kevinkin

Good tactical point. But in the end the Western Europe re-build and thrived.

Good tactical point. But in the end the Western Europe thrived. In the present case, I don't think Ukraine would be involved directly in a obvious war crime. I don't think I will be around when the definitive history of this war is written. So who knows.

A retreating army destroys infrastructure; and advancing army repairs infrastructure. Attacks on dams are war crimes, as explicitly noted in Article 56 of Protocol I and Article 15 of Protocol II of the 1977 Protocols to the Geneva Conventions. These international laws prohibit attacks on infrastructure “containing dangerous forces” including explicitly “dams” and “dykes” if such attacks “may cause the release of dangerous forces and consequent severe losses among the civilian population.” Despite these prohibitions, conflicts over water and attacks on water systems are on the rise, with a dramatic increase in the past two decades. There is precedent for Russian destruction of dams on the Dnieper River. In August 1941, during World War II, the retreating Soviet Army destroyed another dam on the Dnieper at Zaporizhzhia, the Dnieper Dam, to prevent it from falling into the hands of the advancing Nazis. At the time it was the largest dam in the world. The subsequent flooding reportedly killed tens of thousands of people downstream. https://time.com/6285314/ukraine-dam-destruction-water-war-essay/

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraine-situation-report-offensive-going-better-than-expected-u-s-says Administration officials “were encouraged by better-than-expected progress Monday, as Ukrainian units pushed through heavily mined areas to advance between five and 10 kilometers in some areas of the long front,” Washington Post columnist David Ignatius reported Tuesday. “That raised hopes that Ukrainian forces can keep thrusting toward Mariupol, Melitopol and other Russian-held places along the coast.” Joe says it's so .. Biden administration officials say the offensive began on Monday with a Ukrainian thrust south along multiple axes, Ignatius reported, echoing what we reported Monday. The White House, however, said it is too early to tell how the destruction of the Nova Kakhovka dam across the Dnipro River will affect the counteroffensive. “I won't speak to Ukrainian military operations in any way whatsoever,” White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby told reporters Tuesday afternoon. “But right now- too soon to assess what kind of impact [the dam destruction] is going to have on the battlefield." And perhaps the best data possible: Not surprisingly, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu had a very different take than Ignatius on the state of play. He said, as usual offering no proof, that the counteroffensive was crushed and Ukraine lost a tremendous amount of troops and equipment as it staged attacks over three days in several different directions. Let's put our seat belts on and pray the war ends soon.

Certainly Washington, and its NATO allies, should do everything to help democratic reformists in Russia bring about change from within. But we should be clear-eyed about their prospects of success. Western countries should degrade the ability of Russian intelligence to operate overseas by instigating mass expulsions of its officers posing as Russian diplomats. History shows that expulsions degrade the Kremlin’s clandestine capabilities. Russian embassies and consulates in the West should be reduced to shells. The U.S. needs a new grand strategy of containment for Russia. That strategy should be based on an uncomfortable truth: the West has a Russia problem, not a Putin problem. https://time.com/6284209/after-vladimir-putins-rule-in-russia/

Wouldn't you want to crush all the eggs at once in one basket? Seems spreading out might be a logical response to the current situation Russia faces. For example, providing for a flexible counter to any attempt to re-take Crimea in a lighting strike. Crimea is really a major wart on Russia's forehead. It is a base for naval assets the are by and large irrelevant. It only has symbolic value. If given a choice where would people like to live? Kaliningrad or Crimea; both a dystopian nightmare.

https://abcnews.go.com/International/ukrainian-counteroffensive-shaping-amid-series-meant-destabilize-russian/story?id=99789793 SLOVYANSK, Ukraine -- Well-trained, well-equipped Ukrainian combat forces are now in "assembly areas," close enough to front line areas, meaning they could launch a concerted attack on Russian positions in a relatively short time period, according to Western officials. Okay .. It's unclear whether fresh offensive actions by the Ukrainian military will evolve into larger assaults on wider areas of the Russian front lines or whether they are more localized -- or even diversionary operations -- aimed at testing and wearing down the Russian defenses in preparation for a more substantial offensive later on. Major media just speculating. If the UA can keep ABC guessing, then the RA should be no problem.

If that is true, it sort of makes the point the NATO is missing out on an asymmetric advantage to give to the UA. Maybe or maybe not, night combat could be one other critical vulnerability to exploit against Russia.

