Kinophile
-
Posts
4,359 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
22
Posts posted by Kinophile
-
-
3 minutes ago, MSBoxer said:
Or, and this scares me, are they planning on doing something incredibly stupid and believe that action will cross a line that could result in the west providing Ukraine with weapons that could actually reach Moscow?
Something the West flat out won't do. If you're doing that then do it yourself, do it right and make sure you've enough shovels and flamethrowers for all the dead at home afterwards.
If the West are angry enough to do that (give LRM Ukraine) then a few Pantsirs won't do squat to stop whatever NATO slams Moscow with.
Its a dead end speculation, it only ends one way - everyone dies.
-
1 hour ago, dan/california said:
I don't, I was referring to all of the statements reporting they could only do one late last summer. There was a ton of stuff that said Ukraine couldn't do Kherson and something else at the same time. All evidence is that the Russians bought it, and Kharkiv was grossly undermanned and resourced when the Ukrainians took it back.
Hmmm there's more layers to the RUS posture on Kharkiv than Silly Ivan Bought The Lie.
-
32 minutes ago, Butschi said:
Thanks formulating things in a way that allows to actually discuss them.
My feelingb is that theory is a bit far fetched but not entirely unlikely. I really don't think that the SPD has much love left for Putin, he burned those bridges. But of course still many people in power in that party are those who came to power in Schroeder's wake, including Scholz. And compromising stuff Putin might hold didn't wouldn't even necessarily be illegal, it might just be inofficial extras to dinner contact that seem inappropriate in the current situation. Quite possible.
Still, I'm leaning towards more profane explanations: At least in Germany there v is always the next election in some federal state looming ahead. The SPD doesn't look good in the polls and we know that only a minority of the voters is actually in favour of giving any heavy weapons to Ukraine. Sadly, what strikes many here as inconsistent behaviour is precisely v what Scholz was elected for: I already explained this at some point, Scholz' whole election campaign revolved around him being Merkel 2.0. And it was one of Merkels hallmarks to listen to polls, telling people what they want to hear, make some token efforts to make it look like she is actually doing it and than (for examples at the EU level) doing the exact opposite. Merkel was just better at hiding it.
To conclude, maybe you are right but going by Occam's razor the simple explanation is often the correct one.
Elections and polls are my bet too. Kompromat is dramatic and exciting, but elections are the true fear of every politician. It takes a lot to beat that fear and take a chance with your political career.
People have done it and succeeded, yet the fear is always an anchor around their necks.
But sometimes you just should.
-
41 minutes ago, Butschi said:
In isolation? Maybe not. But look through your last x posts and be honest to yourself how many of them were actually meaningful contributions to discuss and understand what is going on and which were mostly venting frustration and name-calling.
See, and this is why I made such a post. Scholz' way of communicating is far below optimal and there a quite a few things where we could have an interesting discussion about what he decided and what he didn't decide. I would very much like to do that.
Except we actually can't because some people here instantly go into rant mode and that precludes any fruitful discussion. As I said several times already, criticize Scholz as much as you like, there are enough reasons to do that. What annoys me, though, is double standards, dishonesty and this whole "everyone who doesn't share my opinion is in league with Putin!"-business.
I'm okay with calling a politician spineless. What you guys actually mean, though, is, he doesn't decide the way I want. The SPD (and I didn't vote for them) is clearly not a bunch of Putin friends. They happen to believe in different things than you do. And before you answer: "but Schroeder!" He is just one guy. And no, deciding against giving tanks to Ukraine is not hurting NATO. It may hurt Ukraine (I say "may" because the discussion here in this forum is still ongoing). But, and sorry if that doesn't sit well with everyone here, NATO is an alliance for mutual defense not for arms delivery. The NATO treaty does not say that if one country or several send weapons to some country then others have to follow. And neither do any EU treaties. It hurts relations between some of the member nations, true, but that is not the same thing. If you have a different opinion - see "double standards" above. You could as well accuse the Polish government of hurting NATO for going ahead without getting an ok beforehand. You could, I don't.
Lastly, you should consider this: I don't know what the decision will be in the end. But Scholz, for all his failings, is still the democratically elected leader of the German government. I may not be ok with what he decides but that's democracy. If he decides to not give tanks to Ukraine, he is well within his rights to do so. That is his call to make, not Selensky's, not Duda's and not Biden's. Please respect that. We can, of course, discuss whether that would be a good decision.
