Mattias
-
Posts
1,279 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by Mattias
-
-
3 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
Putin's restraint is not because he feels his regime is strong, but because he feels it is weak.
Both Mark Galeotti and Vlad Vexler are in agreement with you and have lately been talking extensively about the matter.
/Mattias
-
An interesting look on the Oplot and its crews. Lots of of juicy snippets for the attentive. From the ever productive hromadske
-
Woha! Sorry if this has been posted previously. But it is a curious one.
-
8 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
A better and just world?
The legal aspects of warfare have been evolving for thousands of years. I don't think we've reached the end of that evolution.
It was pretty much irony on my part, but I guess I wasn’t crystaly on that
It will indeed be interesting to see where he lands. Personally I think instigators of war have gotten way to much of a pass in the past, because of their exalted status and them being engaged in the noble pursuit of politics by all means (irony).
-
3 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
Right, but let's remember here that the Russian pilot was *not* charged with warcrimes. He was charged with the destruction of civilian infrastructure, just as a domestic criminal would be. It's a very simple thing... the pilot knowingly destroyed something of monetary value and he has no legal defense for doing so. Therefore, he should be held accountable in an appropriate judicial setting just like anybody else would be for deliberately causing such damage.
Is that really a thing? Aren’t the “laws of war” specifically tailored to avoid the hysterical nit picking that would ensue if war and warriors, where subjected to scrutiny under laws actually based on the assumption of decent human behaviour? I mean, common, what kind of world would that be - were people that in power, big and small, were actually held responsible for every single little trifle?
-
1 hour ago, dan/california said:
This new U.S. light tank…
A pretty good look at it. Being a swede I say an upgraded IKV-91.
-
Just in. Sweden sends Archer, CV 90 (Not specified but clearly indicated Swedish ”C” model - or possibly “D”) and more NLAWs to Ukraine.
-
As a regular reader of this splendid thread I felt very much at home in the reasoning, but I think many of us can still pick up a nugget or two here:
-
53 minutes ago, Zeleban said:
I think this is R-77 heat-guided missiles…
Thank you for answering Zelban. I was thinking a bit more next level. For example do we know what systems that has been shown to be effective/ineffective in this particular context/time? Has there been any particular tactics employed, any new revelations/experiences in the man/machine/effect matrix?
This, of course, links with the AD/laser/air superiority etc discussions. But I guess it is too early to say anything about it.
Mattias
-
12 hours ago, Haiduk said:For two days he shot down two cruise missiles and five Shakheds
Interesting. Is there any information on what weapons are typically used by UA planes for downing drones/cruise missiles, and what tactics are used?
Mattias
-
Double post
-
4 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
I'm still leaning towards Hrim-2, but not so much that I dismiss the possibility it was a truck. The facts as we know them today support either, with small question marks for each possibility. Yup, the truck theory has some inconsistencies that need to be resolved as does Hrim-2.
Steve
In the very long podcast I mentioned earlier Theiner, @noclador on twitter, tackles the ATACMS vs. Hrim-2 issue. He rules in favour of the former because, as I understood it, of the two only ATACMS (being a non ballistic missile) has the attack profile that would allow it to 1. seemingly completely ignore air defences and 2. cause the pattern of damage seen on the bridge. He hypothesis that the US might have given Ua access to the ATACMS guidance system, to mount on a Hrim-2 (3?), but ultimately discards that idea as being too improbable.
-
4 hours ago, Fenris said:
Noting special, just a quick report with some nice close up vision.
Ah, thanks, first time I see the shell casing ejection port in action, from inside the tank.
/Mattias
-
2 minutes ago, Combatintman said:
A good comparison is the German V weapon campaign in 1944-1945.
Building on that analogy russia dropped the equivalent of five Lancaster bomb loads on the 10th, five - over all of Ukraine.
A five bomber raid was nothing to write home about back then, nor is it today.
-
Ok team, what is your take on this.
I was listening to the "The Daily" podcast of today, under the headline "A Bridge, a Bomb and Putin's revenge" from the New York Times. Normally I only listen to them for US internal political issues, but I made an exception. When the 10th of October retaliatory attacks were discussed, there was some gnashing of teeth and doomsday talk about the potential impact on the Ukrainian moral. Not overly much, but well in line with many of the ill-informed and nervous ”maybe we should try for peace instead crowd”. That made me think… What actually did happen on the 10th, and how bad was it really?
Sure Lives were lost, people were most probably crippled and definitely traumatized for life – Horrible injury incurred.
But was it a majestic reaction from the war gods of the east, taking their toll for the Ukrainian insolence of bombing the Crimean bridge?
