[HN Gopher] How Russia Took over the Internet in Crimea and East...
___________________________________________________________________
How Russia Took over the Internet in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine
Author : rntn
Score : 206 points
Date : 2022-02-26 11:10 UTC (11 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.datacenterdynamics.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.datacenterdynamics.com)
| pvaldes wrote:
| Putin wanted so much to be Stalin that has ignored the first rule
| of successful bullying. Hit your targets one by one. Never, ever,
| threaten the entire class at the same time. The usual outcome is
| everybody teaming against the bully until removing him/her.
|
| So the longer this situation lasts, the worse for Putin also.
| Higher probability that the Russians will eventually say enough
| is enough, and throw him under the bus to get rid of him. Maybe
| this is one of the reasons to give the army something to do. He
| is entering the same age when Stalin started his decadence until
| being poisoned by their own people at 73 Yo, and is not earning a
| lot of friends lately. He's looking more and more desperate for a
| fast victory.
|
| Threatening with giving Sweden and Finland the same treatment as
| Ukraine is also interesting. Will not grant him a lot of sympathy
| among the Linux crew and open source world for sure. If you rely
| a lot on cyber-war, disinformation and cryptocurrencies, going
| after the quiet wallflowers in the class that hold many keys in
| this field can backfire easily.
| pvaldes wrote:
| GNU changing overnight all the support for Russian language to
| Finnish just to send a message, would not be an unexpected
| outcome for example.
| anonu wrote:
| This is why we need Starlink. An internet that is cheap, free,
| open, independent of govt control is a geopolitical game changer.
| CharlesW wrote:
| > _An internet that is cheap, free, open, independent of govt
| control..._
|
| Absolutely! We're far better off with a global satellite
| network controlled by a U.S.-based private company.
| decebalus1 wrote:
| > cheap, free, open, independent of govt control
|
| Literally neither of those is true about Starlink.
| 6jQhWNYh wrote:
| Makes me wonder whether the original comment was satirical
| but I doubt it
| atlantas wrote:
| Starlink combined with decentralized finance is how we put
| authoritarian governments into the rear view of history.
| BellLabradors wrote:
| https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1497701484003213317
| carrolldunham wrote:
| Yeah there was this post on here yesterday "Here comes the tiktok
| war" presuming there was going to be all this media spraying out
| on socials but then there was just nothing. All the gawkers are
| asking "huh? Is this war even real?" then I see apparently Russia
| blocked twitter (and presumably other sites) on all the ISPs
| around there -
|
| https://twitter.com/netblocks/status/1497523148362862593
| dade_ wrote:
| Ukraine (and everyone else on this planet) needs to counter
| Putin's constant barrage of misinformation. There are lessons
| here for all of us.
|
| 'I need ammunition, not a ride': Zelensky declines US
| evacuation offer, while Russian media announces he left the
| country:
| https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/1497257833095733252?s=20...
|
| And tell the story of how the war is actually being conducted:
| https://twitter.com/aletweetsnews/status/1497008826201124870...
| pjc50 wrote:
| I believe a lot of the media is getting taken down - the
| bot/partisan armies are reporting it as offensive, and a large
| enough volume of reports inevitably gets things removed. There
| was an article on here yesterday about "banned from youtube for
| watching a livestream of the conflict".
| zuminator wrote:
| That's an efficient short term solution to their war on
| information control, but it's really just a delay. The problem
| for them is the sheer ubiquity of devices which can still
| record without access to the internet, and then be taken to
| regions where they can reconnect to the world and spill their
| secrets. People have come to expect the basic ability to
| communicate on a level that our forbears scarcely dreamed of.
|
| "A well connected Community, being necessary to the security of
| a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Phones,
| shall not be infringed."
| eru wrote:
| I would hope that if any constitution of any country gets a
| right to bear phones baked into it, they won't take the
| incredibly confusing wording of the second amendment of the
| US constitution as their role model.
| zuminator wrote:
| Good point!
| rhino369 wrote:
| A well regulated social network being necessary for a free
| state, the right to keep and bear phones shall not be
| infringed.
|
| What isn't clear about that :)
| kQq9oHeAz6wLLS wrote:
| Agreed, or else you'll get people clamoring for the
| government to control the phone industry because they
| misinterpreted the period meaning of "regulated" (that is,
| definition 2 here[1] not definition 1)
|
| [1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/regulate
| AnonymousPlanet wrote:
| Somehow I have the impression that Russia has dropped the mask
| and doesn't feel it's necessary to pretend anymore.
| yurish wrote:
| No, twitter is working fine right now
| soared wrote:
| There is a ton of media/livestreams/etc if you're in the right
| places. r/combatfootage, twitter, various livestreams on
| youtube/twitch/etc, telegram, etc.
| vbezhenar wrote:
| sillysaurusx wrote:
| Is anyone else completely shocked that our Ukrainian friends seem
| to have stable high speed internet?
|
| I have two friends there, and I've been talking to about a dozen
| others. Not one of them have disappeared, or said "My internet
| might be spotty; there's a war here after all."
|
| I don't know how long it can last, but this feels like a modern
| miracle. Who are the unsung heroes keeping the internet up? There
| must be some sysadmins somewhere that are really taking care of
| business, even though tanks are almost literally rolling down
| their street.
| mrvenkman wrote:
| I pondered the exact same question. My thought process settled
| on...
|
| keeping the data network alive makes it easier for the Russian
| military to communicate and maybe infiltrate. Shutting
| everything down removes attack vectors.
| perryizgr8 wrote:
| Russia is focusing exclusively on military infrastructure. They
| are actively avoiding civilian damage. So it is not a surprise
| that internet is up.
| artem247 wrote:
| terminalcommand wrote:
| I heard a rumor that Russia cannot disconnect Ukraine's
| internet infrastructure, because it is somehow interconnected
| with Poland, which is a NATO member. Disrupting Poland's
| internet could be seen as an act of agression against a NATO
| ally and would require NATO to respond. Again, this is only a
| rumor that I have heard, don't have any sources to back it up.
| Maybe someone here knows more?
| HWR_14 wrote:
| I do remember yesterday or the day before, NATO confirmed
| that cyberattacks fall into the category of attacks that
| require an Article 5 response. That is, Russia taking out
| Poland's internet would be considered an attack on NATO.
|
| If Poland and Ukraine have intertwined backbones, that may
| have been the reason NATO felt compelled to make the
| announcement.
| k0k0r0 wrote:
| Oh, yeah thats is quite something important I would like to
| have disproved or verified.
| lodovic wrote:
| On the other hand, there were reports that the Russian navy
| has damaged parts of the internet cable between Norway and
| the Arctic. Norway is a NATO member, too.