The part of this conflict that is about national sovereignty and democracy would be completely meaningless if we can't respect the decisions of democratically elected governments of sovereign nations.
You're articulation of the above is very well made, and I do thank you for your input. It is appreciated. Otherwise, we'd have a Butschi-shaped hole in our understanding of the German political status, and that would be to our great communal loss.
But I do have one point, or question really:
Chamberlain was the democratically elected Head of a government in a free and fair process. He made some good decisions then made some very bad ones. No one gives him a free pass, and while many did at the time, many did not and made it very clear what he was doing was wrong on many, many levels (not just ethical).
Are you saying once Scholz finds his true Munich moment that we should just accept it, as a decision by an elected representative? Im deliberately mentioning Munich as it seems Rammstein, if Scholz begs off, will be viewed as such by CEE.
Just because he won a political election and has the legal right to decide on national courses of action doesn't mean we can't pour vituperation on a those decisions. If anything, a democratic society expects us to voice opinion, no?
I guess that's two questions
-
6 hours ago, The_MonkeyKing said:
There is going to be a series standoff with these Leopards and the H-hour is tomorrow in Rammstein meeting. Poland PM hinting that we will do what has to be done, no matter the German export permissions.
Germany painted itself to a corner with the US M1 Abrams demand. I think there was absolute no plans for doing this anytime soon, for multiple good reasons. Only compromise I can think of is US making a sale of M1 Abrams with a far off delivery date.
Called it.
Once that stupid legality delay is broken, expect a domino effect.
-
I'm sorry my German friends, I've lived in Germany, love the place and people, astounding art, history, culture, Beer, bread, women, I even like the actual language (!) but holy **** has Scholz made political spinelessness into a martial art.
Even if he publicly commits He'll find ways to foot drag, reduce, side step and avoid following through in full on his word.
Let's see Friday, but honestly, I'm not holding my bloody breath.
-
In German but worth the translate.. Good overview of the differences, implications of sane and which versions to focus on to create a Leo2A#UKR.
-
Love Strykers. Can't WAIT to see how UKR use them in various situations.
-
1 hour ago, dan/california said:
Militarized game cameras are going to be a thing. The gucci ones will come with a selection of covers that match nine kinds of tree bark, and the most common types of brick and siding.
They already are probably a thing. The Ukrainian Volunteer blog has a note about it, where during briefing for a recon mission he asked about game cameras, if Command had evidence if it was a real issue. The answer was they did not but best to assume it was possible.
-
1 hour ago, FancyCat said:
Interesting. Not sure if possible or true but someone should crack open those tanks. Maybe some psyops but I know nothing about this opposition paper.
The fumes in those tanks...thats just so ludicrous. Even if using brand new, unused ones, the air supply need is where? How do they not Far more useful to use them for fuel. RUS has no issue moving men etc around. Plus, once those half-dead, fume-brained mobiks stagger out/are lifted out of the tanks, then what? They still need to be housed, and unless you're breaking the force up into small groups and -
Im sorry, this is just a waste of time.
-
5 minutes ago, Haiduk said:
Reportedly this was helicopter of State Emergency Service, more likely EC225. It crased in Brovary town. 9 persons were onboard - all dead. Because of helicopter fell on kindergarden and on the street also many victims on the land - 9 persons lost (among them three children), 29 were injured (among them 15 children).
All high officials of Ministry of Internal Affairs are lost - minister Denys Monastyrskyi, first deputy of minister Yevheniy Yenin and state secretar of MIA Yuriy Lubkovych
Anyway this was wrong decision to put all chiefs in one helicopter
According to witnesses, helicopter has flown on low altitude over the town and probably pilots didn't spot in time multy-storey building on their course in fog (this is srange - my house in 11 km from. Brovary and despite cloudy weather, I can't say that too dense fog was around). Then they sharply climbed up to avoid collision, but the helicopter lost control, stalled and crashed. But this is unconfirmed version in TG.
