Iranian Chill Thread

[SalarHaqq]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1516785963644633096

This must be the big Bad China we hear so much about challenging the West

So a Chinese credit card processor - reportedly - is refusing to work with a larger Russian bank as well as a handful of small ones, and this implies China isn't challenging western hegemony, that China has capitulated against the US regime? That's a wide cognitive leap.

China is and will be playing a significant role in Russia's successful efforts to neutralize the effects of US- and EU-imposed sanctions, and this goes beyond and weighs more in the overall balance than an unconfirmed side aspect such as a couple of Russian banks being turned down by China's UnionPay.

Not to mention that UnionPay cards have been available in Russia for years already, and that Moscow has already established its own credit card payment system NSPK, which is sufficient for domestic transactions, knowing that some 70% of Russians hardly ever purchase goods or services from abroad anyway.

In short, UnionPay's purported decision with regards to Sberbank is a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of things, and it surely doesn't mean that Beijing is kneeling before Washington.

https://www.ft.com/content/0bdef21b-426e-4e98-9a25-998c9bad500c

Follow the money: how Russia will bypass western economic warfare

hello world this is a new article

thecradle.co

China hoping if it plays nice with Western led world order, US wont pivot to Asia to contain China.

Sure, Chinese decision makers are so ignorant as to operate on such a stupidly short-sighted assumption, and have not in fact readied all that's needed to offset US presence in east Asia. They probably need to employ the quoted user as a consultant, else China will go under!

To the dismay of those whose views are shaped by NATO propaganda, the US regime's so-called pivot to Asia is a vain exercise and it will go down as a miserable failure at containing a rising China. In case of a war in the South China Sea, the US regime and its regional vassals will stand no chance.

But when Beijing's forces initiate the inevitable liberation of Taiwan, the quoted user will probably try to portray the Chinese operation as a botched failure, notwithstanding how it will debunk their current comments about China fearing the US regime.

China has proven time and time again to not be willing to challenge the Western led order beyond some competitive play that ANY country in its position would do. Don’t confuse competitive actions as a concrete move to replace Western led world order. Even US allies compete against the US competitively. Even US spies on its allies and vice versa.

To bring Ukrainian NATO clients to their knees, Russia doesn't need any Chinese weapons to begin with and Beijing's decision-making in this regard won't be affected by lame warnings from the US regime. Reports by western-controlled mainstream media on the topic served no purpose other than to demonize China and then to suggest Russia is isolated.

Xi should ask Putin how well that strategy worked in last 20 years...

Can you believe, US warns (warns!) a country like China about giving Russia any arms and warns of consequences. As if threatening a child or irrelevant 3rd world country. They CALL China and say it again. They hold press conferences and say it again. I mean talk about embarrassing.

China says “yes Mr. White man we listen to you....me love you long time”

Then there propaganda arm fires some very “angry tweets” bad mouthing US lol.

And people have the nerve to call Iran “soft”......oh the irony

If Iran had even 1/3 the economic and military might of China the entire Middle East would be de facto Iranian control.

Sometimes it’s like Iran is the only country with balls in the world anymore, granted they aren’t as steel-like as we would like (see Israeli strikes in Syria and Solemani assassination), but damn if they don’t put Russia and China’s to shame.

Aha, interesting... Yet, wasn't it the quoted user themselves who were publishing voluminous comments in praise of Chinese policy towards the USA, while at the same time contrasting it with what they presented as an ineffectual Iranian approach to anti-imperialism? It sure was:

So about half a year ago, China was a role model to follow, China's development of extensive economic relations with the west was but a tool at the service of Beijing's paramount agenda of challenging the US-led geopolitical order, China was actively resisting the US even during their period of strategic cooperation in the 1970's (Vietnam, Cambodia etc). Whereas Iran by not emulating Beijing and being skeptical about integration into the global economy was on the wrong track and depriving herself of a fantastic additional weapon of Resistance...

But now, all of a sudden China is a submissive, weak power fearful of confronting America and unwilling to question Washington's hegemony. All of a sudden, Iran is commendable for resisting rather than seeking to mend ties with the US empire (mending of ties which the user keeps advocating elsewhere). Wonder who's really "all over the place"?

Notice the common denominator, the standard pattern in these inconsistencies: the sole instances practically in which the user will have something adamantly positive to say about Iran, is when an opportunity presents itself to bash one of Iran's strategic partners, a neighboring or a fellow Muslim-majority state - the rest of the time, they'll seek to relativize, minimize and split hair to find some fault with Iranian achievements.