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29903777
| noAnswer wrote:
| Targeted attacks on water- , civilian energy-supply or
| civilian communications infrastructure is a war crime.
| iso1210 wrote:
| One of my 2 routers in Kyiv is on AS16007 'UKRAINIAN-
| AMERICAN-SWISS LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP "KANCOM"'
|
| Tracerouting to it from London shows traffic going from
| London onto AS8359 MTS (Russian ISP), seemingly to Frankfurt
| then Moscow, then to AS21497 PrJSC VF UKRAINE
|
| The other router is on AS1820 WNET. Traceroute dies at London
| going to Ukraine, coming back the other way the ISP uses
| 100.64 ranges, so no idea where it routes. RTT via Russia is
| 70ms and via unknown is 40ms so I suspect it's direct.
|
| Clearly Moscow could stop advertising Ukraine traffic out to
| the west, but then I guess traffic would be harder to
| intercept.
| traceroute66 wrote:
| > Is anyone else completely shocked that our Ukrainian friends
| seem to have stable high speed internet?
|
| Not really.
|
| I mean, its clear they have good reason for a deep-seated
| mistrust of their Russian neighbours. So clearly when
| establishing international IP transit links they have opted
| time and time again to connect in a Western direction, and
| evidently this has paid off.
|
| Achieving in-country resilience is then not particularly
| difficult as long as you have geographically dispersed
| datacentres and nobody starts cutting fibres or toppling 4G
| masts.
|
| I think it speaks more of what the Russian goal here is. Its
| clear the Russians planned this as a "shock & awe" blitzkrieg,
| basically hoping for a rapid "victory". So their priority has
| evidently been to capture as many high-value targets as
| possible in the shortest period of time. Let's face it, the
| Russians are not stupid, if they wanted to make the Ukranians
| suffer they would have targeted all their resources at Odessa
| (70% of Ukraine's imports and exports) and they would have
| disrupted communications.
|
| Indeed, the Russians could have disrupted communications early
| on if they wanted to. No bombs required, just a few special
| forces types.
|
| Edit to add: To support the above, take a look at the Arelion
| (a.k.a Telia Carrier) network map[1]. Shows two international
| connections to Kyiv from Hamburg and Vienna (and nothing in an
| Eastern direction). No doubt the map story would be similar
| with other Tier 1 carriers.
|
| [1] https://www.arelion.com/our-network.html
| sillysaurusx wrote:
| > Let's face it, the Russians are not stupid.
|
| I thought so too. But one surprising thing about military
| conflict is that it's easy to be stupid.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lICRQPIduFc&ab_channel=Monte.
| ..
|
| Even with overwhelming superiority during WW2, the US damn
| near lost their first attempt to invade Japan.
|
| Ditto for Japan attacking Midway, and every other decisive
| battle.
|
| It's unclear what Russia is even trying to achieve at this
| point. Supposedly they've only committed 1/3rd of their
| forces, which means they have about 100k troops in reserve.
| But the 50k they did commit seem to have achieved nothing. I
| was expecting a blackout (thanks to air bombardment),
| followed by a destruction of Ukraine's air force, then the
| fall of Kiev. Not one of those things happened.
|
| It really makes you question whether Russia's reputation is
| well-earned.
|
| The next few days will be crucial. Russia has only a few more
| chances to plan their next moves. If they continue failing,
| they'll be forced to withdraw when they run out of supplies.
| Which is to say, a Ukrainian victory doesn't seem to be
| impossible, and it doesn't seem to be the result of Russia
| not wanting to punch too hard.
| philistine wrote:
| > Even with overwhelming superiority during WW2, the US
| damn near lost their first attempt to invade Japan. > Ditto
| for Japan attacking Midway, and every other decisive
| battle.
|
| What you're missing here is the fog of war. When decisions
| are viewed through what information was available to the
| decision-makers, it paints a far more relatable picture. No
| one was stupid at Midway. Have a look at this long video
| going through the battle from the Japanese perspective:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bd8_vO5zrjo
| sgc wrote:
| As of now the estimate is they have committed 50% to
| Ukraine, that is pushing hard at the upper limit of how
| many can actually be committed before there is no
| logistical support at all. They could go to 2/3 for a short
| time, but even more of them would be wandering about
| begging for food than are now.
|
| They appear to have made the same mistake as Rumsfeld when
| invading Iraq, a similar sized country with a similar sized
| invading force - he tried to go light and immediate
| reinforcements were required. The difference is the country
| of Ukraine is better prepared, they have better resolve,
| and some better weapons, while the Russians have far lower
| equipment quality, morale, and training.
|
| Nonetheless, there is an enormous logistical advantage of
| attacking a neighbor from three sides and not a country
| halfway around the world. Ukraine also has much more
| forgiving terrain for an attacker than Iraq.
|
| Everything is up in the air, but I share your optimism that
| Ukraine could come out on top.
| oceanplexian wrote:
| Why would Russia run out of supplies? They have an
| unlimited and uninterrupted supply line back to Belarus and
| Russia in multiple directions. I find it more likely the
| folks in Kiev run out of food in a few days.I support the
| Ukrainians but the writing is clearly on the wall and it
| makes more sense the Russians would wait them out and use
| their air superiority to keep supplies out of Kiev, for
| example.
| toast0 wrote:
| > Why would Russia run out of supplies? They have an
| unlimited and uninterrupted supply line back to Belarus
| and Russia in multiple directions.
|
| I'm not an experienced armchair logisticians, but it
| seems like at this moment: Russia can't bring in supplies
| to the airfields; Ukraine has anti-tank weapons that I'd
| expect to work well against supply convoys; Ukraine has a
| motivated population resistant to the Russians.
|
| Maybe the route from Belarus, through the Chernobyl
| exclusion zone is short enough to avoid interruptions.
