danfrodo
-
Posts
3,412 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
13
Posts posted by danfrodo
-
-
Here's some tankie fun, hopefully distract from US House nonsense w some UKR related nonsense.
It always amazes me how filppin' stupid people can be and how zealous in their stupidity. It's great and good to be anti-war, but not when it also makes you pro-slavery and pro-genocide. This naive idiots think that we can just talk to the monsters and they will behave? The world talked and talked and talked to Putin, and then he invades UKR. Then having basically lost any good reason for continuing the war, he continues the war. All the while trying to sabotage global food, global energy, and our democracies. It's utterly amazing to me.
-
23 minutes ago, MOS:96B2P said:
I don't think you can blame anyone for the Republican's internal disarray except the far right Republicans.
I thought that maybe the moderates of both parties could use this as an opportunity to come together, compromise and govern. I'm not sure what happens now.......... I'm guessing you probably prefer New Zealand's parliamentary system of government better...
I am sure there's still lots of GOPers that want gov't to work and would be willing to negotiate and find common ground. Sadly, working w dems (the great satan) will be used against any GOPer in a primary. They would be castigated as a RINO and a weakling and a collaborationist by some extremist usurper candidate. Our compromise form of gov't has been destroyed by the radical right. Except that the radical right is now the GOP base.
Note that during last Bush admin, many dems crossed party lines many times on votes. But doing this under Obama for GOPers became almost non-existent, despite obama bending over backwards to try to make bipartisan deals. When he couldn't find anyone to work with, he just did executive orders to try to get things done.
-
superfluous
-
1 hour ago, Haiduk said:
Russian resistance group "Skrepach" (I can't explain this game of words %) ) claimed they set on fire large storage of military uniform in Rostov-on-Don
That is really interesting. May not sound like much but what if RU logistics put a bunch of effort over many months into making sure there was abundance of good winter clothing. And what if they stored a very big percentage of that clothing at a single supply hub in rostov-on-don because that would make things easy from a logistics standpoint. And then all the supply was burned up. I am hoping that's what occurred here. That could make a real mess as RU soldiers at front line might spend weeks or months of bad weather without proper kit.
I am sure hoping this is what happened here. I real morale and combat effectiveness disaster IF that's what happened.
RU probably thought it was a low value target that would never get hit.
-
Some good perspective on the hard, grinding war of tree lines & trenches. Plus at the bottom the post by Sen JD Vance that set me off yesterday -- bizzarro world fantasy that the pro-UKR folks are all just bleeding UKR for some kind of revenge. It's so utterly insane it's like it was generated by some really bad chatbot.
But the tactical part was quite good
-
6 minutes ago, kimbosbread said:
In the US our political choices are basically like a bundled cable deal (American cable channels would at least in the past come as big bundled set and you couldn’t just pick and choose individual channels).
So in my case, you might agree that supporting Ukraine is absolute highest priority but you might feel that the open-border policy of non-border states is problematic, and you might feel that the restorative-justice approach and just house all the homeless approach might not be the best things (especially in a major west coast city, where things are pretty dire honestly), and you might be pro-choice. And then you might be annoyed by inflation, where a number of people on one side of aisle basically said “inflation is good for everybody” and more or less laughed it off. And there’s obviously tons of other stuff.
On the middle half of the political spectrum, there are a lot of people who support Ukraine and are socially liberal but are extremely upset at the state of their cities and the economy, and who will definitely flirt with voting in the most conservative possible candidate as a show of their dissatisfaction.
This makes sense to me, Kinosbread, well said. The only question I have is why the radical right is making UKR aid such a big deal. I think it's because they are paid (campaign contributions) to do it by lobbies that are, somewhere well below the radar, funded by Putin. I get why the radical left would be like this, they are nuts. But they are also not in power, they have no one in power, they are where they belong -- on the fringe.
We know that Putin has been poisoning democracies for many years, and this is just another instance I think.
-
6 minutes ago, dan/california said:
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/10/02/congress-shutdown-ukraine-aid-00119380
GOP senators weigh go-big-or-go-home strategy on Ukraine
The GOP confrontation last week over continued aid was a rude awakening for Mitch McConnell and other senators who back Ukraine funding.
damn you. Damn you, Mitch McConnell. You keep doing things for Ukraine that force me to say "thank you Senator McConnell" to a person I completely loath. But I mean it. THANK YOU SEN MCCONNELL.