The user will admire China or Russia when there's some possibility to dangle these as a counter-example and deprecate Iran. Conversely they will admire Iran when China or Russia may be belittled by the same token. Seldom if at all, does the user contrast Iran with the USA whilst praising the former. Quite the contrary, when some aspect of America's catastrophic state of affairs is highlighted (for instance violent crime etc), this user will jump in and try to suggest Iran isn't better off.

Incidentally, attempts to drive wedges between Moscow, Beijing and Tehran constitute one of the US regime's foreign policy priorities. Failing which they'll put every effort into trying to blacken the image of each one of these in the public opinion of the other two. This to Washington is even more pressing than its bilateral confrontations with the three mentioned powers taken separately. For what the US regime is absolutely horrified by is the prospect of Iran, China and Russia pursuing let alone cementing even more their strategic partnership.

Not that there's no room, from an Iranian perspective, for any criticism towards China or Russia. Not that these represent fully fledged and flawlessly reliable strategic allies to Iran. However, even the current level of cooperation no matter how low - particularly as far as standing up to US hegemony is concerned, is genuinely unbearable to the Washington regime.

Hence the insistence of the CIA-sponsored, exiled Iranian opposition as well as foreign anti-IR media on over-the-top demonization of both Moscow and Beijing. Reading certain comments, one gets the impression their authors aren't merely regretting that bilateral cooperation with Russia and China isn't deeper than it currently is, but that they actually don't want such a thing to come about.

Strange that the quoted user's rants against Russia and China seem to have gone into overdrive the precise moment Moscow embarked in a major operation to demolish NATO's position in the Ukraine. Given how for years, they were contrasting the Iranian intervention in Syria with relative Russian passivity towards western encroachment along its borders, you'd expect them to applaud when Moscow actually proceeds to fighting back with hard power, right? Not on your nelly! What the user will then choose to do, apart from claiming it's too little to late, is to echo western narratives pretending the Russian campaign has betrayed supposed military "incompetence" and "weakness".

As if this wasn't cringeworthy enough, the sole critical reply we're offered to read is a goofy one that references IAEA cameras at Iranian uranium enrichment facilities as supposed evidence that Iran doesn't dare to confront the empire... as if Islamic Iran hasn't been at the forefront of resisting the zio-American imperialists for 43 years already without nuclear weapons. In fact it ought to have read: Iran left the enemy with no choice but to accept her nuclear breakout capability as well as large scale uranium enrichment, given that initially (early 2000's) the US and allies were seeking to impose a ban on any and all enrichment activity on Iranian soil.

 

[jauk]

For those that keep harping on budgets and costs in IRI's military ventures, those common Western notions simply do not apply with the Iranian economy. No it does not 'cost b/millions of dollars' for this and that. So what's the problem? It's clear to me the problem is a human and supply resource management problem. Another problem is the the decision makers are few and are bottlenecking things. That is a classic 'hero culture' where it becomes poisonous to the venture. In both cases delegation to private industry will unclog things. Note, when I say 'private industry' I do not mean the conventional and ugly Western notion in the strict sense where profiteering becomes a factor ergo 'costs b/millions of dollars' will come into play. THAT is where the issue is and where the fix will be found.

 

[Shawnee]

ادعای سقوط یک ماهواره نظامی در یمن

 

[TheImmortal]

So a Chinese credit card processor - reportedly - refuses to work with a larger Russian bank as well as a handful of small ones, and this implies China isn't challenging western hegemony, that China has capitulated against the US regime? An unrivaled cognitive leap that is.

China is and will be playing a significant role in Russia's successful efforts to neutralize the effects of US- and EU-imposed sanctions, and this goes beyond and weighs far more in the overall balance than an unconfirmed side aspect such as a couple of Russian banks being turned down by China's UnionPay.

Not to mention that UnionPay cards have been available in Russia for many years already, and that Moscow has already established its own credit card payment system NSPK, which is sufficient for domestic transactions, knowing that some 70% of Russians hardly ever purchase goods or services from abroad anyway.

In short, UnionPay's purported decision with regards to Sberbank is just a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of things, and it certainly doesn't mean that Beijing is kneeling before Washington.

https://www.ft.com/content/0bdef21b-426e-4e98-9a25-998c9bad500c

Follow the money: how Russia will bypass western economic warfare

hello world this is a new article

thecradle.co

Sure, Chinese decision makers are so ignorant as to operate on such a stupidly short-sighted assumption, and have not in fact readied all that's needed to offset US presence in east Asia. They probably need to employ the quoted user as a consultant, else China will go under!