Great points. But has NATO lost it's advantage in night combat or is that advantage difficult to press home in this large and long war? So special ops going into a terrorist nest at night is almost irrelevant when we are talking ground warfare on the scale we are observing? And on a static front. Perhaps the advantage will shine once a war of movement arises. I kind of sort of hope so.

Not talking about watch. Asking about fire and movement and using the darkness to an advantage. I read many times this was a major advantage for NATO. Did this advantage go away with a wider use of night vision type force multipliers? Perhaps the UA does not have enough forces for 24/7 combat and rather do most of the work during the day. Maybe its due to training. Just a mysterious part of the war.

So it gets me to wonder which side has the advantage at night and if this domain is something not well reported and a way for the west to give a new meaningful edge to the UA.

Been meaning to ask this question and your post reminded me. All of the videos of UAV attacks and small unit combat overall, show missions completed during daylight. Does the war stop after dark? I don't think so. Therefore, I would like to understand what is going on at night. What percentage of UAVs can deliver munitions at night? How much traditional ground combat takes place at night? I bet there are a few examples of night time operations. But is there an large amount of action taking place we don't see in the public domain? Perhaps videos posted from daytime are just easier for the public to understand and turn into rock operas. I don't know. Puzzled. Maybe it's playing up the positive with daytime videos and keeping the night actions under secrecy.

Nothing new in this analysis except I don't recall something from the Hudson Institute being so rosey. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12152585/Recent-attacks-spell-doom-Putin-break-Russia-expert-warns.html

When you think long term, the border guards will have to be efficient in their jobs so most can go back and rebuild the nation. In the short term, the observations are probably over cautious.

Thanks for the link. Should bring up some interesting conversations this weekend. You sort scratch your head. The UA was said to show initiative in logistics, but not in combat related planning and fighting. While this is a key hole view, it should not be passed off without acknowledging there could be some deep seated issues at least with the infantry that will be tasked to hold ground once re-gained.

Looks like a juicey target. Anyone know where the final assembly takes place and how the missiles are transported to the firing areas? Given the raiding tactics we are seeing into Russian proper, I am pretty sure NATO knows what is going on. So why not take the raids deeper? Small footprint, plausible deniability just to keep Russia off balance at worse. At some point Ukraine has to stop being a punching bag. If NATO knows the supply chain and is unwilling to strike it from the air, then enable something else.

“Russia is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma”. Winston's observation holds today.

One thing about raids is not that the raiders withdraw, it's also what they leave behind i.e. inserted for future rewards. Not sure if that's the case here recently. But I would want to spread a little asymmetry around.

Perhaps the lone example is the brilliant US conduct of the war in the Pacific. After Guadalcanal, there was little let up in offensive operations. Not directly comparable to continental warfare by any means. For a period of 2-3 years the US rested one huge combined arms group, while the other took the war to the enemy. Back and forth. But thinking about it, the UA might just be adopting that operational concept. The weapons involved are different. But the idea of alternation is a key concept in manuver warfare. If I can sharpen my swords faster, move them around faster, strike with better intel, I don't need to expose my human investment to the same extent as my dull, slow, blind enemy. Death by 1000 cuts.

Those old codgers. You got to love them and their tools. But don't go near them - the tools I mean.

A few pages back a post forwarded that the UA offensive might peak in September. I think this is reasonable. First, the material and training for 2023 will be in place and (importantly) the later Fall wet weather will help defend UA gains made in the late summer. This fits with an UA economy of force strategy as things stand. Pretty sure Ukraine will like to engage in attrition dealing with shells and missiles, but the trained human component that delivers firepower is a precious thing to hold close. Very contrary to the way Russia operates.

Arkin, you can address this side topic within the PM system. We all love the ins and out of policy making. But let the occasional outside board slips go by the wayside and address the poster with a PM. If they get back to you with silence so be it.

I agree. This all knowable via even Wiki.

That's cryptic.

The president vetos laws passed by congress. Once any law is in place, the president would have to be sued for not enforcing it. So in your scenario, a new law would have to be passed that pleases the president. By that time emergency situation could get out of hand. It might make an interesting paper comparing how past presidents would have responded to the 2022 RA invasion. But the end, it's just hypothetical. However, the would be writer would have a lot of material to use as references.