Other versions, which now are sharing are diversion and technical malfunction. It's knowingly, that former minister Avakov, who signed big contract with France and Eurocopter, bought not only new,but also used choppers, which were stored due to their technical problems
On the photo - kindergarden in fire after helicopter crash
Oh man. How awful. How stupid to put the 3 highest in one helo, and wtf was the pilot doing flying low in protected airspace?
-
4 hours ago, dan/california said:
Interview with the former head of RAF intelligence, one of the most informative things I have listened to since 2/24.
He also states Britain should seriously consider giving the entire Challenger 2 fleet to Ukraine and starting over with a tank that has a broader logistics base. ~200 units in service just can't maintain the parts infrastructure.
LOL Yes a flyboy would say that. While they're at it, the Typhoon's a little long in the tooth, they should put all those to Ukraine also. Give the CR2s some airborne emotional support.
-
29 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
Dunno, honestly! Just know there's an opportunity to share our collective wisdom and so that's about it. I am sure it will get read, but have extremely low expectations for anything coming from it.
Nah, nothing like that. My meeting is not Battlefront related, but 3 years ago the person did joke about hiring us as consultants after I told him about how CMBS came to be.
As for potential professional interest in CM, that's been on the increase since our partnership with Slitherine. Lots of potential there, always has been. Just needed the right partner to get things beyond the interest phase.
Steve
Interesting, thank you. Very intriguing.
-
15 minutes ago, dan/california said:
We may simply be entering an era that favors defense over offense if the opposing side are anything like equal. All of the new toys can be used on offense but it is slower than simply grinding the other side under your tank treads. It is probably MUCH slower if you don't have a large tech overmatch.
I wonder if it's so unbalanced. A defense in this kind of environment would need to be extremely jelly-like, able to fire, zip away to hide, then fire again, moving backwards/forwards/laterally. The trouble with defence is that you're defending something, usually an area, making you a target than can be id' to a general location then that targeting refined to find you.
Defence itself might shift in form.to a smart formation with an amorphous, diffuse border zone (not edge) that is thickened in response to attack and can flow/defend forwards. Determining who is attacking/defending could be very hard to know for a while.
-
@The_Captet al
Ref how vulnerable Tanks are to squad ATGMs. Obviously we know this, but he also talks what would be possible counters.
-
1 hour ago, The_Capt said:
Soooooo.... Steve is a Hobbit?
-
@Battlefront.com I'm curious on what capacity you're meeting that Deep State Deep Throat...
Your industry is niche within the military training regime, you're not a published historian or (publicly) working analyst and BFC, while certainly idiosyncratic in regard to other Mil sims, is small fry.
Is their interest in the products or your process, or for your 10th Man take on things?
ie Are they seriously looking at CMBS? Or are they interested in how you and the team analyse the context, develop the backstory, flesh out the narrative and build the resulting campaigns? And/or from that, looking at external takes on their current CoA?
The ideas you listed are all future-pointing and national strategic level, yet CMBS is the most modern product you have but is almost a decade old and tactical level. So what are they plumbing your depths for?
Why you? And why now? And why so broad a list?
-
9 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:
Or editing the video to show only the shells that hit?
If Ukraine has enough precision guided munitions to spend several of them hitting a couple of guys in a trench, then I think that is a very positive sign about their ammo stocks.
There's more new craters than shown shell hits, so editing in play? But precision doesn't need to be GPS guided, Drones add Precision if laser equipped (and without laser not as much, so maybe just Increased Accuracy).
-
# - Start a formal collaboration between DARPA and Ukraine MoD (UMoD should create an equivalent).
-
49 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
Here's something different for you guys to contemplate...
I am about to have a private in person meeting with a senior US policy maker on a matter unrelated to Ukraine. Unfortunately, the circumstances of our meeting do not allow for me to have a detailed conversation about this war, however I was invited to submit something in writing with a conversation follow up with policy staffers.
A few of us have been working together offline (some not participating here) on recommendations from our perspective outside of the "Beltway". I have no expectations about what might come from this other than us offering our 2 cents worth of advice that may be somewhat different than what is commonly circulating. I do not expect to be flown on a private jet to DC to testify
What follows are the "headlines" from the document, not the content. A cover letter explains where all this good stuff came from, so you can now consider yourselves policy advisors as well as gamers
Since the origins of this came straight from our conversations here your suggestions are already incorporated, but I'm curious to hear any additional thoughts before this gets handed over.