To the dismay of those whose views are shaped by NATO propaganda, the US regime's so-called pivot to Asia is a vain exercise and it will go down as a miserable failure at containing a rising China. In case of a war in the South China Sea, the US regime and its regional vassals will stand no chance.

But when Beijing's forces initiate the inevitable liberation of Taiwan, the quoted user will probably try to portray the Chinese operation as a botched failure, notwithstanding how it will debunk their current comments about China being "scared" of the US regime.



Humorous assertion. To bring Ukrainian NATO clients to their knees, Russia doesn't need any Chinese weapons to begin with and Beijing's decision-making in this regard won't be affected by lame warnings from the US regime. Reports by western-controlled mainstream media on the topic served no purpose other than to demonize China and then to suggest Russia is isolated.






Aha, interesting... Yet, wasn't it the quoted user themselves who were producing voluminous comments in praise of Chinese policy towards the USA, while at the same time contrasting it with what they presented as an ineffectual Iranian approach to anti-imperialism? It sure was:

View attachment 836654
View attachment 836655

So about half a year ago, China was a role model to follow, China's development of extensive economic ties with the west was but a tool at the service of Beijing's paramount agenda of challenging the US-led geopolitical order, China was actively resisting the US even during their period of strategic cooperation in the 1970's (Vietnam, Cambodia etc). Whereas Iran by not emulating Beijing and being skeptical about integration into the global economy was on the wrong track and depriving herself of a fantastic additional weapon of Resistance...

But now, all of a sudden China is a submissive, weak power fearful of confronting America and unwilling to question Washington's hegemony. All of a sudden, Iran is commendable for resisting rather than seeking to mend ties with the US empire (mending of ties which the user keeps advocating elsewhere). Wonder who's really "all over the place"?

Notice the common denominator, the standard pattern in these inconsistencies: the sole instances practically in which the user will have something adamantly positive to say about Iran, is when an opportunity presents itself to bash one of her strategic partners, a neighbor or a fellow Muslim-majority state - the rest of the time, they'll seek to relativize, minimize and split hair to find some fault with Iranian achievements.

The user will admire China or Russia when there's a possibility to dangle them as counter-examples to deprecate Iran, and will admire Iran when China or Russia may be belittled by the same token. Seldom if at all, does the user contrast Iran with the USA so as to praise the former, however. Quite the contrary, when some aspect of America's catastrophic state of affairs is highlighted (for instance violent crime etc), this user will jump in and try to suggest Iran isn't better off.

Incidentally, attempts to drive wedges between Moscow, Beijing and Tehran constitute one of the US regime's foreign policy priorities. Failing which they'll put every effort into trying to blacken the image of each one of these in the public opinion of the other two. This to Washington is even more pressing than its bilateral confrontations with the three mentioned powers taken separately. For what the US regime is absolutely horrified by is the prospect of Iran, China and Russia pursuing let alone cementing even more their strategic partnership.

Not that there's no room, from an Iranian perspective, for any criticism towards China or Russia. Not that these represent fully fledged and flawlessly reliable strategic allies to Iran. However, even the current level of cooperation no matter how low - particularly as far as standing up to US hegemony is concerned, is genuinely unbearable to the Washington regime.

Hence the insistence of the CIA-sponsored, exiled Iranian opposition as well as foreign anti-IR media on over-the-top demonization of both Moscow and Beijing. Reading certain comments, one gets the impression their authors aren't merely regretting that bilateral cooperation with Russia and China isn't deeper than it currently is, but that they actually don't want such a thing to come about.

Strange that the quoted user's rants against Russia and China seem to have gone into overdrive the precise moment Moscow embarked in a major operation to demolish NATO's position in the Ukraine. Given how for years, they were contrasting the Iranian intervention in Syria with relative Russian passivity towards western encroachment along its borders, you'd expect them to applaud when Moscow actually proceeds to fighting back with hard power, right? Not on your nelly! What the user will then choose to do, apart from claiming it's too little to late, is to echo western narratives pretending the Russian campaign has betrayed supposed military "incompetence" and "weakness".