I made a rough calculation:
83 missiles (Kh 101, Kh 555, Kalibr, Iskander, S-300 and Torndo S) were supposedly used, as well as 17 Shahid UAV.The average warhead size of these weapons is 324 kg, for a total mass of 32 400 kg.
Out of these, 43 were reportedly shot down, reducing the mass delivered by 13 932 kg
For a total of 18 468 kg
As I understand it, that is the equivalent of the bomb load of three (3) A-10 warthogs – if you consider that bombs probably weigh more than missile warheads.
3 single seat attack aircraft worth of ordnance… Is that a massive response to a strategic attack on the jugular of the southern front?
3 single seat attack aircraft worth of ordnance… Will even the sustained attack of such a force do anything to dent the moral/cohesion/effectiveness/capacity of the Ukrainian nation?
On both account, I think not. Especially since the best of russian missile technology seem to be less accurate than even dumb bombs dropped by an A-10.
Furthermore, I saw somewhere that the total shelf cost for the 10 October attack was 350 million $. Is that money well spent?
All things considered, Putin certainly managed to catch the headlines… Putting the perceived russian military might back on the agenda. But almost completely unjustified, it seems to me…So, what are your thoughts, have I misunderstood this? Should Putin's gestures have anyone really shaking in their boots?
-
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:
Yikes, that is a long podcast!
Steve
Sure is, took me all day to get through
But the authoritative analysis of most European major land system from an in theatre perspective, taking vital logistics and political aspects into consideration - combined with a succinct presentation of the pro ATACMS argument held me riveted. And not least humbled, by the unusually high incidence of (very interesting) facts that I was not aware of.
-
A really excellent listen. Theiner has some great insights into hardware issues, and in particular regarding artillery. Both technically and politically interesting. The Crimean Bridge discussion follows Steve’s train of thought - though the conclusion lands in ATACMS being the weapon used.
-
6 minutes ago, sburke said:
suicide move for Lukashenko. No way is he going to commit to this considering the risk and he has nothing to gain by it.
My thoughts too, basically. Potential he could have come under even more severe pressure from the Tsar though.
I doubt Starsky has enough impact to be able to influence anything, should it be a targeted psyops move.
-
Any thoughts on this, coming as it does from a Ukrainian communications officer?
-
2 hours ago, kraze said:
-
5 hours ago, Gpig said:
Wolves in the forest. So spooky! Especially with that Raven call in the distance.
That would be Huginn or Muninn scouting for the Allfather.
-
2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
There are lines not to cross, but this isn't one of them IMHO.
Steve,
Your premise seems to hinge on me not fully understanding the need to relentlessly curb stomping of the russian war machine, in all its constituent parts, into submission - well beyond Ukraines borders of 2013 and the capacity of it threatening any of its neighbours.
I can assure you that notion is completely unfounded…
The thing is, that at the same time I genuinely believe that “we” are fighting for certain values. Values that does not really include the unnecessary degradation of human beings (that definitely being everyone of us).
My point here, in the forum context, is that he did’t post that video, made into a meme, on this forum. “We” did that. And what does that say about us?
That said, I have zero interest in a prolonged discussion on this point. I love the thread and follow it religiously for all it gives. It really is a haven of sanity and life-affirming absurdity.
Please consider my post a soft voice, whispering in your ear as we roll along the colonnades on our triumph.
-
13 hours ago, riptides said:
Pontoon guy....
Having seen the actual clip that the picture originates from, knowing that it is an image of a human being in a moment of absolute terror and anguish, I personally am revolted by its use in a meme. I know full well that my emotions are shaped by what might be described as the arrogance of a western comfort, but could we please refrain from going that much orc and refrain from posting gore here?
Looking into the abyss and all that…
-
2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
What got him power was the industrialists (oligarchs by another name) and the military, as well as nationalists within the political and social elite. Some were believers in what the Nazis stood for, some were taken in by Hitler's personality, but all were united by their desire to see Germany become a world power again.
My reflection here does not really effect your line of argument but I think it could be important to highlight, as this very moment in time and space is one which we constantly return to.
I would argue that the capitalists and right-wing politicians did not support Hitler because the wanted something, as much as they feared loosing something. At the time there was a strongly felt fear of a leftist, russian style, revolution and since the right did not want to cooperate with even liberal/moderat left-wing political forces, the Nazis provided an alternative with the muscle mass able to oppose “the proletariat”. The fact that the nazis themselves had stoked much of the social tension they were now asked to quench, is just par of the course for fascist development.
Robert O. Paxton does a great jobb illuminating these processes in his book the Anatomy of Fascism. A text that is painfully relevant in todays political climate.
How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
Yay from Sweden! With Iran backed book burners and a most excellent government it is adult diaper time.