Kraft

I'd argue it is faster and safer than a pickup truck driving through mud, dodging shell craters and mines, artillery and fpv drones - although the latter have a chance of taking this thing down. Also it doesnt put a driver at risk, so for hard to reach places this can have valuable use. It probably costs a lot more than a simple truck though.

Being ahead in an oryx excel is only useful if the few Bradleys, Leos,.. that are lost are actually replaced. Russia can replace these losses for another 2-3 years. The toll is paid by the units that have to weather these assaults with rationed shells. The loss ratio wouldnt be as much in favor were support available that could end up on oryx, while endless mechanized hordes break over trenches held with blood alone. I am fairly confident this war will end before one side is reduced to conscripts sharing a rifle and ammo, towns and cities matter, especially if they contest a Region russia wants to claim its own.

We should all be hopeful russia manages to scale up their failing, not just in Bakhmut and Avdiivka, the last stronghold in Donetsk, but failing beyond - that will win the war. Maybe after losing the battle for Avdiivka, they should lose the battle for operationally insignificant Kupyansk, its only 5km until russia can fail there too.

I did and it contained exactly the same bullet points what the article I posted summarised. Would you expect him to say anything of the sort? "Fact" is, support is ending, very much uncertain is what this long term strategic shift will envision and how that will be achieved within presidential election time while republicans shift further down the Putin hole. This started with a few unreasonable unimportant noise makers that made Ukraine their talking point, it has spread to the whole party, elections will make it worse not easier to get funding through and if you want to build up factories and send the AD to protect them, its going to cost a lot more than hand-me-downs and write-offs of vehicles already leaving service. Which is why conclusion to this stated "goal" is pessimistic. But we will see, maybe tomorrow republicans will wake up and finance the greatest Ukrainian MIC the world has ever seen, that not only burns money through produced tanks blowing up but also makes itself self sufficient by selling.. something! I expected more than 31 Abrams but $100B sounds much better, a crazy unit price though. Evidently, it will be a natural number <31, the range of possibilities is thus not endless when evaluting this lowered support. As I said, all the combined effort and storage cleaning of the last 2 years amounted to a stalemate, spooling down will not lead to winning when russia is now putting 30% of its GDP into the military. Should we compare this with Ukraines GDP to see how far free market deals would get us? And Business hates risks, what would help business? Government commitment to a clear definable goal, which hasnt been offered for 2 years, as politicans stay far away from anything definable so they can hedge their bets and drop out if stuff moves sideways. This new vote of confidence in a self sufficient Ukraine without its largest assistance provider will surely help quell investors fears that their capital investments wont be devalued by cruise missiles or unfavorable peace treaties. Ah okay

Tripple posted for some reason, please deleate

Double posted for some reason, please deleate.

Why do you feel to overexaggerate and mock what I am writing? Instead of replying to what I actually replied with? As for what Mr Miller said, it is exactly the same as the article summed it up, unless I missed a keynote in your wall of text. Support is ending, build UA MIC - to make it brief. They've been saying "Congress needs to act" for the past quarter of a year. Doesnt make them act though does it? I am not knowledgable on internal US politics but I fail to see any other funding issue that has been in complete deadlock this long. To the contrary, a "shift" in "strategy" all of a sudden indicates to me the opposite of a positive resolution. It also didnt adress any of the aforementioned issues with poofing an MIC into existance, protecting it and funding it within a country that is on life support financially and unable to fund any of this, ever, on its own. As long as the war is going on, economically, there can absolutely be no self sufficiency in which UA just buys stuff for fair market value (+massive risk premium) from its own pockets and keeps up to attrition.

Verdun is a small town with a population of 16k people, during WW1 it had less. The relative amount of forces present and their casulties over time make it important. Bakhmut was the biggest battle of this war on these scales. You may define success as trading the city and tens of thousand of the best soldiers for a bunch more convicts, I dont. And I doubt in any negotiation, convicts will play a role, cities will. Now as for the long run implications - major US support and all the old war soviet EU stocks, + few whatever could be spared modern stuff the EU sent caused a stalemate. Now, US ends support and EU stocks are as empty as before. I dont say tank > drone. My original point below the article was about "UA MIC" replaycing ALL the stuff. That includes SAM launchers, HMMWVS, shells, and so on. Every day I see Fundraisers to buy used unarmored cars for frontline MedEvac! So clearly, whatever there is it is not enough, now US cuts support and UA should just magically poof underground mass facilities to replace it all. As for the need of tanks, IFVs, I say it is needed, for such a task, where a key defensive point cannot be taken by drones alone or where drones cannot even support properly. If the UA should ever be in a position to attack in such conditions, it needs vehicles, of all sorts. As for drones, we can spin the same argument. russia is building assembly line factories way outside, these large facilities would be the focal point of any missile barrage, unless UA gets the SAM coverage to defend such facilities its unrealistic to expect more than hand soldering production in a shed or basement somewhere with parts ordered online or 3d printed with 300 euro retail printers. It is very significant in the defence of Avdiivka and was fought over very hard. As for Avdiivka, it is the entrance towards Donetsk, somewhat relevant no? Regardless, repeating "unsignificant" for every village, city that is lost is not a solution. What UA needs and gets have been 2 different things for 2 years, I dont think that will change any time soon. Are you seriously saying the US will actually build up a UA MIC? After republicans made Biden throw the towel and end support?? Besides claiming the 6+ mine thrawlers were going to breach 10km minebelts with drones every bush? All the kit that was needed.. and training that didnt include drones at all.. I remember you saying even a full nato suite of specialised vehicles would have a tough time breaching these lines. On top of the russian reserves, that turned out to be in the thousands while UA can count its working Leopards with 1 hand