As if this wasn't cringeworthy enough, the sole critical reply we're offered to read is a goofy one that references IAEA cameras at Iranian uranium enrichment facilities as supposed evidence that Iran doesn't dare to confront the empire... as if Islamic Iran hasn't been at the forefront of resisting the zio-American imperialists for 43 years already without nuclear weapons.

That post is commending China’s economic policy success as instrumental to its independence which is simply unrivaled in human history when looking at 1970-2020. I’d be hard pressed to find a country that grew as well as China in a Western led order since the start of the 21st century.

I have no faults with China’s policy growing as a economic power. It astutely used Western consumerism to gain ToT and western dependence for cheap goods to catapult itself from a rice paddy 3rd world country to the second biggest economy in the world.

But it’s geopolitical policy has been very lackluster given events like Syrian Civil War, Iran-US spat under Trump, and now Ukraine. Russia is supposedly China’s closest “ally”, we can brush over the other two events as not directly applicable to Chinese interests (or whatever excuse you would like to make).

Xi will be facing the Western Pivot soon. Both Russia and China used Iran to distract the West from confronting them...except the West was still covertly moving in their directions and in the case of the former they are right up to the border. Now Finland and Sweden are declaring they want to join NATO.

How does Russia expect to stand against a 35-40 member alliance if Xi would rather sit on the sidelines and buy his time?

Maybe Xi thinks that Russia’s survival is not important to China—that a return to a Yeltsin like figure that panders to the West is not incompatible with China.

One thing is the Russia — Iran — China axis people keep commenting does not yet exist mostly due to Russia and China and their lone wolf foreign policy where as Western led order is built on increasing allies in all realms.

Iran has extensive support among its various proxies and foreign legions. Russia has Chenchens and some separatists. China has China (not sure how reliable Pakistan would be as a military ally in conflict).

My criticism is lack of a unified foreign policy with Iran from both Russia and China. A security architecture to rival NATO in some capacity. It seems both powers think their nuclear arms provide enough power and in case of China its economic might is an added deterrence.

But the moves are happening underneath the surface....more and more western factories are pivoting to Vietnam and other Asian countries from China. The order has been given.

Let’s see how the great power game plays out.

For those that keep harping on budgets and costs in IRI's military ventures, those common Western notions simply do not apply with the Iranian economy. No it does not 'cost b/millions of dollars' for this and that. So what's the problem? It's clear to me the problem is a human and supply resource management problem. Another problem is the the decision makers are few and are bottlenecking things. That is a classic 'hero culture' where it becomes poisonous to the venture. In both cases delegation to private industry will unclog things. Note, when I say 'private industry' I do not mean the conventional and ugly Western notion in the strict sense where profiteering becomes a factor ergo 'costs b/millions of dollars' will come into play. THAT is where the issue is and where the fix will be found.

Fair to point to criticise the amount of government or “quasi government” control of manufacturing sector as a possible reason for inefficiencies in economic model. However, China has shown that a quasi government control economic model can be very successful.

It all comes down to implementation.

 

[TheImmortal]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1517463361243725824

https://twitter.com/x/status/1517537503707901954

 

[Stryker1982]

God... I just wish we know what this was all about lol. It's so nerve-racking

The log updated.

Flights to Moscow. If anything, they have accelerated in the last 3 days. All in all, their has never been this many flights to Moscow in such a short period of time. Something is cooking.

 

[Blue In Green]

The log updated.

Flights to Moscow. If anything, they have accelerated in the last 3 days. All in all, their has never been this many flights to Moscow in such a short period of time. Something is cooking.
View attachment 836783

Wait and see… all we can do.

 

[TheImmortal]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1517587450834599936

https://twitter.com/x/status/1517419374554062850

 

[Stryker1982]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1517587450834599936

https://twitter.com/x/status/1517419374554062850

Russia does not have the ability to run large air sorties in this war, this conflict will turn more into ground only oriented combat, and the Ukrainians are just receiving a flood of advanced weaponry. Sooner or later, they will be full of better equipment than Russia.

The longer this goes on, the more stocked Ukraine will be with good equipment.

Does Russia have any type of Fath or Fajr-5C type weapons to strike 155mm howitzers they find via satellites?

 

[TheImmortal]

Russia does not have the ability to run large air sorties in this war, this conflict will turn more into ground only oriented combat, and the Ukrainians are just receiving a flood of advanced weaponry. Sooner or later, they will be full of better equipment than Russia.

The longer this goes on, the more stocked Ukraine will be with good equipment.

