kevinkin

Deleted ... thanks womble.

Sir Winston Churchill, "Russia is never as strong as she wants to appear, but never as weak as she looks." Bingo on point 1. But the jury is out on point 2. Let's see if the Bulldog's quote stands the test of time. Interestingly, legend has it that the Russians coined Winston's nick name.

My take too. The monster Putin is throwing his population into a meat grinder and attrition is real for them. While back in the US, no one wants their kids thrown into that type of warfare. While there might be some lack of awareness of what is going on in eastern Ukraine, I think most Americans realize this is ugly warfare right now. Putin may want to make things so ugly Americans will recoil from direct involvement. So is he projecting a perception of attrition or the reality of it? I think more the later.

Reality sucks: https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-one-year-lives-of-5-friends-0443aac32251e86a595cf2da23f8faef We can't allow this to become normal. (Cold stare at our political - military - industrial elites.) Seth's sort of coming in out of the dark: https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2023/02/16/the_long_term_fight_881975.html Russia wants not a “grinding war of attrition”, but rather to make Ukraine look like an attritional war, because this evokes images within Western historical memory of the Russian bear’s indomitable will. So the perception of a war of attrition. Um, have to think on that. Tell that to the mom who's kid lies under another mom's kid in front of an UA trench. Ukrainian skill-at-arms can defeat Russia’s strategy on the battlefield. The West must also defeat this strategy in the domain of political perception. If Russia is to be forced to the bargaining table, it must be convinced that the West can and will sustain Ukraine in the long-term. An MQ-9 transfer, properly conceived, would demonstrate the West’s commitment to long-term Ukrainian sustainment. It ought to include, however, fighter jets and long-range missiles alongside it to protect Ukrainian airspace, enable Ukraine’s southern and eastern offensives, and after the current phase of conflict ends, ensure that Ukraine can strike targets within Russia. Holy out of left field batman.

Perhaps of all the Russian armed forces the 'air force" might be the most loyal to the current or future authoritarian regimes. If they can't have any impact - tactical or higher - why put them in harms way? They are Putin's joker in the hole, he ain't got any aces. Either in the casino or in the air.

Just when my curiosity is up, this out today: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraine-bought-all-the-gas-trucks-available-in-europe-to-keep-fueled Despite massive Russian attacks against its power and fuel supply infrastructure, Ukraine claims it has actually increased its fuel reserves to the point of surplus thanks to the influx of imports and an innovative logistics operation using thousands of fuel trucks as mobile storage sites. Ukraine began receiving large amounts of fuel in January from the U.S., and over the course of Russia's all-out invasion, purchased thousands of fuel tanker trucks to create a mobile storage system, said Serhiy Kuyun, director of the A-95 Consulting Group, a Ukrainian fuel market research firm. "Revolutionary changes have taken place,” in the Ukrainian fuel supply chain, Kuyun told reporters Wednesday during a briefing at the Ukrainian Media Center. “There has never been this [American] fuel in Ukraine. There is also fuel from Taiwan, India, and the Netherlands.” That's a change from before Moscow's full-on invasion, when Ukraine received the majority of its fuel from Russia and Belarus. But beyond new sources of fuel, Ukraine has developed a mobile storage method that Kuyun claims defies Russian attempts to bomb its supplies out of existence. Well there's part of the answer re: fuel anyway. I would imagine Ukraine had thought this through well before last February. Kudos.

Looks like Russia adheres to equal opportunity employment and deployment. I wonder if she hit anything of military value? https://www.newsweek.com/marina-yankina-russian-defense-official-window-death-1781713

Thank to those who responded. I would rather be part of the UA supply chain. Your life expectancy is a lot longer. I wonder if the UA pushes down decision making to the lowest feasible level. Get this stuff from point A to B by midnight and I don't care how you do it etc.. Operating on their home turf might assist too. I had an uncle that drove for the "Red Ball Express" . and was fascinated when my dad and his brother would swap war stories.

I thinking of strikes on larger more centralized hubs than a xroads. But even in that example, the UA might just adapt and use another unpublished route to the front. What's the state of Ukraine's rail network that would normally move stuff in bulk. I read critiques of Russia neglecting Ukraine's rail early in the war. Was that the long RUSI analysis? These less reported aspects of the war are important and can be fascinatingly.

Good point. But established road and rail hubs don't need ISR to target. They don't move. If the UA is avoiding them opting for a less known routes, then that's an adaptation that Russia can't replicate to the same degree since any ill established supply lines are easy for the the west to uncover. Russia's ISR is not blanketing or agile at all. Plus their forces require more just to subsist which might mean secondary supply routes don't have sufficient through put and Russia is tied to well know avenues of logistics. Enter the almost real time delivery of HIMARS.

Question: How are UA logistics organized in way that they are less vulnerable to RA aerial attacks? Is their supply chain just less rigid and more adaptable than Russia's? More dispersed. Better trained? I have seen articles on the young workers innovating with UAVs. But can't remember any report on how the UA supplies its troops vs Russia. This is a similar question to the one on how Ukraine's medical system is dealing with the wounded. Supplies go in; the wounded go out. Ukraine is doing a better job in these areas and as Steve mentions above: "There is so much to learn amidst the tragedy of this war."