| And if Russia can establish operations at an airstrip,
| that changes a lot. The route from the south seems
| disruptable because there's a single bridge chokepoint.
| (But maybe temporary bridges are viable, again, no
| logistics experience).
| dragontamer wrote:
| Russia doesn't even have air superiority yet. Ukrainian
| air force is blowing up elite paratroopers before they
| even have a chance to reach the front lines.
|
| This entire invasion is already a disaster. Russia still
| has an advantage but they're taking unnecessary losses
| already.
|
| -------
|
| No Ukrainian city is encircled yet either. Kyiv can't run
| out of food when it's still safe for supplies to come
| into the city.
|
| Russia needs to establish the basics, and haven't even
| done that yet.
|
| EDIT: it's been like 3 days. It's too soon to expect
| Russia's military to have a big success yet. Russia's
| superior weaponry should have a relatively easy time
| but... Russia is basically trying to perform 4 or 5
| simultaneous 'Battle of Fallujah's here simultaneously.
|
| Just going all in on major cities around the country
| simultaneously, where most people in those cities really
| hate Russians right now.
| A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
| It appears to be an accurate assessment. I was expecting
| to see blitzkrieg based on initial reports, but it seems
| less likely now. In a very real sense, I hope that is the
| case.
| dragontamer wrote:
| If anything, the Russians are moving in too fast. I think
| the Russians really were going for the 'decapitation',
| trying to quickly kill or capture the politicians in
| Kyiv, leaving the Ukrainians leaderless.
|
| All signs point to this IMO. Russians have failed in that
| attempt this far, but it's only day 3.
|
| Ukraine has been routing or killing a lot of airborne /
| paratroopers in and around Kyiv (Russian VDV units).
| Russia really is going for a quick victory, committing so
| many airborne units there.
| kabes wrote:
| But in all likelihood Russia still wins easily from
| Ukraine. Even if at a slightly higher cost than hoped
| ceejayoz wrote:
| The initial war? Quite possibly.
|
| The ensuing Western-supported insurgency, under the name
| of either Zelenskyy the hero or Zelenskyy the martyr?
| Quite a bit more doubtful.
| dragontamer wrote:
| Russia has already lost more airplanes than the US did in
| the entirety of the Iraq war. (USA lost 24 fixed-wing
| aircraft in all of Iraq 2003 to 2009).
|
| I do realize that this is a Ukrainian propaganda, but
| their claims are incredible: https://mobile.twitter.com/E
| uromaidanPress/status/1497643063...
|
| 7 aircraft shot down in a singular night, including 2x
| IL-76 MD just last night alone. Big, slow, 4-wing
| transport airplanes (carrying either 100+ paratroopers or
| heavy equipment to the front lines). These aren't drones
| they're shooting down, Ukrainians continue to threaten
| the logistical support Russia needs to feed the front
| lines.
|
| We're no longer in "slightly higher cost" territory.
| We're in "Russians failed to disable Ukrainian's airforce
| and air-defenses... advanced _ANYWAY_ and are taking
| heavy losses" territory.
|
| Yeah, Russia may win after this. But what's incredible...
| something completely unthinkable just a few days ago...
| is that the Ukrainians might actually win conventionally.
| Russia's failure to disable Ukrainian's air force is
| already a costly mistake, especially because Russia
| continues to advance despite being in a state of air-
| parity with the Ukrainians.
|
| --------
|
| I think the Ukrainian city of Kharkiv is in trouble
| however. But there's video proof of entire convoys being
| blown up (https://mobile.twitter.com/JimmySecUK/status/14
| 9757339550817...) on their way to Kharkiv, definitely
| proving that the Ukrainian Air Force continues to fly.
| traceroute66 wrote:
| > But the 50k they did commit seem to have achieved
| nothing.
|
| A bit far-fetched I admit, but thinking outside the box,
| perhaps those on the Russian side of the front line don't
| really fancy being involved in this ? In other words, "we
| need to make some noise because the boss is watching" but
| really the commitment isn't there.
|
| Reason I say that is perhaps its an extension of what we
| saw on that infamous broadcast where Putin was seeking
| approval from his cabinet but some of them were struggling
| to find a way to disagree without actually saying it.
|
| > It really makes you question whether Russia's reputation
| is well-earned.
|
| But this is also a possibility of course.
|
| Who knows. Its impossible to second-guess Putin.
| ZeroGravitas wrote:
| Robert Axelrod's "evolution of co-operation" book on Game
| Theory discusses instances of German and Allied trench
| forces in WWI firing their artillery at the same time and
| place each day so it looks and sounds like a war is
| happening but the poor schmucks on the front line aren't
| needlessly murdering each other. It supposses they can
| organize this without any explicit communication as it's
| fairly obvious when someone is trying to kill you.
|
| There's also a long history of people in wars not even
| firing their weapons covered in the book "On Killing".
| People generally don't want to needlessly kill other
| human beings and a big part of army training and tactics
| is to work around this basic human instinct e.g. making
| you fight to keep your small group of friends alive,
| rather than for the financial benefit of some oligarch
| hundreds of miles away in safety.
| HWR_14 wrote:
| > People generally don't want to needlessly kill other
| human beings and a big part of army training and tactics
| is to work around this basic human instinct e
|
| I wonder if that's the actual source of the purported
| necessary 3:1 attacker to defender ratio in an
| insurgency. You have three times as many people willing
| to kill to defend their home as to invade, so you need
| more people to get the same number of shooters.
| brabel wrote:
| > perhaps those on the Russian side of the front line
| don't really fancy being involved in this ?
|
| I think that's definitely the case, Russians are very
| close to Ukrainians culturally and ethnically. They were
| on the same side on several wars.
|
| I think this may explain why things are not going full on
| bloodthirsty kill-everything-that-moves yet... but just
| wait until coffins start piling up on the hangar. Seeing
| your mates being killed has a way to make you de-humanize
| and hate the other side, no matter who they are. That's
| how you end up with entire cities bombed to the ground in
| later stages of a war... I don't think any war starts
| that way, that's how it usually ends though.
|
| Let's hope they'll find a way to stop this in time.
