchgefühl ist auch nach ca 6 Jahren noch geblieben.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ja gut, nerviger Besserwisser kann man jemandem, der das beruflich macht, sehr gut zutrauen. Gibt aber auch schlimmere Eigenschaften.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Putinversteher zum Beispiel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Streitkräfte und Strategien - Podcast, Tag 64, 0:30
| | In vielen Mails lesen wir von Eurer/Ihrer Furcht vor einem Atomkrieg, mit dem Putin gerade wieder unmissverständlich allen gedroht hat, die die Ukraine unterstützen.
Was sagen Fachleute dazu? Die analysieren die Lage, sehr kühl, sehr sachlich, und sehen selbst den Einsatz kleiner, sog. "taktischer" Atomwaffen, wenn überhaupt, dann nur als letzte Möglichkeit für Putin, um kurz vor einer drohenden Niederlage die Ukraine doch noch zur Annahme von Friedensbedingungen zu zwingen, die er dann zu Hause als Sieg verkaufen könnte.
Putins Preis wäre allerdings die absolute Ächtung, und es könnte zu einer nuklearen Eskalation kommen, die auch Russland treffen und im schlimmsten Fall vernichten würde.
Also: unwahrscheinlich.
Westhalb die amerikanische Denkfabrik "Atlantic Council" in einem Artikel zum westlichen Umgang mit der Eskalation in der Ukraine den Regierungen rät, eben nicht ständig über die Gefahr eines dritten Weltkrieges zu reden, und vor allem nicht darüber, was deshalb "auf gar keinen Fall" gemacht werden dürfe.
Weiter heißt es wörtlich: "Ein gewisses Maß an strategischer Unklarheit und die Möglichkeit einer Intervention einer Intervention der USA und der NATO, falls er [Putin] zu weit gehen sollte, können hilfreich sein, um russische Exzesse zu mildern und die Eskalation zu kontrollieren."
Abschreckung sei mehr Kunst als Wissenschaft, steht da noch, und es sei für Gegner eher ermutigend, wenn man ihnen zeige, dass man zu viel Angst hat, um in einen Krieg einzugreifen. | |
https://twitter.com/tomiahonen/status/1519989673711525889
| | This is latest count of Russian losses in its invasion war into Urkaine that has now run over 9 weeks via RT @KyivIndependent
23,000 dead Russian soldiers is now more than all killed in their 10 years war in Afghanistan plus dead in 2 years of the first Chechen War, combined | |
https://twitter.com/JackDetsch/status/1520000257647595520
| | NEW: Ukraine’s stiff resistance has limited Russian territorial gains in the Donbas and inflicted “significant” costs on Russian forces: UK Defense Intelligence
Fighting is heavy around Lysychansk & Severodonetsk. RU STILL hopes to gain full control of Luhansk & Donetsk regions | |
https://twitter.com/ThreshedThought/status/1519944083233517571 | Thread Reader
| | Time for an update on the Battle for Donbas
A thread.
As expected, the Russians have sort of fizzled.
They pulled all of these mauled units out of Kyiv, and then tried to reconstitute them for combat in the East. This is pretty hard and these new units would have been bruised and damaged from the Battle for Kyiv.
The Russians really had one chance - to build these units up - to build up a reserve, and then try to do some bold manoeuvre - and surround the Ukrainians in the East. The reason that was their one chance is they didn’t have anywhere near the 3:1 attackers to defenders ratio that you need, and so clever manoeuvring was the only option they had.
The Russians needed to clout not dribble. Unfortunately they dribbled. The dribbled by feeding these reconstituted units piecemeal into the front line - trying to fight a kind of attritional battle against the Ukrainians. The Russian ‘plan’ was grind the Ukr down with artillery and then waves of infantry. Kind WW2 stuff. The only problem is that style of warfare need loads of troops. Which the Russians don’t have. Cut your cloth to suit etc.
So the Russians are squandering / have squandered their one chance.
The Ukrainians have done the right thing here.
They are dug in, and so artillery effects them less. And then they are withdrawing in good order, so that they can inflict maximum damage to the Russians. They are trading space for enemy troops. Exactly the right tactics.
(The Russians are also so poorly trained and with such poor morale that they are STILL sticking to main roads which makes it pretty easy to ambush them, or find them with drones (which you use to then direct artillery on them)).
So we will see the Battle for Donbas culminate in maybe the next 2-4 weeks. Basically the Russians are gonna run out of troops, and the Ukrainians are going to counterattack.
More widely, there has been a major strategic shift in the war.