This is not your brother's MALD: https://eurasiantimes.com/russia-is-launching-balloons-with-corner-reflectors-into-ukraine/ Given enough data and experience, these won't be too much of a problem. But a PIA until then. One element in stopping the keystone cops: https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/02/12/ukraines-new-anti-tank-tactic-lay-a-minefield-then-scatter-more-mines-from-the-air/?sh=573f525f55e3 Another "flip side" opinion article appears: Trying to kill every last Russian soldier and completely humiliate President Vladamir Putin puts Ukraine and NATO in a precarious position. If you humiliate this president enough, then there is no predicting what he might do. No, you can't predict the future. But the West may never have a better chance to shape it to their advantage. For most of us, this is a fight for a future we will never see (age dependent). https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-731369

F-35s over Poland. https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/article-731535

Don't forget the gang at the Matrix forums discussing CMO.

https://www.stripes.com/theaters/europe/2023-02-13/russians-wartime-exodus-9127629.html Pretty good summary of what's going on with the brain drain and exodus of talent from Russia. A lot more options for the people fleeing this time around. I guess due to the interconnected world. I suppose Putin could slip a few agents into the mix and send them off to do no good pounding away at a laptop. Russian President Vladimir Putin's war has set off a historic exodus of his own people. Initial data shows that at least 500,000, and perhaps nearly 1 million, have left in the year since the invasion began — a tidal wave on scale with emigration following the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution and the Soviet Union's collapse in 1991. And ... "This exodus is a terrible blow for Russia," said Tamara Eidelman, a Russian historian who moved to Portugal after the invasion. "The layer that could have changed something in the country has now been washed away." Like the white Russian emigres of the Bolshevik era and the post-Soviet immigrants of the 1990s, many of those leaving Russia because of the war in Ukraine are likely gone for good. Eidelman, the Russian historian, said that the longer the war, the deeper the scars. "Every extra month leads people to get used to a different country," she said. "They get a job there, their children go to school, they begin to speak a different language. The longer the war lasts, the longer the dictatorship in the country continues, the fewer people will return." In our lifetime? ... Matthew Rojansky, president of the U.S. Russia Foundation, a Washington-based group, said the Russian expats could become "a repository of relevant skills for a better, freer, modern Russia." For now, though, Rojansky said, the outflow sends an clear message.

CNN: In fact, NORAD commander Gen. Glen VanHerck said recent objects shot down were likely the first “kinetic action” that NORAD or the US Northern Command had taken against an airborne object over US airspace. Learn something everyday. Meanwhile they had school kids like me hiding under our desks for nothing. And NORAD has had no problem tracking Santa Claus for decades. Someone is playing with our sensibilities and heads got to roll.

I have been wondering about this side of the war for a while now. Is it too hard on the heart to cover? A few MBTs here, a few there. That gets covered. Meanwhile, Ukrainians are cast all over Europe. Some in horrible shape from wounds. The refugees last March obtained a lot of coverage off the bat. Is the media covering this side of the war adequately now? https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraine-situation-report-this-may-be-russias-first-kamikaze-drone-boat-attack Drone boat attack in the news. A relative pin prick compared to the humanitarian story. And humanitarian side of the war will have an important impact on the geopolitics moving forward.

Well here is the flip side of the coin for you: https://asiatimes.com/2023/02/breaking-russia-more-like-breaking-ourselves/

A brief history from one Georgians POV: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/georgia/make-russia-pay

Things are heating up; BBC cites friendly data: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-64616099 The UK's MoD pointed out the recent increase (RA) could be due to "a range of factors, including lack of trained personnel, coordination, and resources across the front". Ukraine "also continues to suffer a high attrition rate", the UK said.

Good to know. Any idea if this is care at civilian or military (NATO) facilities? Are hospitals in European capitols accepting the wounded through an extensive network of burden sharing?

Thanks guys. Let's pray that the attention is robust. But I fear there are many horror stories. The world was not ready for the carnage. Is it ever?

Has anyone come across an article on how the UA is evacuating and caring for its most serious wounded? For example, is the environment such that helicopters can be used to transport soldiers to well staffed field hospitals having the resources to complete major surgery? I wonder if NATO can provide assistance in this? Perhaps the medical facilities are staged close to the fighting and long range transport is rarely needed. I ask because I don't know. And given how brutal this war is, this would seem to be a big part of its history. Many unnamed heroes behind the lines. It's hard to imagine the stress on the medical system this war must be. We so often discuss weapons procurement, but where are the IV bags, antibiotics, pain killers coming from? I might be able to answer if this were a nice tidy post cold war conflict. But sadly we are in new/old territory now.

Well there needs to be some operational context put in place. Modern MBTs are designed to fight other tanks and provide infantry support. So much depends what's going on in the wider conflict, the terrain, air and artillery support and the need to risk MBTs going after the enemy's MBTs if other means of defeat exist. The mobile firepower and shock action of MBTs need not be deployed in mass. But at some point the enemy will have to try tank-tank engagements or else the flow of gasoline and armor might become battle winning. This assumes the armor is operating with protection from attack choppers and ATGMs. Very complex since armor should not act alone.

A taste of the front lines: https://unherd.com/2023/02/the-madness-behind-the-battle-for-bakhmut/ Cheap drones and additively printed shells. I wonder who supplies the resin to knock out a T90?