https://news.yahoo.com/chinas-leader-brings-putin-support-131745230.html
The one thing Putin desperately needs from China he is not going to get. China is not stupid.
China does not promise weapons
Published
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum
A place for civil discussion of the events of the day for Tidewater residents without the limitations imposed by media forums.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
Yahoo!News: “Washington says Putin’s military has already ‘blown through’ many of its resources over more than a year of ceaseless shelling and airstrikes in Ukraine, and it’s desperate to secure new supplies of missiles, shells and ammunition.”
I’m dubious that Russia is desperate and I’m not inclined to read much into the fact that no agreement for China to supply arms to Russia was announced.
With respect to the first, Russia doesn’t publish its defense production metrics (for obvious reasons). So, in the absence of verifiable sources or public analysis, there is no reason to believe anything “Washington says” on the subject.
With respect to the second, no one expected a weapons supply agreement to be announced. Besides, China could support weapons production in Russia in a million ways without supplying finished arms. Or, China could supply finished arms secretly in ways we would never know about.
All that said, China may be eager to have some of its military technology tested on the Ukrainian battlefield. Field test results are a key input to military operations planning and tactical analysis. But if Russia and China intend to collaborate in this way, one would hardly expect them to tell the world about it.
LikeLike
Uh, nope.
Russia is desperate for equipment and ammunition. It is now trying to re-commission WW2 tanks that are older than Putin. Tanks that will be nothing but death traps for the hapless convicts and conscripts given five minutes of training on how to fight in them. Then there is this . . .
https://www.wsj.com/articles/acute-artillery-shortage-is-hampering-russias-offensive-in-east-ukraine-western-officials-say-6f2fb94a
As soon as Chinese weapons show up in Ukraine, we will know about them. Russians are very good at dropping ordinance when they run from the battlefield.
If China wants to help here is one solution. . .
Russia leaves Ukraine entirely and China can offer it security protection the same way we shield NATO countries. Then the supposed cause of the war – NATO encroachment – will no longer be a threat. Of course, Russia would have to give up its lust for Ukrainian resources and that is very unlikely to happen before Putin is removed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
WSJ’s reporting all boils down to a single word. Here is the quote. Can you spot the word?
“Russian ammunition shortages have in recent weeks worsened to the extent that extreme rationing of artillery shells is likely in force on many parts of the front, the U.K.’s Defense Ministry said on Tuesday in its daily intelligence briefing.”
The relevant word is “likely.”
Russia may be fielding some old tanks, but they are also fielding new ones. It is Ukraine that has no modern tanks to field.
It is currently being reported that Russia has completed its capture of Bakhmut, with 10,000 Ukrainian soldiers now trapped within the city with no possible supply or exit. We’ll see how that plays out.
The territory Russia has already captured in Ukraine was once responsible for 90% of Ukraine’s GDP. Short of a NATO incursion, there is zero possibility that Russia will give up the gains it has made. The pious solution to the conflict you recommend isn’t on the table.
LikeLike
“The relevant word is “likely.””
You have proclaimed anonymous sources as being okie-dokie. But the U.K.’s Defense Ministry making a statement that you don’t want to believe because of the word “likely”. That “likely” is a lot more believable than any of the fertilizer you claim superior knowledge of.
Asinine. Totally asinine.
…” there is zero possibility that Russia will give up the gains it has made. ”
Interesting. Israel HAS done that in the past. But Russia isn’t capable of doing so?
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “Asinine. Totally asinine.”
You lose. LOL!
LikeLike
“You lose. LOL!”
Calling your comment totally asinine makes me “lose”? How so, oh wise and sanctimonious one?
LikeLike
RE: “How so, oh wise and sanctimonious one?”
Because your opinion of my comment is irrelevant. Also you clearly don’t understand the comment itself.
LikeLike
I understand our idiocy quite clearly. Are you elated to Ron DeSanctimonious?
LikeLike