Does Russia have any type of Fath or Fajr-5C type weapons to strike 155mm howitzers they find via satellites?

The biggest thing Russia lacks is something akin to the AC-130. Just a plane loaded with cannons and artillery shells that can hover over front lines and deliver hell on the enemy.

Iran greatly needed such a plane in Syria. Would have saved tens of thousands of lives and shortened the war.

Russia at least has bombers, just mostly cruise missile and FAB bombs.

Russia has various types of MLRS including parachute assisted MLRS to hit objects hiding behind buildings or natural barriers. It has Iskander BM and CM versions. It has costal missile systems.

It is mind boggling that Russia cannot pummel an enemy that is using conventional military tactics. Not sure what the reasoning is wether lack of targeting data, munitions, or what.

Iran cannot send a plane full of kabob to Syria without Israeli fighters going into the air. Yet Ukraine is getting supplied with Tanks/Artillery /APCs quite easily.

 

[Stryker1982]

The biggest thing Russia lacks is something akin to the AC-130. Just a plane loaded with cannons and artillery shells.

Iran greatly needed such a plane in Syria. Would have saved tens of thousands of lives and shortened the war.

Russia at least has bombers, just mostly cruise missile an FAB bombs.

Russia has various types of MLRS including parachute assisted MLRS to hit objects hiding behind buildings or natural barriers. It has Iskander BM and CM versions. It has costal missile systems.

It is mind boggling that Russia cannot pummel an enemy that is using conventional military tactics. Not sure what the reasoning is wether lack of targeting data, munitions, or what.

Iran cannot send a plane full of kabob to Syria without Israeli fighters going into the air. Yet Ukraine is getting supplied with Tanks/Artillery /APCs quite easily.

My guess, seems to be they have a serious lack of reconnaissance capability and perhaps have trouble communicating with artillery corps and missile corps for targeting. This is kind of a big deal.

Ukraine seems to have just the opposite and are fully capable of directing artillery exactly where they need to go when they need to go. Ukraine is not fighting tank on tank battles and their method of fighting has made it hard to advance in a columns on dense roads walled to walled with forests. Ambushes, hit and run, and artillery strikes seems to be working.

Hard to pull up a recon drone in an manpad infested environment to provide coordinates for targeting. Russia needs to get its shit together before Ukraine gets all of NATOs most advanced systems trained and accounted for.

The bridges over the Dnipro are still up.

 

[TheImmortal]

Ukraine seems to have just the opposite and are fully capable of directing artillery exactly where they need to go when they need to go. Ukraine is not fighting tank on tank battles and their method of fighting has made it hard to advance in a columns on dense roads walled to walled with forests. Ambushes, hit and run, and artillery strikes seems to be working.

Lets be real, Ukraine has the intelligence gathering data of 35 member nations of NATO or else it would be absolutely screwed in this war from an intelligence gathering standpoint.

I bet most of the war is being commanded by NATO commanders who rely to Ukraine generals in the country on what to do.

This is really NATO vs Russia war— with Ukraine being the surrogate for NATO.

A genius strategy quite frankly, it prevents Russia from using its tactical nukes as a Trump card if it was a direct NATO confrontation. At the same time NATO gets to dwindle down the Russian army slowly thru a war of attrition. This is similar to what they did to Iran in 1980s. Took Iran 20+ years to recover its military and economy.

 

[Stryker1982]

Lets be real, Ukraine has the intelligence gathering data of 35 member nations of NATO or else it would be absolutely screwed in this war from an intelligence gathering standpoint.

I bet most of the war is being commanded by NATO commanders who rely to Ukraine generals in the country on what to do.

This is really NATO vs Russia war— with Ukraine being the surrogate for NATO.

A genius strategy quite frankly, it prevents Russia from using its tactical nukes as a Trump card if it was a direct NATO confrontation. At the same time NATO gets to dwindle down the Russian army slowly thru a war of attrition. This is similar to what they did to Iran in 1980s. Took Iran 20+ years to recover its military and economy.

Here's what makes it worse, and the people who keep being apologists for serious problems for Russia in this conflict.

Ukraine is under general mobilization. Strongly motivated, and available to them, the best of the best NATO equipment coming through. They'll probably replace their shitty AKs soon enough with modernized rifles as well.