UK Foreign Sec Liz Truss has stated that the UK strategic aim is to evict Russian forces from Ukraine (including Crimea, so back to pre-2014 borders). She also said it would take ten years but she’s wrong about that: Russian forces will collapse before that, and we’ll see a coup)
This is a clear statement of intent by the UK, and would only have been made if it was felt that other NATO allies could and would sign up to it. It’s very welcome after some wishy washy thinking about strategic aims (although the activities were good).
The US at the same time has announced $33 BILLION of funding for Ukraine (or rather Biden has asked for from Congress). That is an extremely clear signal of intent.
Also means that NATO and the US have decided that Putin is bluffing about using Nukes if NATO up the ante.
Other issues:
Mariupol - Ru has basically stated they can’t take the steelworks.
Trans - looks like the Ukrs might be hitting targets there too, as with in Russia previously.
Kherson - Russians are trying to org a referendum, but the pop is non-compliant so this might be diff.
Strategic outlook:
Give it four weeks; we’ll see Donbas go in the other direction, then Crimea will start to come into play. | |
https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1519985062590259200
| | Some dark sarcasm is Russian military propagandist Aleksandr Sladkov’s commentary. Soldiers need to show heroism because someone has miscalculated Donbas offensive, he suggests.
Russian security milieu is transiting into its habitual “empire is betraying its soldiers” mode. | |
| | | Sladkov is embedded with Russian forces and has covered several Russian wars. He's very well-sourced (he was the first person to be invited to an SSO exercise). Sounds like he shares Girkin's pessimism for the second stage of this war. | |
bezogen auf diesen Kommentar des russischen Propagandisten Aleksandr Sladkov:
| | [Translation:]
DONBASS. HEROISM IS SUPERFLUOUS. IT DOES NOT EXIST WHERE EVERYTHING GOES ACCORDING TO PLAN.
We are going ahead heroically. There is an old proverb: "Someone's heroism is the result of someone else's mistakes." We cannot take Novomikhailovka, Marinka, Avdeevka or Peski.
Military forces of the DPR and Russia are storming Ukrainian Army and Nazi positions. They are heroic. They cannot penetrate the enemy defence from Donetsk. We all understand and will not go into details. | |
Lawrence Freedman, Emeritus Professor of War Studies King's College London
https://twitter.com/LawDavF/status/1519961166612729856
| | My latest post on the war, this time looking at the risks of a long war or an early escalation:
Escalators and Quagmires
| | | It is an unfortunate feature of wars that they are often launched with an expectation of swift and decisive conclusions but then spin out of control, losing both focus and limits. Just over thirty years ago I wrote an article describing how this happens, employing the familiar metaphors of escalation, describing how a war could progressively reach levels of increasing ferocity and danger, and quagmires, describing how belligerents could get stuck in an unwinnable conflict that they dare not lose. ... | |
| | The necessary condition for a negotiated settlement remains as has always been the case: for Moscow to recognise that this war is going badly and that its short-term military prospects are poor. Because of his past bombast it is hard to imagine a humbled Putin admitting meekly to a monumental failure. But if the alternatives are a quagmire that prolongs the misery or an escalation that yields no strategic benefit then perhaps within Russia’s elite, including the senior ranks of the military, there will be more stirrings against the continuation of this futile war. They might consider the implications of a complete battlefield failure in the Dombas and the potential value of an agreed, orderly withdrawal.
There is a lot of fighting to be done before we reach this stage, and it may never be reached, especially if Russian forces prove to be more successful in defence than in attack. But it is important that would-be mediators adjust their proposals to take account of the surprising and devastating course the war has taken. When it began advocates of an active peace diplomacy were wondering what sort of partition of his country Zelensky could be persuaded to accept. Now they need to consider the practicalities of getting Russian troops out of the country.
They should banish the notion that despite having set in motion this calamitous war Putin must be given some reward to bring it to a conclusion so that his ‘face’ can be saved and even greater calamities prevented. Zelensky’s face is as important as Putin’s, and he would lose his if - after all the sacrifices of his people - he was asked to find concessions to help render Putin’s defeat more palatable.
The problem from the start has not been Putin’s face but his mind. The track record of those attempting to anticipate his choices has been poor, and constant speculation about how he might lash out as he approaches his personal Götterdämmerung tends to make us more anxious than wise. There are all sorts of things that Putin might do to express his anger and frustration but none will gain him any lasting strategic advantage. The best course is for Ukraine to stick to its reasonable objective of expelling Russian troops from its soil and NATO to support them in that endeavour. | |
| |
https://twitter.com/evghenia_v/status/1519980623296872450
| | | With provocations in Transnistria over the past couple of days, you may have heard of the Cobasna arms depot. Here is what might happen if it is blown up. #Moldova is literally sitting on a huge bomb, that RU refused to dispose of over the past 30 years. | |
Andreas Kynast, ZDF-Hauptstadtstudio,
zum "offenen Brief an Olaf Scholz"
https://twitter.com/andikynast/status/1519968139202777089
| | Man muss nicht immer einig sein mit @MelnykAndrij, aber hier hat er recht.
