OBJ

I don't think it's West bashing day. But I do think we all need to acknowledge: 1. NATO isn't ready to fight and doesn't want to fight until it's ready. Reading anything about the current state of the Bundeswehr is just very depressing. 2. WWII, US General Marshal, something like, 'Roosevelt taught us (US military leadership) a modern day democracy cannot fight a 30 years war,' so keeping a democracy focused on the best way to avoid getting directly engaged is to support those that are engaged, especially in a multi-threat environment, is hard.

Thanks @Grossman At least among these three, no one sees a knockout blow coming from either side in 2024. If true, the thing I worry about more than anything else is eroding western will to supply Ukraine, leading to negotiations that leave Putin with what he's taken. Whether the West, particularly the EU, have the moral fortitude to fast track Ukraine into NATO and the EU after that looks to me like the $64k question. That's the only way I see to keep Putin from resuming his aggression after a western gift of time to rebuild and get his offensive right a second time, quite possibly in the context of other world crisis the West will be focused on then. Being an amateur prognosticator striving to be realistic, I realize I am much more likely to be wrong than right. In this case I hope I am wrong and being too negative. My summary: 1. Barbara Zanchetta, Department of War Studies, King's College London - The war will drag on through 2024 with the only likely outcome a negotiated settlement. 2. Michael Clarke, former director general of the Royal United Services Institute - Industrial-age warfare is a struggle between societies. What happens on the battlefield becomes ultimately only the symptom of that struggle. The military course of this war in 2024 will be determined in Moscow, Kyiv, Washington, Brussels, Beijing, Tehran and Pyongyang more than in Avdiivka, Tokmak, Kramatorsk or any of the devastated battlefields along the frontlines. 3. Ben Hodges, former commanding general, United States Army Europe - I do, however, anticipate that early in the new year the US will rediscover its strategic backbone and pass the aid package that was delayed in Congress in December. The most strategically important part of Ukraine that remains occupied by Russia is Crimea, which is what we call the "decisive terrain". War is a test of will, and a test of logistics. The Russian logistics system is fragile and under continuous pressure from Ukraine.

This

Thanks Dan and Steve, So, because I don't know, what would Russia breakup into? What new entities with what geographic boundaries would emerge. Who would lead each? What would each's legacy nuclear capability be? Are we thinking another Russian revolution followed by another Russian civil war? Apologies to Colin Powell's legacy, I think he said during the 1991 August coup something like, 'I'm not worried about the Russian revolution. I am worried about the next one.' Is this the 'next one' we're worried about?

OK, one major value of the forum is seeing issues from new perspectives. I misremembered, thought the coup sense was 'be careful what you wish for.' I also was not at a coup leading to the breakup of Russia would be a good thing. So searching for a current perspective on a coup, there is the below sample. I hope I am not wrong but assume these sources are credible even with their western political bias. My synthesizing leads me to, Putin's vulnerable to this day and a coup is still quite possible, with the probability going up the longer there is stalemate and heavy Russian losses in Ukraine. None of what I found predicted the Russian state would breakup, just be led by someone else, perhaps more inimical to the West than Putin. But again, that maybe a function of my 'search bias.' Is there a way for us all to get more factually grounded on this topic, likelihood of coup and outcome if there is one? https://nypost.com/2023/12/23/news/former-cia-agent-predicts-russian-president-vladimir-putin-is-about-to-be-toppled/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/11/07/russian-ponomarev-putin-coup-ilya-ponomarev/ https://time.com/6284209/after-vladimir-putins-rule-in-russia/ https://www.businessinsider.com/how-putin-could-toppled-coup-former-intelligence-officers-russia-ukraine-2023-5 https://ssi.armywarcollege.edu/SSI-Media/Recent-Publications/Display/Article/3508732/would-a-russian-coup-solve-anything/

Hi @Astrophel I can't talk to #1, good luck #2 requires airlift to get over the drop zone, and I think most folks think the paratroop carrier would not survive to get over the drop zone. The idea of moving via air over the minefield using current or near future technology has gotten a lot of discussion here, proven jet packs and heavy lift drones carrying single troopers being part of the discussion (flying low enough not to be engaged by the systems that would take our paratroop carriers). Those conversations also included discussion on how to solve all the other parts of the problem of fully penetrating to breakout of modern defense in depth.

Hmmm, I thought most folks here agreed a coup that deposed Putin would end up worse for everyone, Russians, Ukrainians, Europeans, RoW? Did I misunderstand that the people in Russia that could pull off a coup would be worse than Putin in every way meaningful to everyone not already aligned with Russia?

Kind of combining @Aragorn2002 @Haiduk @Harmon Rabb and others... Prayer for Ukraine, not original. "Grant us fair weather for Battle. Graciously hearken to us as soldiers who call upon Thee that, armed with Thy power, we may advance from victory to victory, and crush the oppression and wickedness of our enemies and establish Thy justice among men and nations. Amen." I can thank God I get to be a member of this forum and sit in my clean cloths, freshly showered, dry and warm, belly full, relaxed under a sky free of enemy drones and missiles, with no worry to man my position in a cold muddy trench to hold off the next enemy assault, and take in and share thoughts on the military and political nature of present and future conflicts

https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300234091/the-origins-of-victory/ re @The_Capt discussion on strategy, I agree with @dan/california, very good reference, published in 2023.