With such mobilization, how many tactical battalion groups could Ukraine mobilize in 2 - 3 months time? Being realistic here, Ukraine could easily have 50,000 volunteers on a low scale, and could be more than 100,000+ which is very normal and not surprising. We've had such things in Iran as well when no one helped us.

We are talking 10 full divisions, or more than 50 tactical battalion groups Ukraine can raise in 2-3 months when it trains new personel, and equips them with NATO donations.

I would like someone to explain to me, what Russia will do against Ukraine which will inevitably field a larger military than Russia when Russian troops have to bleed to take towns in heavily fortified areas. Sooner or later, Ukraine will not only be better armed, but also in larger quantity.

Short of Russia initiating a general mobilization, they will not win this war if it continues more months in. If anything the Ukrainian military will be more larger and better equipped than ever before the war.

it takes alot of time to do so, but In a country of 45 million, you can mobilize 2 -3 million men, with 1-2 months training per platoon which would be done simultaneously. 50,000 people can be WELL trained per fiscal quarter.

With the military industry of 35 NATO countries behind you, trainers and financing. In about 6 months to 1 year, their size can grow into well above 500,000 trained troops & less trained reserves in total. Adding 50,000 trained troops by June is not a shock. God knows we 've done it before. It's all a matter of how brave Ukrainians wants to be and how motivated the average person is to fight. The fact that they haven't done forced conscription, but just mobilization, shows they probably have alot of volunteers.

 

[SalarHaqq]

It is mind boggling that Russia cannot pummel an enemy that is using conventional military tactics. Not sure what the reasoning is wether lack of targeting data, munitions, or what.

Russia has been pummeling Ukrainian forces alright, seeing how the latter are believed to have lost (killed and permanently removed from battlefield) several tens of thousands of troops as well as thousands of MBT's and APC's.

Iran cannot send a plane full of kabob to Syria without Israeli fighters going into the air. Yet Ukraine is getting supplied with Tanks/Artillery /APCs quite easily.

Iran sent significant amounts of weapons to Lebanon during the past decade. I haven't seen zionist sources claim that the flow was fully interrupted, so in reality most of what Iran wishes to supply Hezbollah with, should be landing in Hezbollah's hands.

Ukrainian supplies have gotten hit often enough, the percentage shouldn't be so much inferior to intercepts of Iranian arms in Syria.

This is really NATO vs Russia war— with Ukraine being the surrogate for NATO.

A genius strategy quite frankly, it prevents Russia from using its tactical nukes as a Trump card if it was a direct NATO confrontation. At the same time NATO gets to dwindle down the Russian army slowly thru a war of attrition. This is similar to what they did to Iran in 1980s. Took Iran 20+ years to recover its military and economy.

An logical strategy from their point of view, I don't understand what's genius about it. Neither Russia nor anyone else should have expected NATO to proceed differently. But the question is how successful can it possibly be. It's hard to imagine that any of it is going to avert Russian victory, or prevent Russia from coming out strengthened from this special military operation, after having effectively pushed back on NATO through the use of hard power in a European theater, pretty much a game changing event.

It's not going to take as many years as the Iran-Iraq war, it's even doubtful whether the Ukrainian regime can hold out an entire year seeing how fast its manpower is getting depleted. Economically, NATO regimes in particular EU ones are set to incur losses too, for Germany alone some official source put the estimate at around 250 billion USD.

I believe it was Alastair Crooke who observed this is only the beginning. Tides have turned against western hegemony.

 

[SalarHaqq]

it takes alot of time to do so, but In a country of 45 million, you can mobilize 2 -3 million men, with 1-2 months training per platoon which would be done simultaneously. 50,000 people can be WELL trained per fiscal quarter.

Remind us how many Ukrainians have left the country as refugees after only two and a half months of war? Also, kindly ponder the fact that the entire south / southeastern half of Ukraine is populated essentially by russophiles (in fact, by Russians). You may substract these from the pool of (motivated) manpower available to Ukraine as well. They'd rather join the Russian forces if given the chance.

It's pretty obvious that Moscow hasn't been using a heavy handed approach thus far if alone for the fact that the inhabitants of the areas it is fighting in are largely pro-Russian and are being pinned down as human shields by Ukrainian reprisal brigades.

This is also why Russia hasn't gone over to obliterating Ukrainian infrastructures on a large scale, NATO-style. You mention bridges in Dnjepropetrovsk, are you of the opinion that it would have been beyond the capability of the Russian military to erase them in a matter of minutes if given the order? If so, I'd advise to think again.