Anthony

I have a suspicion/fear, based on my extensive armchair knowledge, that although Crimea is Ukrainian land, militarily it is kind of a poisoned chalice, perhaps a bit like Snake Island, in that it's really difficult to hold, militarily. If/when Ukraine do take it, holding it safely will be tricky, as it's hard to defend. Let's see. Would love to be wrong.

My uncle Don had a garage and used to post me mine.

Ooh, yeah. Sixt are good for upgrades, but they're often the most expensive by a good margin. I remember they came out cheapest once, and they upgraded me to a Jag. Didn't smell of small heath thankfully.

One of the joys of not owning a car, is that when you need one you hire one, and picking up the car is like new car day. That day is today.

Rwanda?

Would be so happy if they did everything except broadcast it. Yeah Nige, all those horrible tasks you did? Nobody saw you. So, so sorry.

So many threads to put this in, but I have to choose one, so here it is. I feel like @bickster should now come in and tell us which ones were nice, and which ones were arseholes.

It took us five years! Don't tell me how to do property!

Yeah, such a frustration that they can only properly shield themselves from air attack over a small area, but it shows what they're capable of when it happens. Wouldn't it be great if the collective West saw this and gave them loads more.

Well, it could well be that they're doing all the right things already, and that it will eventually work and the Russians will be ground down to be an ineffective fighting force in Ukraine. F16’s make things much easier though. Their introduction would protect ground forces enabling them to move more quickly maybe? So I don't think the strategy would change, just the tactics. I need to dig up my armchair general sticker. EDIT: Found!

I don't think so either, at least as far as the country/regime is concerned. Russian armed forces occupying parts of Ukraine on the other hand...

True, but only afterwards. Right now, in the thick of it, looking at lines on the map tells you almost nothing.

I understand where you're all coming from, but I think you're looking at the wrong things. The war is about territory, so we measure the success or failure of each side by how much territory they control at the end of the war. The key is 'at the end of the war'. Right now the aim is to weaken the opponent, so that you can eventually retake lost territory/conquer new territory with greater ease and minimal loss, but it's nigh on impossible to work out how effective either side's efforts are. Right at the top of both militaries huge resource is put into establishing how much the opponent has been weakened, and following on from that, when is the most opportune time to advance. They have the best resources to do it, and they're pretty much in the dark. Us armchair generals, safe in our homes, hundreds and hundreds of miles away from the fighting have no chance whatsoever. The key indicators are looking at the strengths and weaknesses of either side, and see how they change over time. What are Ukraine's strengths? Morale, organisation, innovation, ability to learn, inexhaustible but slow and limited Western Weapons supply, robust logistics. Weaknesses are maybe manpower, reliance on Western donors that are infiltrated by Russian influence. Russia's strengths are manpower, although not as unlimited as is generally thought, influence tentacles all over the world at almost every level of decision making. Weaknesses are fragile logistics, low morale, inferior equipment, weak economy, limited ability to learn, dysfunctional command (operations conducted due to short term demands of politicians, rather than the needs of the war). And more. So for example, we know that Ukraine is degrading the Russian military machine, but we don't know by how much. We know that Russia is inflicting casualties on Ukraine, but we don't know how critical these losses are. So I guess, think of it as like a tug of war. You watch all the huffing and puffing thinking that it's a stalemate. Then one side collapses and the other side win.

Why Gobby Cabbage still gets employment as a football pundit. I mean, I can't stand the bloke at the best of times, but he could make it a bit harder for me to hate him by being good at his job. He's shit. He adds nothing I couldn't add, and I'm **** useless. "Ooh, that was good skill, that." "He's a good player, he is." "Great anticipation, that."

A gargle.

US cultural imperialism. What makes it worse is they don't know they're doing it.

Sorry, wasn't trying to be snarky. If you watch footage of ABBA back in the day, then watch the Voyage show it's so good it's uncanny. I do wonder how hard it would be to fake it for the Beakles? You'd have to have some amazing animators to get it right.

Good luck doing motion capture on George Harrison and John Lennon. I've been to the ABBA Voyage thing and it's **** awesome. Helped in no small part that the arena is designed specifically for it. The sound is amazing, and I'm a sound nerd. The transition between projected stuff and real stuff is absolutely seamless. /nerdgasm.

Yeah, fixing and cannibalising - all very normal. We do it in the UK and we're not even at war. The problem is that due to sanctions things massively complicate things for Russia. Sanctions will never stop the imports, but will make it harder/slower/more expensive/less reliable to get some of the more high tech spares. All that said, the rate a which they've been losing equipment in the last week or so, I doubt even the US on a full wartime economy footing would be able to replace the losses. And it's only a million tanks. Get it right. Attention to detail is important.

Ah, money talks. I guess it's like touch rugby for kids. The idea is you get kids seeing it, then buying NFL merchandise, sorry, playing the sport, then it gets worldwide popular, then rugby players have to wear armor {sp} and helmets and doing touchdowns instead of trys. THEN they buy the merchandise and lots of money drains to the US

I don't think they have an unlimited number of fighting age men, but I believe the Russian leadership thinks so. Their tactics suggest so.. I think that's all they know how to do, on the battlefield at least.

Funnily enough, I read about those defences about half an hour after I posted. "We're going to go them at their strongest point." "Why sir?" "it's the LAST thing they'll expect!" "A cunning plan indeed."

It is kind of nuts the losses the Russians are taking, but my fear is that the AFU will be overwhelmed with sheer numbers; obviously a constant fear in this war, but it's one of the few 'tactics' the Russians have that appear to 'work'. It's all about power at a point. It's obviously great that the AFU can eliminate loads of Russian forces, but can the AFU get enough troops/equipment in place quickly enough to stop the Russian attacks? Who knows. I hope so.

She'll be alright, it's the Australian way mate. No worries etc.

Ah, brilliant. I'd almost given up. Never going to happen though.