Thanks @alison, as you point out, the minefield is only part of the problem. I think you listed a number of the other problems well.

Assuming they got it right, NYT article says senior defense official, just to be clear, not the Minister of Defense. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/23/world/europe/ukraine-defense-official-arrest.html#:~:text=The Ukrainian police have arrested,artillery shells for Ukraine's military. I agree with the sentiment of punishing him, wonder if the Ukrainians have frontline penal battalions. This guy would be a great candidate for supervised mine clearance work. Paraphrasing another dictator, 'it takes a brave man to be a criminal in the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense.'

I couldn't directly access the NYTs article either, but did find this, free to me at least. https://kyivindependent.com/nyt-putin-open-to-ceasefire-if-russia-keeps-occupied-territories/ NYT: Putin open to ceasefire if Russia keeps occupied territories Share Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share via Email by The Kyiv Independent news deskDecember 23, 2023 5:40 PM2 min read Russian President Vladimir Putin (C) leaves the hall of the Grand Kremlin Palace as officers of the Presidential Regiment (R) look on during an award ceremony marking the Heroes of Russia Day on Dec. 8 in Moscow. Putin said after the ceremony that he would run for president again in the 2024 election. (Contributor/Getty Images) Listen to this article 0:00 / 2:41 1X BeyondWords This audio is created with AI assistance Russian President Vladimir Putin has been reportedly signaling behind closed doors that Russia would be open to a ceasefire along the current frontline, the New York Times reported based on its sources. Putin's sought ceasefire would mean Russia would keep the territories it illegally occupies in Ukraine, where the population is subject to abductions and summary executions. “He really is willing to stop at the current positions,” a former senior Russian official told The New York Times. “He’s not willing to retreat one meter,” the former official added. The New York Times wrote that some American officials say that Putin's alleged willingness to end the war, that cost the lives of tens of thousands, could be an attempt to influence opinions and "does not reflect genuine willingness" to end the war. Ukraine laid out its 10-point "peace formula" in November 2022. One of the key points as a precondition for starting peace talks is the full withdrawal of Russian troops from Ukrainian territory, including the regions illegally annexed by Russia in 2022. Russian officials have previously reiterated that this would be considered a nonstarter for any negotiations. According to the New York Times article, Putin also reportedly sent out feelers for a ceasefire deal in the fall of 2022 after Ukrainian forces liberated Kharkiv Oblast, according to American officials, indicating that he was satisfied with Russia’s captured territory and ready for an armistice. The signals came through multiple channels, including via foreign governments with ties to both the U.S. and Russia. Unofficial Russian emissaries have reportedly spoken to interlocutors about the contours of a potential deal. “Putin and the Russian army, they don’t want to stretch their capacity further,” an undisclosed international official told the New York Times. Dmitri Peskov, the Kremlin’s spokesman, said Russia was ready for talks, but only for “the achievement of its own goals.” There is no reason to start peace negotiations with Ukraine at this moment, Peskov earlier said to reporters on Dec. 20. The prospect of peace negotiations, including exchanging territory for peace or other significant concessions, is widely unpopular among the Ukrainian population. A poll released in December 2023 found that 74% of Ukrainians were against such territorial concessions with Russia in exchange for peace. Ukrainian and Western leaders have also repeatedly said that they do not believe Russia is interested in good-faith peace negotiations.

"And the risk is obvious, the lead vehicle gets taken out and all the rest now either try and turn around or have to go around into uncleared space. So a proving system is a must and right now those are mine rollers." 1. I think this is true for any contested breach, regardless of how the breach is made. Speed of breach combined with clearing confidence would both seem to be equally important. 2. The precursor to breaching, all the discussions we've had on the need to clear the defender's ISR abilities in planned breach site and all decoy locals first. I still like the mobile infantry idea concept but prefer the heavy lift drones over jet packs, still jet packs, as someone else said, what could be sexier than that!

Also this, free to read, at lease for me. Putin proposal Russia keeps everything they occupy now. https://kyivindependent.com/nyt-putin-open-to-ceasefire-if-russia-keeps-occupied-territories/ As @kimbosbread said, Kremlinologists, thoughts, analysis. Putin, serious, if so why, if not, why. Why now? Maskirovka, to what end?

Wow, flying (gliding) snakes. Taking this seriously, the idea of man imitating nature, how do you see the 'flying MICLIC' do the equivalent of, starting high up in a tree, 'suck in its abdomen and flaring out its ribs to turn its body into a "pseudo concave wing", all the while making a continual serpentine motion of lateral undulation parallel to the ground to stabilize its direction in midair in order to land safely. Assuming you are not just putting me on, taking me for a ride

Apparently breaking news, NYTs, Putin exploring potential ceasefire in Ukraine? https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/23/world/europe/putin-russia-ukraine-war-cease-fire.html Need an account to read. Ceasefire, what would Ukraine need to get to agree to give him this?