| throwaway894345 wrote:
| In another thread, commenters were remarking about how
| ineffectual protests by the Russian people would be on
| account of Putin not caring about their opinions. Whether
| or not that's true, I wonder if the Russian people could
| shame their soldiers into a degree of ineffectiveness
| ("throwing the game").
| A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
| No, but upper echelon is well-versed in money and power.
| If it seems like Putin is losing the game, their opinion
| could change the power structure. That is not
| automatically a good thing by the way. There is a reason
| 'devil known' is a phrase.
| rndgermandude wrote:
| >It's unclear what Russia is even trying to achieve at this
| point.
|
| That's really the crux of the matter here. What is Russia's
| goal here? If you're operating on the assumption that they
| indeed want to capture the entire Ukraine, it then indeed
| looks like they aren't doing as well as a lot of people
| seem to have expected, thus far.
|
| However, it's possible that Putin is using the Russo-
| Georgian-War (2008) playbook again which didn't aim to
| capture the entire country, with the goals of ultimately
| capturing only some of East Ukraine (Dombass in particular,
| and keeping Crimea) and forcing the remaining Ukraine in
| negotiations to become a "neutral" state located between
| Russia and NATO/EU. While again embarrassing the West and
| their military and diplomatic resolve as a cherry-on-top.
| That Russia has been hitting targets in the west of Ukraine
| might have been to destroy Ukrainian military's
| capabilities and capacities, in this scenario.
|
| Even if it's the Georgian playbook again, I still think
| Putin might have grossly overplayed his hand there. The
| NATO and EU will likely not let go as easily this time,
| especially not because in particular Poland, the Czech
| Republic and the Baltic states as NATO and EU members feel
| very threatened and expressed themselves as such.
| sgc wrote:
| It's 50 more years of standoff if a Russian doesn't give
| Putin the coup de grace, because of the geographic
| location. But that is what Putin wanted - to consolidate
| fiefdoms and polarize the divisions.
| prostoalex wrote:
| > forcing the remaining Ukraine in negotiations to become
| a "neutral" state located between Russia and NATO/EU
|
| This keeps coming up as if Ukraine's acceptance into NATO
| was imminent any day now. Realistically NATO membership
| Ukraine was decades away, if ever.
|
| It's a convenient pretext pitched mainly by Russian
| media, which needed to frame the sense of urgency, but
| the real reason must be elsewhere.
| swores wrote:
| Hypothetically if you were Putin and that was the actual
| reason, wouldn't you want to deal with it asap when it's
| still years or decades away, rather than wait until it's
| close enough that your invasion might lead to them
| quickly signing it and then sending in Nato forces? Not
| to mention the fact that he might not trust reports of
| how far away it is and think it's happening sneakily
| behind his back soon?
|
| I've no idea what Putin's motives are, but I don't think
| the fact that Ukraine joining Nato wasn't weeks away from
| happening prevents it from being as likely a reason as if
| it was that imminent.
| philistine wrote:
| Russia's demography is declining, and global warming will
| thaw the permafrost and annihilate a ton of
| infrastructure in the East. Oil prices are high right
| now, but European reliance on Russian oil is probably at
| the highest it will ever be. Putin is not getting
| younger, and he probably wants to finish the long work of
| integrating Ukraine into his governance system before he
| dies. The Russian army, as the last three days have
| shown, is strong, but not getting stronger with every
| passing day. It's probably way past its prime.
|
| Even though what Putin hated was not the risk of Ukraine
| joining NATO, but merely Ukraine saying it wanted to join
| NATO, on the Russian side, it might have been now or
| never for Putin.
| drran wrote:
| Russians fear that NATO will join Ukraine.
| nine_zeros wrote:
| It has only been 3 days. I would give it 30 days for them
| to destroy (or more likely take control) of critical
| Ukrainian infrastructure.
|
| Make no mistake. This is a seizure of Ukrainian land,
| sovereignty, resources and infrastructure.
| the_af wrote:
| Isn't 30 days essentially a military and political
| failure though? I can see in Putin's thinking that a 3-5
| day long decapitation strike would be feasible, and then
| they occupy Kiev and it's _fait accompli_.
|
| But 30 days, with almost all of the world against it?
| It's way too long and someone else may get involved.
| tomatotomato37 wrote:
| Desert Storm took that long when you consider the initial
| air campaign, and even then the ground invasion still
| took 4 days in a theater with complete air superiority,
| decent terrain for a mechanical warfare rush, and local
| support from Kuwait and Saudi Arabia
| the_af wrote:
| But was the rest of the world almost unanimously against
| Desert Storm?
|
| I simply cannot see a scenario where a 30+ day slog in
| Ukraine, with attrition and mounting casualties, has any
| positive outcome for Putin.
|
| (I struggle to see any positive outcome for Putin anyway
| and cannot understand what his endgame is, to be honest.
| Even success at toppling Ukraine's government, if
| achieved at all, may prove to be short-lived)
| jrexilius wrote:
| If Putin doesn't care about the opinion of his own
| voters, the whining of the Western world wont matter
| (China, Iran, Venzuela and others are not against
| Russia).
| the_af wrote:
| But don't you think in a protracted conflict some power
| is bound to get involved, triggering an escalation? With
| each day, week and month the chances of this increase.
|
| It's one thing for Putin to get it done in a week or so.
| Even then, how does he plan to hold his puppet government
| in Kiev?
| jrexilius wrote:
| I wish I could be as optimistic as you are about that but
| looking at Georgia, Belarus, and other recent historical
| examples makes that hard. China, Russia, and Iran (with
| hangers-on like Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, et al) have
| been working hard at building an alternate global trade
| and financial system for more than a decade now,
| precisely to remove what little socio-economic leverage
| the west had. And, it's stil winter in Europe. The
| Germans and French need to heat their homes, which
| currently depends on Russian gas.
|
| Also keep in mind that China is working towards this same
| "resolution" with Taiwan. It's in their interest for
| Russia to succeed here.
| [deleted]
| Denvercoder9 wrote:
| > decent terrain for a mechanical warfare rush, and local
| support from Kuwait and Saudi Arabia
|
| This applies to Russia in Ukraine as well. It's mostly
| flat plains, Russia has support from Belarus and is a
| direct neighbour itself.