Deutsche Prominente fordern unumwunden die Kapitulation eines angegriffenen Staats und beschuldigen dessen Regierung, halb umwunden, die Zivilbevölkerung zu opfern.
Groteske Täter-Opfer-Umkehr | |
Youtuber hat sich Satellitenbilder angeschaut und kommt zu dem Schluss, dass Russland noch ca. 6000 Tanks in Reserve rumstehen hat, von denen man vielleicht maximal 3000 wieder gängig machen könnte.
Zum Vergleich: Die USA haben ca. 3000 M1-Abrams in Reserve. Ältere M60-Panzer werden quasi nicht mehr aufbewahrt.
Russlands Reserve besteht aus verschiedenen Panzern, von T-54 bis T-90, wovon die jüngeren Panzer sicher eher wieder fahrbereit gemacht werden könnten.
|
|
[Dieser Beitrag wurde 8 mal editiert; zum letzten Mal von Herr der Lage am 29.04.2022 18:13]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Die Ukrainer müssen einfach ein paar Frösche schlucken, es geht um einen WELTKRIEG
Alice Schwarzer auf die Frage, wie sie meint dass der Brief in der Ukraine aufgenommen wird.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Zitat von Herr der Lage
More widely, there has been a major strategic shift in the war.
UK Foreign Sec Liz Truss has stated that the UK strategic aim is to evict Russian forces from Ukraine (including Crimea, so back to pre-2014 borders). She also said it would take ten years but she’s wrong about that: Russian forces will collapse before that, and we’ll see a coup)
This is a clear statement of intent by the UK, and would only have been made if it was felt that other NATO allies could and would sign up to it. It’s very welcome after some wishy washy thinking about strategic aims (although the activities were good).
The US at the same time has announced $33 BILLION of funding for Ukraine (or rather Biden has asked for from Congress). That is an extremely clear signal of intent.
Also means that NATO and the US have decided that Putin is bluffing about using Nukes if NATO up the ante.
| |
what.
also GB erwartet (oder möchte?) einen Coup d'etat? von wem, der russischen Armee?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"ich denke es kommt drauf an bei wem ... äh ... ich denke ... äh ... da denken nicht alle das gleiche so wie in Deutschland"
Alice auch hart ins Schwurbeln abgeglitten?
|
|
[Dieser Beitrag wurde 1 mal editiert; zum letzten Mal von eupesco am 29.04.2022 16:50]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Die olle TERF Tochter soll einfach mal ihr scheiß Maul halten.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vielleicht sollte sie mal wieder nen Frosch schlucken. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Zitat von Sniedelfighter
| | Zitat von Herr der Lage
More widely, there has been a major strategic shift in the war.
UK Foreign Sec Liz Truss has stated that the UK strategic aim is to evict Russian forces from Ukraine (including Crimea, so back to pre-2014 borders). She also said it would take ten years but she’s wrong about that: Russian forces will collapse before that, and we’ll see a coup)
This is a clear statement of intent by the UK, and would only have been made if it was felt that other NATO allies could and would sign up to it. It’s very welcome after some wishy washy thinking about strategic aims (although the activities were good).
The US at the same time has announced $33 BILLION of funding for Ukraine (or rather Biden has asked for from Congress). That is an extremely clear signal of intent.
Also means that NATO and the US have decided that Putin is bluffing about using Nukes if NATO up the ante.
| |
what.
also GB erwartet (oder möchte?) einen Coup d'etat? von wem, der russischen Armee?
| |
Nee, der Kommentator Mike Martin prophezeit einen Kollaps der russischen Truppen und einen Coup.
Von wem? Keine Ahnung. Von einem oder mehreren Nicht-Vladimirs in Russland, die mit der russischen Gesamtsituation unzufrieden sind, wahrscheinlich. 
|
|
[Dieser Beitrag wurde 1 mal editiert; zum letzten Mal von Herr der Lage am 29.04.2022 17:06]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Die Schwarzer steht mittlerweile so weit abseits, dass sich schon Feministinnen von ihr distanzieren. 
|
|
[Dieser Beitrag wurde 1 mal editiert; zum letzten Mal von KarlKoch am 29.04.2022 17:12]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Keine Memes, aber wenn der Generalstab der ukrainischen Streitkräfte selbst Axel F in der Crazy-Frog-Version unter Videos legt?