I agree, all true, they do mention specifically mechanisms to control recoil effects: "Asisguard equipped the drone with two systems designed to address the issue of recoil affecting accuracy. One uses a group of sensors that account for variables ranging from a target's distance to the current wind speed. The other uses robotic arms to manually move the gun as needed to counteract the recoil." I agree with you though, the verbiage is from the sales brochure of the manufacturer. However, there were track laying tractors before there were tanks, just like there were toy drones as kid's toys before... well everything we have now.

What do we think the relative 'time to clear' between using GPR/sensors and individual charges vs long or linked line charges? If the time is the same or difference negligible, what do we think the likelihood of incomplete clearance would be? Credit to Steve, my limited knowledge of present heavy lift drone capability makes pulling a 'light' lead line across the mine field possible now, the anchoring, strength and power source needed for the winch to pull the MICLIC into position I am not so sure of. What @poesel said with calculations.

Dan, you are amazing. I'm a third into the book now. My favorite quote so far, Danish politician Karl Kristian, '"It is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future."

Hmmm, yes, flying (light and heavy) drone use expanded beyond ISR and PVR attack into other missions, breaching, counter ISR, infantry transport, casualty evac, resupply, etc... and anti-infantry (link), this one, machinegun armed, 200 rounds, allegedly 100% accurate on human sized targets out to 200m. Critically no mention of endurance. https://futurism.com/turkey-buy-drone-machine-gun From the article: "But as more and more armed drones emerge, it seems like just a matter of time before militaries decide to remove human operators from the equation altogether. In fact, that may already be happening as United States Defense Secretary Mark Esper accused China in November of selling autonomous killer drones to nations in the Middle East. So, while the drones that Asisguard plans to sell to Turkey later this month might require a human operator, there's a chance the next armed drones the nation adds to its arsenal will be autonomous — and that'll be when things get really scary." Are we seeing the early signs of two tracks and two legs being replaced by four nacelled rotors? My opinion, near future, next 50 years, replacement no, major supplement yes, maybe something like the tank joining the infantry-artillery team 1916-1945, potentially a whole new arm, perhaps a new, 'arm of decision,' as well as a new form of vehicle mobility in many existing arms. 'And discuss,' this last quote attributable to others, LLF I think.

Thanks Dan, that's my understanding also. In Ukraine we now have forces and fixed geography that enable a continuous front strong enough on both sides to preclude successful offensive operations. I asked as I believe this is another circumstance that may be unique to Ukraine, at present.

I think it is a great idea in combination with all the others that talk to friendly drone use in the attack while denying the enemy defensive use of drones in the battle space, assuming we all agree heavy ground forces and ground LOC transiting the minefields are necessary to the breakout. I do not know what a current Mine Clearing Line Charge weights but there is this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M58_MICLIC The line charge is 350 feet (107 meters) long and contains 5 pounds (2.27 kg) per linear foot of C-4 explosive. This line charge is supposed to be effective against conventionally fused land mines and supposed to clear a lane 8m wide. The explosives for a line this length weigh 1,750 lbs, just the explosives, not sure about the 'line container'. The greatest lift I've seen for 'heavy' drones is 414 lbs, so if that's a practical max we'd need to reduce line length assuming lifting drones at both ends. It makes sense to me a force assembled to attack above minefields could use the same form of mobility to clear lanes through the minefields.

Ahhh... I think we have all made comparisons between the current situation in Ukraine and the western front in WWI. The problem is the same, how to restore mobility to the battlefield. A lot of the other factors they were dealing with then are at different stages now but still the same factors, limits of technology, material limits, manpower limits, societal casualty tolerances, doctrinal orthodoxy, probably a lot more factors people smarter than me can articulate. I imagine the militaries of WWI were all asking similar questions to what we're asking now on this forum. I have to imagine a lot of ideas were investigated to various stages until rejected for whatever reasons. I believe mining was. I doubt the tank and infiltration tactics were the first and only ideas that originated then from thinking on how to restore mobility to the battlefield. I also think at it's heart CM is about solving tactical problems, pretty much every scenario is a tactical problem to be solved. Most of the people here are interested in that, solving tactical problems, so they see the need for new solutions in Ukraine. You and @The_Capt are two of them. No need for any of us to attack each other on the forum. On the other hand, we should challenge other people's ideas we think are unsupportable if we have data, experience, historical precedent to support our position. That all feeds the discourse, and hopefully expands all our thinking on the particulars to be solved and solutions likely to work. and of course Steve can take everything we say here he agrees with and include it in his military consulting Also I think @The_Capt's use of 'denial' was as in tactical denial, the defender denying the attacker the ability to maneuver, modern air defense denying air forces the ability to provide close air support, that usage.

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-middle-east-67751758/page/2

We might have to agree to disagree. My current sense is the majority of Republicans in both houses want to support Ukraine. Politics is 'the art of the possible.' Republicans now see conditions that make it possible for them to get more of what they want at the border while still getting aide to Ukraine.