-
Let's not get caught up in words like 'conservative' for what is happening. These people not anything like what conservative GOP was in the past. There are radical, insane people who have managed to take the US house hostage. These loonies are a minority of the country and a minority of the GOP and a minority of the house -- but they are a minority that managed to hold the GOP leadership hostage and now the country hostage on occasion. The rightwing media did such a good job brainwashing the f-kwits over the last few decades that now the lunatics are running the asylum. Just look at what these imbeciles believe. They live in a psychotic, anti-science, anti-reality fantasy land.
But my point is that those that want to abandon UKR represent a minority of both US parties. They will not get to continue minority-tyranny for long. I bet most GOPers, while publicly praising Trump, are secretly wishing he'd die soon so some sanity can return. Then they can get back to serious work of making rich people richer, which is the actual mission of the GOP.
These radicals in the house are having a grand old time trying to set fire to the republic, but it's very unlikely they will last. They will all most likely be in the dustbin of history after the 2024 elections. Most of them won't survive their primaries. They are nearly all from safely-GOP districts so their seats will probably remain GOP. And the non-crazy GOP politicians will be happy to see them (and Trump) gone -- they just can't say that in public. Because of the MAGA base. The dumbest f-wits america has ever seen.
I am confused when I see, today, so many people peeing their pants over UKR aid, as if it's ending. This is just a speedbump on the road. The majority is with UKR, both with the public and the politicians.
-
back to the war. There's an interesting video here of an RU observation post precision hit by UKR. Also says RU building new rail lines in the south as backup in case they lose the ones running thru tokmak. I hope UKR gets within HIMARS or GMLRS range of that line. Folks keep pointing to the defenses around Tokmak. but don't need to take it, just need to cut the supply lines. Then everything has to come over the kerch bridge or by boat. And yet we hear from 'serious people' that UKR can never take back the landbridge. But how will RU hold it w seriously disrupted supply lines over the long, cold winter?
-
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:
Yup. Not too difficult to spot, eh? He has been banned again because that's how bans work.
Steve
for reals, that was kevinkin?? I was thinking maybe I overreacted but now thinking maybe not. I think a lot of forum members would read that little article and be really tweaked. It was a disgusting example of concern-trolling. And he offered no plan for actual victory. Saying he wanted victory, then advocated cutting off UKR. It was like some drunken kevinkin post..... hey.... I wonder if he moonlights as a writer on that website...
-
2 minutes ago, Dave2214 said:
danfrodo -
You can't put thousands and thousands of Ukrainian lives in the context of the DOD budget. That's not right. If we want to win - win. All else is cruel. Crush and win fast.
Thanks for the reply to my post and do get your position. I respect it. I just have a different view about winning and saving lives in the end compared to the way the US has handled this mess. American can print money, but can't print people and their God given souls.
Regards,
- David
David, I am confused about what you were trying to say here. I went to look at the article, but he doesn't actually say anything useful other than lamenting that helping UKR hurts the military capability of the US. WTF am I spending money if not for this war, right now. Then he has this howling pile of speculated bulls-t:
Frankly stated, there is no likely viable path to a military victory for Ukraine. To continue supporting Ukraine “for as long as it takes” is no strategy at all. It is merely continuing, month after month, to send gear, ammunition, and other combat support to Kyiv. Doing so may prevent an outright military defeat for Ukraine, but no matter how much support the U.S. and NATO provide, Kyiv’s troops will almost certainly never drive Russia from its territory. What such support will do, however, is keep the war going, at the cost of sometimes many hundreds of Ukrainian troops daily.
Why is this true? Who says Kyiv can't defeat RU forces to the point of getting back the landbridge. And maybe Luhansk? he says this like he knows that to be true. Maybe it's true, maybe it's not, but right now RU looks to be getting weaker while UKR is getting stronger.
Also, he says meaningless ****e like "need to win" -- WTF does he think everyone is trying to do? And he assumes we all want endless war just because we've been in long wars in the past. It's ridiculous. So we stop sending ammo & gear? WTF does this clown think will happen then? That Putin will sue for eternal peace?
