Live data from Hacker News

Russia confiscates passports of senior officials to stop defections

ft.com

51–60 of 177 posts

Re: Russia confiscates passports of senior officials to stop defections

#51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You are completely leaving out social factors. Are Russian citizens willing to support the invasion no matter the cost? Are they willing to dedicate their lives to it? Or is there a point where they would decide it's just not worth it? Without the support of the populace, the government wouldn't be able to pursue this for long.

They fully support the invasion but have thousand excuses why someone else should dedicate his life.

Re: Russia confiscates passports of senior officials to stop defections

#52
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What of the fact that multi-million dollar tanks are being taken out by $500 drones?

If you talk about kamikadze drones then a simple fishing net can protect against them. Also, are Western tanks immune to $500 drones?

Obviously, it is such a simple solution no one but HN members has found about it.

Re: Russia confiscates passports of senior officials to stop defections

#53
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> many thousands of high-quality Soviet tanks I'm curious why they have chosen not to deploy them, then.

Because tanks are expensive and sending prisoners with AK-47 to storm enemy trenches is much cheaper.

Re: Russia confiscates passports of senior officials to stop defections

#54
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What of the fact that multi-million dollar tanks are being taken out by $500 drones?

If you talk about kamikadze drones then a simple fishing net can protect against them. Also, are Western tanks immune to $500 drones?

I mean yeah they tend to actually have reactive armor and don't tend to be quite as vulnerable to the "turret tossing" as those operated by the Russians. But this isn't about western vs soviet tanks. The point was the "many thousands of high-quality Soviet tanks" appear to be quite vulnerable to very inexpensive and widely available equipment that Ukraine have become adept at using.

Re: Russia confiscates passports of senior officials to stop defections

#55

Clearly they're winning the war /s

[flagged]

Any discussion as to who is winning is meaningless without defining what victory means. And apparently it not only means something very different for each side, but also changes with time.

Suppose Ukraine manages to push Putin's army back to original pre-2014 borders. Is this victory? With a large part of the country in ruins, a terrible GDP decrease, thousands of men with PTSD, not to mention those dead. There is simply no victory here, just enormous pain because of someone's sick ambitions.

Re: Russia confiscates passports of senior officials to stop defections

#56

> Russia confiscates passports of senior officials ... which passport? Russians have two passports, one is for the internal matters and other one for traveling abroad. Add: lol downwotes. Sure, guys, you are always concentrated and read the article, filled with the fillers and stating what the water is wet to the brim, because, you know, someone may wake up from 20 years coma and suddenly need to read this article. A…

The passports that the general (foreign) audience knows - the external/international one.

Nope, internal one. See the update

Re: Russia confiscates passports of senior officials to stop defections

#59
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What of the fact that multi-million dollar tanks are being taken out by $500 drones?

If you talk about kamikadze drones then a simple fishing net can protect against them. Also, are Western tanks immune to $500 drones?

Not immune, but far better protected and safer to operate than an aging rust bucket with a cope net that has to advance to close range just to hit it's targets.

Re: Russia confiscates passports of senior officials to stop defections

#60
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> many thousands of high-quality Soviet tanks I'm curious why they have chosen not to deploy them, then.

Because tanks are expensive and sending prisoners with AK-47 to storm enemy trenches is much cheaper.

So you're saying they've got this enormous fleet of tanks that they've yet to deploy but which could turn the tide of the war ... and they're just sitting on them? I don't buy it.
Post reply on HN