Recommendations for United States legislative action
1. Clearly define Objectives and Desired Outcomes – TOP PRIORITY
2. Form a Blue-Ribbon Commission to examine lessons learned and recommend changes based on that
3. Officially designate Russia a State Sponsor Of Terrorism
4. Establish the legislative framework for a new Marshall Plan for Ukraine
5. Work with the EU and Ukraine on reform roadmap that will gain it EU Membership
Recommendations For Military Aid To Ukraine
1. Intelligence sharing - TOP PRIORITY
2. Artillery, artillery, and more artillery
3. Expand Deep Strike capabilities
4. Procure and deliver Soviet era replacements until stocks are exhausted
5. Help Ukraine destroy Russia’s Black Sea Fleet
6. Provide heavy AFVs
7. Increase logistics capabilities
8. Increase scope of training to include all US schools
9. Expand long term professionalization
10. Plan for needs of the future Ukraine Armed Forces
Recommendations for US foreign and national security policies
1. Ensure Ukraine Wins the peace – TOP PRIORITY
2. Ukraine must win
3. Russia must lose, but not converted into ashes
4. Ukraine needs justice, not vengeance
5. Provide Russia with a roadmap to better relations
6. Prepare for Russia continuing hybrid warfare
7. Be ready to take advantage of Russia’s short term weakness
8. Devote significant resources to reinforcing the “Western Order”
9. Undertake a full review of US military preparednessDeepen UKRAINE-NATO integration, training and Coordination.
-
21 minutes ago, OldSarge said:
I don't see a full reconstruction effort mentioned, unless it is already rolled into #1 'Winning the Peace'. Something along the lines of a Marshall plan that helps Ukrainians rebuild their own country and infrastructure while restoring their economic vitality and returning their citizen soldiers back to jobs.
Section A, pt 4,no?
-
10-15....per team? Or unit?
They should be crack MFs by the end of a few days but where is the impact on the field?
Also, that's a lot of fires with little time for BDA, training adjustment...
-
Every tank goes pop when hit correctly.
RUS ATGMs are no joke and if used correctly can totally take out any Western tank, super-duper OP God Mode Abrams included. Western armor is probably better but it's not invincible.
I guess the two factors affecting the kill rate are 1) Quantity and 2) Usage.
RUS does not appear to have enough units in use, in comparison to UKR. I've seen this noted in some OSINT circles, and it's odd. They're not hard to make, the electronics did use some Western stuff but nothing irreplaceable and they must have had a large pre-war stockpile.
One interesting idea I read was the state of RUS training - because their infantry wasn't strong after training, the churn was high and dedicated contrakti not very numerous. So perhaps the smarter higher ups put emphasis on aggressive armored mech attacks, with vehicles providing the hitting power to the spotting infantry, who were emphasized to urban assault, support and not long range tank sniping. This created an officer corp and mindset that focusses on mech, ie vehicle formations.
This used the plethora of barrels available without the onerous actual training of infantry. Like with all corrupt organizations, the easiest way wins out, every time.
Of course, that was while RUS was on the attack. I suspect we'll see a lot more ATGM use when UKR starts assaulting prepared RUS lines.
I'm also curious about ATGM usage during the defense of Kherson...
-
1 hour ago, Splinty said:
This picture is why I don't think integrating maintenance and logistical support for Bradleys will be too big of a problem. That M270 uses the exact same engine, transmission and suspension as the Bradley. Ukraine already has some experience in operating and maintaining at least the chassis and drivetrain.
Hahhhhh veeerry interesting point
How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted · Edited by Kinophile
Russia doesnt have to be hit by Nukes to actually use nukes. Itlll use nukes in conventional situations, when hit by conventional munitions. Non-nuclear missile attacks on Moscow are absolutely within that wheelhouse. So my point is not that the West would strike with Nukes, but that any strike that physically threatens the Rus government will be responded to with nukes. Its literally stated right there in their published doctrine.
If Ukraine fires missiles or uses suicide drones at Putin personally then they are seriously risking a nuclear strike, and to be honest, a justified one. We hate Putin but he's still the Russian Head of State. You launch a strike on him, all youre doing is risking everyone in your country. Ukraine MOD isnt stupid.