-
48 minutes ago, Dave2214 said:
Interesting counter view:
"The U.S. is thoughtlessly drifting toward repeating many of the worst mistakes Washington has made in the past half century. We lead with our emotions and support the Ukraine side in its war with Russia — a war that shows no sign of ending soon — yet without the requisite sober and honest analysis of what that support will cost us, what our strategy should be, or what achievable outcome we seek. We merely try to send tranche after tranche of support to Kyiv without any thought to the cumulative effect on our country."
So, there is no plan for victory. Just throw money at the problem.
That's an interesting opinion on what's going on. Except that we're spending nearly 800 BILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR on our military. OMG we're going broke because we used ~5% of our already spent money to actually try to do something, militarily, that will help the world be a better place. What cumulative effect on our country?? This is just utter horses-t. If we had just stood by & let Putin win in UKR would he then decide to not try to poison all the world's democracies? Would he not use fossil fuels to extort europe every time he wanted to? This is tankie nonsense.
We have mountains of gear gathering dust and that's a huge portion of what we've sent.
And just because I am on a rant on this: How about we turn this around by saying "those that want to freeze the conflict haven't given any thought to the cumulative effect on the world of pulling Putin's *** out of the fire". Gawd this makes my blood boil.
-
-
24 minutes ago, Nastypastie said:
M113 TOW's are AMAZING if you can get them properly hull down so its literally just a dudes head and the tube poking out. You wind up with literally 20x BMP1's flinging dozens of those horrible ATGM's at you vainly as your crews pick them off one by one.
totally off topic, will stop here. I try to be hull down, just barely showing above terrain. and some sagger or T64 still picks them off. But sounds like it's a 'me' problem not an equipment problem since you are having success.
-
1 hour ago, The_Capt said:
Check out CMCW kids, copies available in the lobby!!
I meant modern tactical games. Drones aint no fun. Heck yes CMCW is fun! Except 1979 is tough as americans. I love M60s but they struggle against the soviet tanks. And those awful M113-TOW things -- Damn them, they never spot first and never hit anything. I'm in a battle 1979 battle right now and not doing well -- against the AI. That's embarrassing.
-
21 minutes ago, The_Capt said:
I think game developers need to really look hard at drone vs drone actions. It won't solve for tanks as we can see very far and by other means but freedom of movement on the future battlefield is going to require an ability to achieve air-superiority below 2000 ft, even if temporarily. I strongly suspect the best thing to kill a UAS, is another UAS. UGVs will go the same way. This will mean a combination of front edge unmanned swarm systems battling out, while manned forces are trying to kill each other over the horizon in the initial stages. Then someone's unmanned cloud will collapse, ISR advantaged will slide violently and the losing sides manned systems will die very fast if they cannot run away. Big, slow hot will be a liability in that environment.
Arquilla's three rules:
Many and small beats large and heavy
Finding always beats flanking
Swarming always beats surgingThe_Capt's Axiom - Mass beats isolation, precision beats mass, mass precision beats everything.
soooooo..... you are saying tactical war games can still be fun?
-
7 minutes ago, dan/california said:
I am just eagerly awaiting the first video of a Russian artillery battery getting aquatinted with a Bradley's 25mm.
That's more like it! Armor rampaging through enemy backfield! That's what I want!
And blasting away at some surprised lancet units would be particularly satisfying.
-
41 minutes ago, Bearstronaut said:
When I was active duty back in 2021 my brigade did a rotation at NTC. The SIGINT team I was in charge of was attached to a Stryker infantry company defending the mouth of a pass. We were attacked by an OPFOR armor battalion and we just straight up murdered them. They took like 70% casualties and the rest slinked away under a heavy smoke screen. I often wonder how that AAR went.
Some really good posts here lately. But this one tops the charts, thanks for sharing that. TheCapt's 'denial/anger..' post comes in 2nd.
The main problem w drones is that they take all the fun out of tactical wargaming. And make obsolete my beloved tanks. So sad. So very sad.