I only mean the supposed US plan to fund / build up a UA MIC instead of the support of the last 2 years. That MIC I say wont happen. Whether EU supports with EU MIC in Ukraine, or selling vehicles of EU MIC to Ukraine or just donating old hand-me-downs, I havent said, as my point below the article is, its up to EU now (in whatever capacity), as US is pulling out of this, regardless of Biden/Trump.

Yes, its up to Europe now, because as I said, the US will not built a UA ((underground)) MIC to sustain this attrition war on the same level with russian MIC. Its a dumb talking point so their press conference is not just "youre on your own, but we support you in our hearts".

And meet Mr Cluster, Mr FPV drone, Mr Mortar, Mr MG and sniper fire for 2.5kms walking speed? Even the russian commanders were able to figure out thats not gonna work, Im sure they are aware tanks go boom when hit by drones but driving is the only way to cover the distance. Not to mention, you need heavy support to take dug in troops behind several obstacles, AP/AT mine belts and with a massive height advantage. And they did. Lets call it Avdiivka success then, much like Bakhmut was such a success, It bled the russians dry! Lets meet in Bakhmut and celebrate, Im sure Putin is furious after losing all those convicts. Did it not completely stop the UA offensive which was supposed to go on through the winter, the gains that are currently being recaptured by russian forces, executing those who are left to hold the lines in the south? As much as people here expected hundreds of armored vehicles to go and take 2.5 km of land the day before russian advance started, why should I believe you know a similar assault is not coming next month to close the last 1.5km? Literally the same comments with Bakhmut about a year ago This, after endless videos of Russian soldiers getting grenade dropped and freakin chased around trees. Your deduction after all that is "Gee we really need more tanks and IFVs"? We need unmanned systems that are resistant to jamming...another thing a Ukrainian defence industry could master. I think you are misunderstanding me. I said, as a russian commander, how would you take this poisiton? There are no videos of UA soldiers being hit by FPVs on top of the heap that I know of, yet it is a prime location to neutralize. Im sure the russians tried, now how are you taking it? By walking? Try that in CM, even without drones hunting everthing in the unprotected greyzone. Dont disagree, drones can prove decisive. But what I am talking about here is and being called defeatist for, is an MIC that the US "wants" to build to cover the lack of support from now on. IFVs, SAM, Engeneering, and so on, will not be buildable by UA within 1-2 years in a scale to not only cover losses but also grow at the same rate as russian military in that time. There are many reasons why this wont happen, one of which are the US funds for that, currently at 0$ which may not be able to cover massive underground factories to cope with the highest losses since? WW2?

How else would they have been able to take the heap and critically threaten the only way in and out of Avdiivka, that was serious enough to switch from "counter-offensive through winter" to "lets redeploy it all to stop russian advances"? With infantry running over open ground? There were 100% a bunch of jammers up there too, so drones are basically out in precision attacks on entranched positions. Go around it? The same dilemma exists for the UA and russia. Just russia was able to capture this position, somehow with useless tanks, which essentially ended UAs offensive indefinetely. Its nice talking about PGM and all that fancy AI drone swarm stuff. Please stay grounded with reality of what the UA has and what it doesnt and what countries in the EU could possibly supply within 1-2 years, when stuff like Taurus is off limits. I dont expect a German drone factory supplying a million suicide drones, do you? Without US support, what is going to defend the UA drone factory when all SAM systems are already insufficient to cover not even the frontline but simply the back of the country? Denouncing me for 'defeatism', when half the forum here was still in the rosy bubble saying the offensive will break through any day now and republicans are just bluffing. I remember also being talked to like that when criticising the "recon in force" of driving 15 bradleys (was that 20% of all stock at the time?) Into the same minefield.

Im talking about support, not building a MIC

IFVs are essential as ever, unless you fancy walking towards enemy positions in drone and arty space where you could drive instead. So are SAM systems, Engeneering and transportation. And as much as everyone likes to say tanks are dead, they may offer low return on investment but are still essential in breaking defensive lines, as the russians proved by thunder running the slag heap - and capturing it. But, my comment was faceutous. I do not expect these industrial complexes to be built or supported by the US, even under Biden. Its up to Europe now.