| mardifoufs wrote:
| Russia supposedly stopped the offensive yesterday for
| negotiations and it's now back on. Makes sense considering
| how calm the front was yesterday and how we are seeing tons
| of movement today. But of course that could be pure BS,
| it's hard to even get verification that things were
| actually calm yesterday since both sides have a pretty
| solid opsec... at least compared to what I got used to with
| the syrian civil war!
| ipodopt wrote:
| I am not an expert but this is my rough take.
|
| It seems that the Russians are having logistical issues.
| They are running out of gas. Not sure how but it seems
| like it.
|
| We are hearing today about them sending in more armored
| divisions. These will re enforce the supply lines. But
| this is a really risky play. It is a double edge sword.
| Now that they send more in they need even more gas. And
| if they run out they suffer a larger loss. What good are
| 4,000 tanks without fuel? Suddenly your armored division
| are infantry divisions who are outgunned on foreign soil.
|
| The less risky play would be to withdraw there armor
| pretty far back. But this means an extend war. Which they
| should lose do to basically endless international support
| to the Ukraine and their willingness to fight.
|
| So the play would be to pull back and stick to claiming
| the small section of the separateness region they have
| capture so far. This is will happened when the last of
| the armored units cross the line to cover the retreat.
| Given Ukraine can last four more days and keep the supply
| lines broken.
| [deleted]
| mint2 wrote:
| That is most certainly BS. There is no doubt, no
| question.
|
| For the past several months Russia's stated efforts at
| diplomacy have been an utter farce, the saying "pissing
| on you and saying it's rain" does not go far enough.
|
| Now all of a sudden Russia says they paused for
| negotiations... "fool me once shame on you; fool me 100
| times with the same ruse, I should stop taking drugs"
| aix1 wrote:
| > Russia supposedly stopped the offensive yesterday for
| negotiations and it's now back on.
|
| An important caveat is that this is according to Russia.
|
| Ukraine's version is quite different (it was Russia's
| attempt to lure Ukraine's top officials to Minsk, which
| is the only place where Russia is prepared to conduct the
| talks).
|
| In any event, it seems pretty clear that there was no
| actual ceasefire yesterday or today.
| alexryndin wrote:
| Sorry, I'm a noob in HN interface and didn't find how to
| answer your original comments --
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30478874
|
| > This "evidently Ukrainian site" is a Kremlin propaganda
| outlet
|
| I'm not going reasoning here about how propagandistic is
| stopfake itself, because, as I already said, if you only
| wanted, you could easily find some information about this
| s*ithole for example:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t05R_cPVjtU
|
| but I ask you:
|
| did you find any confirmation or refutation of my words?
|
| is the _current_ advisor of the president of Ukraine any
| pro russian?
| alexryndin wrote:
| > An important caveat is that this is according to
| Russia.
|
| if you really wanted to, you could easily find an article
| on the evidently Ukrainian site, stated that "Advisor to
| the head of the Office of the President of Ukraine
| Oleksiy Orestovich in a comment to the Country confirmed
| that Ukraine refused to negotiate with Russia." (thanks
| to google translate)
|
| https://strana.today/news/379089-ukraina-otkazalas-ot-
| pereho...
|
| In this time it is really easy to wash brains and make
| fake news, but if you make a little effort and use
| different sources, you can always find the truth, and I
| encourage everyone to do so, use Telegram public
| channels, contact people from the "other side", always
| double check mass media and don't be ignorant.
| aix1 wrote:
| > an article on the evidently Ukrainian site
|
| This "evidently Ukrainian site" is a Kremlin propaganda
| outlet:
|
| https://www.stopfake.org/en/strana-ua-or-strana-ru-how-a-
| san...
| pell wrote:
| Strana is a pro-Russian website.
| drran wrote:
| <<Strana>> (strana, country) is a Russian word. The
| Ukrainian word is <<kraina>> (krayina).
| mardifoufs wrote:
| Agreed 100% that this is absolutely just from russian and
| like _very_ pro russian sources. The only reason why I
| give it any credit is that it fits with the reality on
| the ground. If russia was pushing and got actually
| stalled, I 'd have expected to see a lot more air raids
| and shelling. Yesterday was weirdly calm, even when it
| comes to airstrikes, bombings etc. Not exactly the signs
| of a desperate push
| alexryndin wrote:
| is the adviser to the President of Ukraine seems to be
| _very_ pro russian to you?
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30478794
| aix1 wrote:
| Again, the source that your other comment cites is a
| Kremlin propaganda outlet. There's little reason to trust
| it to accurately represent Ukraine government's position
| on anything related to this war.
|
| https://www.stopfake.org/en/strana-ua-or-strana-ru-how-a-
| san...
| drran wrote:
| Search your <<facts>> in this little collection of
| Russian fakes with 13000+ items:
| https://euvsdisinfo.eu/disinformation-cases/
| aix1 wrote:
| My interpretation is they're pushing and (sadly) making
| progress, though much slower than they'd like.
|
| https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russia-
| ukraine...
|
| Judging by the many videos of interrogations of Russian
| POWs, many of them are just kids who barely know where
| they are, are unmotivated and poorly equipped. Hardly a
| professional and well-equipped army. There are also
| indications of logistical challenges (videos of Russian
| military vehicles running out of fuel, that sort of
| thing).
| extrapickles wrote:
| Running out of fuel is pretty common in military vehicles
| as the fuel gauges are at best reliable to half a tank.
|
| Drivers are supposed to track how far they have driven,
| but if its driven by multiple people and someone forgets
| to log distance or the vehicle is forced to idle for a
| long time the distance can be off.
|
| Also a broken fuel gauge will not mark the vehicle as a
| casualty. Its not critical equipment as your supposed to
| be tracking fuel usage as a driver.
| justsomehnguy wrote:
| The main problem (?) here is why Russian forces totally
| forgot how to move in a convoy.
|
| They constantly lose their mates, move in a line like
| they are on a parade, move without deployed AA.
|
| This is beyond "unmotivated and poorly equipped", this is
| Africa/Middle East levels of incompetency.
|
| There is something very, very fishy going there.
| drran wrote:
| Ukraine is open to a negotiation with Putin at Hague.
| Putin refuses, but Ukraine will convince him.
| jl6 wrote:
| It's only day 3 and Ukraine is big. I imagine Plan A was to
| expect the Ukrainian military to surrender rapidly, and
| they are now gathering and mobilising for Plan B.