Musikalisch sind die eh weit vorne, fast egal welches Video
https://twitter.com/DefenceU
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Zitat von Sniedelfighter
| | Zitat von Herr der Lage
More widely, there has been a major strategic shift in the war.
UK Foreign Sec Liz Truss has stated that the UK strategic aim is to evict Russian forces from Ukraine (including Crimea, so back to pre-2014 borders). She also said it would take ten years but she’s wrong about that: Russian forces will collapse before that, and we’ll see a coup)
This is a clear statement of intent by the UK, and would only have been made if it was felt that other NATO allies could and would sign up to it. It’s very welcome after some wishy washy thinking about strategic aims (although the activities were good).
The US at the same time has announced $33 BILLION of funding for Ukraine (or rather Biden has asked for from Congress). That is an extremely clear signal of intent.
Also means that NATO and the US have decided that Putin is bluffing about using Nukes if NATO up the ante.
| |
what.
also GB erwartet (oder möchte?) einen Coup d'etat? von wem, der russischen Armee?
| |
Die russische Armee hat nicht das Prestige und nicht die Kompetenz zu putschen. Falls Putin abgesägt wird, dann aus dem Sicherheitsapparat- FSB, SVR, GRU usw.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Zitat von Poliadversum
| | Zitat von Sniedelfighter
| | Zitat von Herr der Lage
More widely, there has been a major strategic shift in the war.
UK Foreign Sec Liz Truss has stated that the UK strategic aim is to evict Russian forces from Ukraine (including Crimea, so back to pre-2014 borders). She also said it would take ten years but she’s wrong about that: Russian forces will collapse before that, and we’ll see a coup)
This is a clear statement of intent by the UK, and would only have been made if it was felt that other NATO allies could and would sign up to it. It’s very welcome after some wishy washy thinking about strategic aims (although the activities were good).
The US at the same time has announced $33 BILLION of funding for Ukraine (or rather Biden has asked for from Congress). That is an extremely clear signal of intent.
Also means that NATO and the US have decided that Putin is bluffing about using Nukes if NATO up the ante.
| |
what.
also GB erwartet (oder möchte?) einen Coup d'etat? von wem, der russischen Armee?
| |
Die russische Armee hat nicht das Prestige und nicht die Kompetenz zu putschen. Falls Putin abgesägt wird, dann aus dem Sicherheitsapparat- FSB, SVR, GRU usw.
| |
ja deswegen war ich so arg verwundert.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ist n Video von der Sun, aber egal, das ist halt echt unfassbar:
4 (vier) Panzer in 3 (drei) Minuten zerstört.
So kommt man dann zackig auf mehrere hundert kaputte Panzer, no problemo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UI in arabisch? Intredasting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jo, Stugna, sollte wohl exportiert werden. Hat man dann aus offensichtlichen Gründen sein gelassen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Zitat von Poliadversum
Jo, Stugna, sollte wohl exportiert werden. Hat man dann aus offensichtlichen Gründen sein gelassen
| |
Exportversion heißt Skif. Damit wurde übrigens auch schon ein KA52 im Flug getroffen.
|
|
[Dieser Beitrag wurde 1 mal editiert; zum letzten Mal von Buxxbaum am 29.04.2022 18:08]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kurzes Video über das Stugna-P-System generell
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Zitat von eupesco
Alice auch hart ins Schwurbeln abgeglitten?
| |
"abgeglitten"? Die war immer schon bekloppt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So halb, wenn auch nicht als Short direkt (mit Weiterscrollen und so):
|
|
[Dieser Beitrag wurde 2 mal editiert; zum letzten Mal von Herr der Lage am 29.04.2022 18:53]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Putin Pimmel
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19.08.2021 - obs ihn provoziert hat?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Zitat von -=Q=- 8-BaLL
19.08.2021 - obs ihn provoziert hat?
| |
Er konnte ja nicht die deutsche Polizei hinschicken. Vielleicht war das unser taktischer Fehler? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | Zitat von TylerDurdan
| | Zitat von -=Q=- 8-BaLL
19.08.2021 - obs ihn provoziert hat?
| |
Er konnte ja nicht die deutsche Polizei hinschicken. Vielleicht war das unser taktischer Fehler?
| |
Vlt. kann Alice Schwarzer vermitteln.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wie ist denn da die Stimmung so? Anschweigen, wie in einer dysfunktionalen WG?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ich las, es könnten Promo-Aufnahmen für die große Parade am 9. Mai sein. Vielleicht doch kein spontaner Gefühlsausbruch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Thema: Allgemeine Diskussion zum Ukraine Krieg |