I wonder how long it takes to build an "industrial base" that can produce +100 Tanks or so a month, like the russian can. On top of countless IFVs, SAM, EW, Engeneering and transportation. That doesnt get bombed by russia the second its finished. With the current 0$ budget. "[Moral] Support as long as it takes" https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2024/01/5/7435942/

Some good news from me for a change

First time I've heard about it, recently opened special anti drone school in the US military. Although this is only for 1000 soldiers /year.

Maybe less informative but documentary about 110th Brigade (Avdiivka), dubbed in english+subtitles, for those interested in it.

The army can decide whats useful and whats not.. that spare parts for active service NATO tanks are missing is a result of the Bundeswehr being a paper weight. These spare parts are missing in the repair facility in Lithuania, not on the UA frontline! Maybe Amazon Prime could offer their services, if these parts are in stock at all. Imagine how the NATO spearhead troops will be fighting 2 months into a conflict at current loss rates, if they cant supply parts to 20? Leo2A6s. Im sure Putin is keeping a close eye. As for damage by the crews, I think it is equally likely they knew these tanks would not return for ages if sent away to outside repair shops so they tried to gerry rig it as best they could to get it in the field asap for the offensive/Avdiivka. ----------------

3rd Assault Brigade released a remembrance video * for the fallen warriors of 2023. It includes 186 soldiers, although I've noticed one that I know missing (for unknown reasons to me), so the number is higher. This gives a minimum of 1 KIA every 2 days for this Brigade. *Reddit for those without TG ---- Okay so I checked wikipedia which lists 115 KIA for 2023, including him, so the most accurate list would be those 2 merged. So between ~200 and 300 known KIA, +unrecovered MIA. Probably >1 KIA/day over the year but I dont know how many months they were active on the frontline.

The video made a different argument, the T-62s and other rubbish were being pulled to allow time for restoration of systems that have more upgrade potential, such as T-72 versions. But of course quality will degrade. No questions, but I ask, what quality will UA support be in 2 years time? A rusty tank, IFV or truck is always better than nothing and so far 2024 appears to be quite dry, in regards to everything. Maybe US elections will change this but there are reasons as to why many things havent been supplied and I doubt those reasons are changing, as military necessity has always been 'everything is needed' and the political excuses have been countless from such amazing arguments as 'abrams too heavy' and 'taurus too complicated'. Avdiivka losses are greater than ex. Bakhmut in terms of equiptment but not russians, I do not think russia will be able to sustain this type of attack for years but all they really need is to sustain them for another 2-3 km until the city is essentially cut off. Then, the next target may differ in casulties/losses again. As for mobilisation, immigrantion for enlistment is still ongoing, as well as all other types of vulnerable nobodies getting forced, such as religious minorities and so on. Example from New Year: https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2024/01/01/st-petersburg-police-round-up-thousands-of-migrant-workers-in-new-years-raids-reports-a83624 These thousands here are the subsection of migrants who decided to bail on mandatory enlisting, unlike the far greater amount that did enlist and is/was part of the meatwaves.

I know, my point is sanctions have little to no effect. Surprisingly, just shipping this stuff to a border country and having a truck drive over is enough to circumvent most of it, a sudden 1000% increase in imports from some russian vassal has yet to raise an eyebrow with the people who designed this 'embargo'.

Sampled were almost 3000 pieces of individual components from missiles, drones and tanks.

I posted a video a while back of some OSINT guy who pixel counts the open storage fields for tanks. According to his rough estimate, and dismissing large numbers of vehicles that were in too poor shape, russia has about 1.5-2 years of tanks left to continue this burn just on its own, not counting production numbers that are in the 3 digits As for mobilisation, true greedy volunteers and convicts have been supplementing the graveyards but mobilisation is still active, just not in a big wave but trickling, which causes far less political instability (and 0 protests) than a million russians getting a letter at once.

All 3 collapses were pretty much due to complete overextention and exhaustion of the forces on the front line, where skeleton crews and police units were supposed to hold frontline towns. Then the Kherson defense had to be abandoned to stop the northern collapse. If there is another collapse, it wont be because of that reason. The russian army was well able to fill and extend its ranks despite the losses to end up in a manpower advantage. Judging by the absence of literally any kind of pushback against current mobilisation, seems russia will be able to keep this up for a while. It was also able to restore and refurbish vehicles and equiptment at a rate I think most people didnt expect, I certainly didnt think the russian army could throw 300-400 vehicles and thousands of soldiers away right after the counter offensive bogged down, when speculations of imminent ru defense collapse were flowing around. Without any significant change in the current support (and shell shortage) I expect a 'summer 2022' repeat, where the ru is able to grind its way forward for most of next year. Dont think F16s will significantly change that, and since there have been almost no pledges of new armored vehicles in significant numbers, I assume the gap between forces will extent. Subject of US politics of course, which could change all of this.