| thfuran wrote:
| "Hope the enemy immediately surrenders" should never be
| plan A.
| Denvercoder9 wrote:
| Why not? It's usually the lowest cost (in money, materiel
| and bloodshed) option for both sides, so it doesn't seem
| a bad first option. Of course it's unlikely to happen, so
| you should be ready to execute a plan B.
| azeirah wrote:
| ~It can definitely work, see for instance Nazi Germany ->
| Poland.~
|
| Edit: Nevermind. I am very wrong on this. What I
| understood to be a "quick" victory from my vague memory
| of history lessons was a month. I also never considered
| that Poland never surrendered but _lost_ the invasion.
| There was no surrender.
|
| If Putin believes he had the means to capture Kyiv within
| a really short time AND he believes his own propaganda
| that Ukrainians are idiots and cowards and drug addicts
| and whatever then yeah. I do see how you could logically
| conclude that they would surrender quickly.
|
| But Ukraine turned out to have an extremely strong
| leader, raising morale to levels far beyond Russia's.
| Turns out the folk is nationalistic, proud and doesn't
| want to take shit from Russia.
|
| So many civilians in Kyiv are joining the fight because
| they want to and they have to.
|
| Is that what Putin was expecting? I don't know.
|
| Do want to note that on Dutch television a historian
| stated that he believes Russia believes they will have
| Kyiv captured before early March, since airports near the
| Ukrainian border have been closed until then. So while 3
| days is long for Kyiv to hold out, the reality might be
| they'll have to hold out for at least 2 weeks before it
| starts really mattering in the eyes of Putin.
| hervature wrote:
| > It can definitely work, see for instance Nazi Germany
| -> Poland.
|
| What are you talking about? The invasion lasted several
| weeks and had the support of the USSR. They quite
| literally destroyed the Polish army. In fact, Poland
| never officially surrendered.
| A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
| >>Is that what Putin was expecting? I don't know.
|
| This is the weird point to me. I had zero problem
| understanding why Afghanistan fell as quickly as did it.
| And that is with seeming IC warnings that Taliban had
| enough clout and American's sufficiently disliked.
|
| It is hard for me to believe Russia did not have
| appropriate intelligence on nation's mood as a whole. And
| it seems like they either did or disregarded it.
|
| Maybe there are other considerations at play that weigh
| harder than the risk. Then again, if Chechnya showed
| anything, it is that Russia can play long occupation and
| 'win'.
| type0 wrote:
| > Then again, if Chechnya showed anything, it is that
| Russia can play long occupation and 'win'.
|
| You can't compare Ukraine with Chechnya. Also Russian
| soldiers are much more hesitant to attack Ukrainians, the
| plan as I see it was to scare them to surrender, but
| Ukrainians weren't scared so what could follow might be a
| horror for humanity to behold if it continues for a long
| time because resentment builds up we might see some
| terrible atrocities of war.
| hnarn wrote:
| > see for instance Nazi Germany -> Poland
|
| I don't know what your understanding is of the invasion
| of Poland, but you should probably read up on it if you
| think it ended in an almost immediate surrender.
| IAmGraydon wrote:
| Just wanted to note it's "Ukraine", not "the Ukraine".
| butler14 wrote:
| they did achieve something!
|
| they took out 200 men with /200 helicopters/ to take over
| an airstrip
|
| and 17 blokes on an island in a shed with a /warship/
| traceroute66 wrote:
| Thanks. Noted and corrected.
| eru wrote:
| Don't beat yourself up over it, though.
|
| 'The Ukraine' used to be perfectly acceptable English.
|
| It's a bit like Burma vs Myanmar.
| HWR_14 wrote:
| 'The Ukraine' was acceptable when it was a region of
| other countries (like "the Midlands" or "the American
| Southwest"). It's unacceptable to refer to a country. I'm
| sure trying to (subtly) demote Ukraine from a country to
| a region is a goal of Russian propagandists.
| aix1 wrote:
| > It's unacceptable to refer to a country.
|
| The United States of America, the United Kingdom, the
| Bahamas, the Gambia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo
| (and probably others) would like a word. :)
| drran wrote:
| Unites States of the America
| HWR_14 wrote:
| Full names don't get that treatment for some reason, but
| even that fully applies. It's the United States of
| America or America. It's the United Kingdom of Great
| Britain and Northern Ireland or Great Britain. It's the
| People's Republic of China or China.
|
| I will admit commonwealth countries are often "The
| Republic of The X". But that naming seems left over from
| when they were territories of the British Empire, where
| "the X" is referring to a subdivision of the empire.
| eadmund wrote:
| IMHO it's still 'the Ukraine,' 'Burma' &c. There's no
| need to change. We say Paris, with an 's,' not 'paree';
| the French say 'Londres,' not London, and that's okay
| too. Languages use their own words for common place
| names, and that is fine. There's nothing wrong with using
| a language's words, and no real need to change them.
| mcfedr wrote:
| There is something wrong when it's a clear political
| statement to use the wrong term
| smcl wrote:
| > Thanks. Noted and corrected.
|
| Looks like it wasn't a clear political statement, and was
| instead an honest mistake. Let's not get too carried away
| with this, there's a very real conflict going on and I
| don't imagine the people being shelled and shot at are
| particularly concerned about the word "the" right now.
| HWR_14 wrote:
| If you read the chain, the clear political statement was
| by eadmund. But sticking to old terms or naming
| conventions (or switching to new ones) is often a
| political statement. It's a powerful way to do it. I
| mean, look at the people calling COVID-19 "the China
| virus". Or the people with strong opinions on "blacklist"
| vs "denylist"
| gunfighthacksaw wrote:
| I was wondering about this.
|
| My conclusion was that "the Ukraine" refers to the
| geography and territory (it would read as The Borderland in
| East Slavic, between the steppe and the Carpathians)
| whereas Ukraine is the republic and nation that resides in
| the territory.
|
| Since this war directly involves the population and the
| government, it is Ukraine the nation, not 'the Ukraine' the
| land.
| drran wrote:
| Ukraine means <<Fortified area>> in Ukrainian or Polish.
| It's <<ukriplennia>> (fortifications) +
| <<krai>>(area)/<<krayina>>(country) = <<ukrayina>>. A
| modern Ukrainian word with the same meaning is
| <<ukripraion>> (fortified area). It's started by Poland
| as a set of fortifications to protect eastern Poland
| against nomads from the East. Multiple ukrains were
| built. Ukrainian Cossacks were used for defense. When
| lines of defense covered large territory, the whole
| protected area received the name <<fortified area>>
| (Ukraine).
|
| See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guillaume_Le_Vasseur_de
| _Beaupl... for details.
|
| Russians are trying to downplay this and replace Oo at
| the beginning with Oh, to create Russian word Outskirt
| instead.
| justsomehnguy wrote:
| > My conclusion
|
| As you can guess, there is no definitive article "the" in
| Ukrainian language:
|
| https://web.archive.org/web/20171014083357/http://www.ukr
| wee...
| AlexandrB wrote:
| > the Russians are not stupid
|
| Arrogance is one hell of a drug. It's entirely possible that
| Russia believed its own propaganda and thought they would be
| welcomed as liberators by the Ukrainian people. The US
| literally did the same thing in the war in Iraq.
|
| With the number of lies the Russian state throws out on a
| daily basis I'm sure it's hard to keep things straight.
| DyslexicAtheist wrote:
| > Its clear the Russians planned this as a "shock & awe"
| blitzkrieg
|
| > the Russians are not stupid
|
| these 2 points have been on my mind unrelated to your
| argument. I do not think they're stupid which is why I can't
| help to figure out why they botched this up. The whole thing
| looks like an unhinged ego trip of a single ruler that has
| grown increasingly isolated (maybe because of the pandemic),
| like Stalins final days. But Putin isn't Stalin.
|
| So either they failed on strategy, nobody was brave enough to
| question Gerasimov, or the bigger plan is yet to reveal
| itself. For now it's Occams razor I think.
| oceanplexian wrote:
| Am I the only one who thinks that while what's going on is
| reprehensible and terrible, it does actually make a lot of
| strategic sense from Putin's POV and he is not, in fact, an
| idiot?
|
| Ukraine is a pretty soft target and has great strategic
| value. After taking Crimea and installing favorable leaders
| in Belarus Russia was prepared to invade from all sides
| with no resistance (Which was probably planned years in
| advance). Europe is helplessly dependent on Russian gas,
| and won't risk intervening. China is collaborating with
| them behind the scenes mitigating the West's threats of
| sanctions.
|
| From my perspective I see a highly intelligent, strategic
| set of decisions made over a long period of time.
| Unfortunately it seems most people seem to be ignorant to
| the facts and analyzing the situation emotionally.
| almost_usual wrote:
| It's a stalled offensive front, it's not strategic to
| waste time and resources. Russia is only exposing
| themselves more the longer this draws out.
| Sebb767 wrote:
| > it does actually make a lot of strategic sense from
| Putin's POV and he is not, in fact, an idiot?
|
| I don't believe he's an idiot and I'm sure he knew that
| he could take the Ukraine without much resistance from
| the West. It comes with significant drawbacks, however -
| the EU might not cease trading completely, but the
| sanctions still hit the economy hard and their own stock
| market tanked. The war is also really expensive and quite
| unpopular, both inside Russia and on the global stage.
| Finland and Sweden will also most likely join the NATO
| now, which, while geographically not that important,
| still makes him a tad more surrounded. Lastly, a
| destroyed Ukraine full of people hating him is really not
| that useful.
|
| It's a bit unexpected, but we also know now that the
| Ukraine is putting up quite fierce resistance and is not
| really a soft target. I was wrong about him invading at
| all, so my predictions about Russia might be wrong again,
| but I think invading was strategically a really bad move.
| Udo wrote:
| > these 2 points have been on my mind unrelated to your
| argument.
|
| Same here. Could the issue be morale? I heard isolated
| reports that the lower-rung soldiers appeared to have very
| low fighting morale, and apparently many had not believed
| that the invasion would actually go ahead. Allegedly, some
| hadn't been told they were actually doing an invasion.
|
| What if this problem exists from the top down? It only
| takes a few disillusioned generals so they fail to deploy
| 70% of their forces, and the troops that do make it to the
| battlegrounds are not being properly coordinated. The only
| other reason I can think of besides internal sabotage is
| that they're worried about the optics of a too brutal
| assault, but then again they have not really worried about
| optics in the past.
| tlogan wrote:
| It seems to be morale. Here [1] is a click of Ukrainian
| asking Russian soldiers if they need tow back to Russia.
|
| My point is that Russians and Ukrainians people like each
| other: the problem is that Ukrainie does not have puppet
| like Lukashenko as a leader.
|
| [1] https://twitter.com/Liveuamap/status/1497485623225200
| 640?s=2...
| _Algernon_ wrote:
| >There must be some sysadmins somewhere that are really taking
| care of business, even though tanks are almost literally
| rolling down their street.
|
| https://xkcd.com/705/
| buzzwordninja wrote:
| Is there a course to go from SRE to SERE?
| VictorPath wrote:
| jmyeet wrote:
| > Is anyone else completely shocked that our Ukrainian friends
| seem to have stable high speed internet?
|
| The only reason Ukraine continues to have Internet access is
| because the Russian Army hasn't chosen to cut it. That's
| literally it. Internet infrastructure is incredibly fragile. A
| couple of well-placed missiles is all it would take.
|
| There's no excuse for Putin's invasion. None. There are
| underlying reasons but they are in absolutely no way a
| justification. We can and should ask how we could've avoided
| this. It may well inform how we end it.
|
| That being said, Russia is clearly pursuing a strategy of
| minimizing civilian casualties (for now at least). Targets have
| been military installations, key geographic points, bridges,
| airports and command-and-control infrastructure. I suspect that
| if Russian casulaties continue (and it _seems like_ they 've
| been reasonably high) then images and video of downed Russian
| aircraft and helicopters and the remains of Russian convoys may
| well cause Russia to cut off that Internet. It could get much,
| much worse.
| BiosElement wrote:
| And apartment building, hospitals and ambulances... I
| originally would have agreed with you, mind, but it would
| seem our shared optimism for minimized civilian targets was
| mistaken.
|
| https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/26/kyiv-residential-
| to...
|
| https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/02/25/ukraine-russian-
| cluster-...
| Aldo_MX wrote:
| When I saw the apartment building on the news and I saw the
| fire fighters I immediately asked myself "wait, why are
| there fire fighters in the middle of a war?"
|
| I started thinking that maybe these buildings were not
| targeted by the missile, but the missile landed there
| because it was deflected?
|
| I don't have an idea on how weapons work, but I don't
| really think that these buildings were the actual targets.
| jmyeet wrote:
| All of those things have happened. Straight up. And again
| there's no excuse for it. But it could also be much, much
| worse, particularly if the Russians decided to actually
| bomb civilians and target things like water treatment
| plants, utilities and so forth.
| BiosElement wrote:
| I concur, and to be clear I'm only noting that to counter
| disinformation that only military targets were hit, not
| as a criticism of your post.
|
| It seems reasonable Russia wants to keep infrastructure
| intact, not just for minimizing outrage, but also a
| county reduced to rubble isn't very useful. Not to
| mention I doubt the average Russian soldier is terribly
| keen on doing more than necessary damage as well.
| [deleted]
| justsomehnguy wrote:
| > optimism for minimized civilian targets was mistaken
|
| https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/26/kyiv-residential-
| to...
|
| This is clearly not a target. And if you ever had seen the
| damage from the cruise missile (hint - look at two previous
| days with tons of footage of Kalibr hitting intended
| targets) you would clearly see what this is definitely not
| the amount of damage a proper missile would deliver. More
| so, given the position and direction there is a pretty high
| chance what it was an AA missile from the Ukrainian side.
|
| Anyway, it is amusing how when anything happens which
| involves Russia it is killing intent and war crimes
| immediately, without even an attempt to reason it with a
| common sense.
|
| Can't say anything on the second link, though it is very
| little damage for a cluster munition.
| drran wrote:
| The Internet is designed to withstand a nuclear war. RF is
| not a threat for Internet.
| Sebb767 wrote:
| My Ukrainian colleagues were actually back to work yesterday.
| It's surreal how things can be so normal and yet so different.
| sillysaurusx wrote:
| I noticed that too! In livestreams on tiktok, air raid sirens
| are going off 24/7, explosions aren't unheard of, and yet the
| cities seem... normal? The streets are full of cars, and if
| not for the sirens, it would seem to be just another day at
| the office.
|
| WW2, Vietnam, and Iraq apparently biased our understanding of
| what a war is like.
|
| I told my Ukrainian buddy that as long as he doesn't get
| drafted, he'll be okay, and to stay put. I thought that every
| combatant was going to become either unalive or a prisoner.
|
| Their leader is a badass. https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsi
| nteresting/comments/t1pr8... I told my friend, "If I were
| him, I'd be scared shitless." His response appears to be
| showing me that I'm empirically a lot more cowardly than I
| care to admit.
|
| They're managing to hold. Against Russia! Ukraine has
| internet, water, food, and their air force is intact. It's
| just incredible.
|
| Hats off to everyone in (or near) Ukraine who are resisting.
| vmception wrote:
| It was the same during those other conflicts
|
| People aren't just huddled in a subway station for 5 years
|
| Everyone has stuff to do, and react when necessary
| pjc50 wrote:
| The streets of Iraq were full of cars during the invasion
| and subsequent occupation, which caused a _lot_ of
| incidents when skittish coalition forces shot at them for
| driving suspiciously, especially near checkpoints.
| https://www.channel4.com/news/iraq-war-files-death-at-
| checkp...
|
| WW2 and Vietnam featured absolutely huge levels of mass
| area bombing that cannot be achieved now. The entire
| Russian air force is only about 1,000 aircraft: https://en.
| wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_Russian_Air_For... ;
| difficult to get figures for the buildup, but this
| https://www.businessinsider.com/russias-air-force-is-
| joining... suggests that a few hundred are within range of
| Ukraine (makes sense, they're not going to leave the rest
| of the country undefended)
|
| By comparison in WW2:
|
| > On the morning of March 18, 1,329 bombers and 733
| fighters of the US Eighth Air Force formed up over England
| and set a course for northern Germany. The target for 1,221
| of the bombers was Berlin
|
| > More than half of the bombers, 714 planes, sustained
| damage from German anti-aircraft fire. 16 suffered hits so
| severe that they had to crash land behind Soviet lines. In
| total, 24 bombers and six fighters were lost on the
| mission. 178 Americans were killed, wounded, or captured in
| the raid. The German Luftwaffe lost just three pilots.
|
| Also, it's like day 3 of the war, there simply hasn't been
| time for attrition against civilian vehicles and fuel
| supplies to empty the streets.
| 1_player wrote:
| That and possibly the Western intelligence/military has been
| training and providing hardware to the Ukrainians to set up
| redundancy in their network. The threat of invasion has been
| there since 2014.
|
| Which made me wonder whether an open-source kit to create an
| inexpensive 4G connection tower with an ethernet plug at the
| other end exists? Such a project would be _invaluable_ in areas
| hit by war or other disasters in the modern age of information.
| I'm thinking something as cheap as possible with an open-source
| firmware that can be flashed onto cheap hardware such as a
| Raspberry Pi: build it, flash it, plug it in. Is anybody
| working on this already?
| emteycz wrote:
| https://bellard.org/lte/
| seszett wrote:
| That's not open source, and probably not inexpensive
| either.
| emteycz wrote:
| Most probably considerably less expensive than any other
| commercial option, though. And, as opposed to other
| commercial solutions - it runs on a PC with a SDR, and
| nothing else is needed.
| aliher1911 wrote:
| There's OpenBTS, but it is GSM only afaik.
| einpoklum wrote:
| EB-Barrington wrote:
| Hello from central Kyiv, Ukraine. I have had zero internet
| disruptions.
|
| The Ukrainian government has specifically announced today (in
| response to Russian propaganda)they will _not_ disconnect any
| internet or communications - if there is an outage, don 't be
| concerned - it will be repaired asap.
|
| Because, Russia is indeed losing what they have started, and
| Ukraine is winning.
| klohto wrote:
| Slava Ukrajine from Czechia! We are doing what we can to help
| here, please don't stop fighting.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-02-26 23:02 UTC)