'Breakthrough' according to ISW. This is good news but it shows how much we've moved the goal posts for the summer campaign. I admit I have moved my goalposts all the way back to 'cut the rail & road lines east of Tokmak along a broad enough front to deploy artillery along that line'. Then keep grinding away during the rasputitsa as much as possible, while hoping for a good solid freeze. I suspect a long freeze, like 4 weeks, is somewhat unlikely, so might be 10 days of frozen ground at a stretch, which would make operations sketchy as once you get going you are suddenly back in mud.
-
UKR update from one of my usual suspects. Calls it best week of the year for UKR. Lots of corrosion and making solid progress against RU west of Verbove. Also he reported claims by an RU guy saying bakhmut area losing 100-150 wounded per day.
and a couple interesting nuggets here
-
54 minutes ago, The_Capt said:
Tank Fight!!! Steve already beat up on a lot of this. To which I would add:
- C-RAM. If technology becomes mature that allows a force to shield hundreds of small sub-munitions coming in at 100s of m/s then the tank will be long gone already. In fact with that level of resolution and precision targeting anything larger than a field mouse (with a little helmet on) above ground is dead. You may as well cite Gandalf and the League of White Wizards. C-RAM tech is currently big, heavy and effective against very few incoming at a time, largely in a COIN or low level conflict context. To upscale to what we are seeing in Ukraine is…well…just not happening anytime soon.
- ATGMs and RPGs are nowhere near the limits of lethality to weight. Do just a bit of reading on nano-treated explosives. https://www.army.mil/article/243587/army_argonne_scientists_explore_nanoparticles_for_future_weapon_systems. And that is not science fiction, prototypes are already in the works.
-Integrated APS at platoon level - I should freakin hope so! You mean we don’t have this already?! It will buy some time I am sure but as we have seen sticking a lot of tanks close to each other is not smart on this battlefield, let alone the next one. A whole platoon popping off APS is going to draw a lot of heat (tee hee) but hey if it get you to sleep at night.
- Logistics. This will be the fight for the next decade at least. How does one protect logistics lines? Self loitering and longer more precise artillery is going to push fights over the horizon (well out of tank fire range) and protecting logistics is going to be really challenging. Guns have the advantage because they are already well back. As to tank “driving back”…see movement=spotted=dead on the modern battlefield. Right now in Ukraine the tanks are largely already back near the guns.
- Mech infantry and their kit: “You are always creative unless it is stuff you don’t like”. So you think all those unmanned systems might take some of that load off. I mean you are ready to lean on freakin Iron Dome force fields to hold off DPICM but somehow having unmanned offset infantry loads is just science fiction?
-How have infantry been doing against ISR and artillery? Well better than armour but not by enough on the offensive, yet. But hey we get it infantry screwed, armour forever! Look everyone can go hug their stuffed tank while sporting their armoured corps pyjamas. I frankly don’t have a dog in this fight. What I am very interested in is ensuring we chart a military capability course based on reality and not culture or history.
If we need infantry we also need mobility for that infantry. Are you thinking future is more MRAPS & CV90/stryker -type vehicles? Something else? and for firepower it would be artillery & attack drones? Plus maybe some weapon the mobility platforms?
-
1 hour ago, Haiduk said:
UKR PzH2000 hit Russian 2S3 in Novoprokopivka area
I never, ever get tired of watching RU assets w secondary explosions. Congrats to UKR on every hit and may RU collapse soon. Another artillery asset out of the game, some number of daily shells not flying toward UKR.
-
With autumn we'll be losing the leaf cover. I remember in the spring how much it mattered that it returned. So who does losing leaf cover favor? Attacker or defender? My first thought is that leaf cover favors the defender, so losing it favors the attacker. But attacker uses leaf cover to screen movement, so sometimes will hurt.
Lots of artillery & vehicles will now be exposed and that favors the side w better eyes & better precision, so UKR I would think.
-
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:
From my perspective, shared by many here, we have already long passed the point where large armored vehicles (as currently conceived of) have any place on the battlefield of tomorrow. They are already too expensive to make, too expensive to keep, and too expensive to deploy. They are already too slow to manufacture, to slow to slow to maintain, and too slow to deploy. They are already too vulnerable from expensive threads, medium threats, and increasingly cheap threats.
Sadly, as a tank aficionado, a lifelong tank cultist, this is probably true. I just don't see much to refute it.
And once again, having said that, it means we need more proper CM warfare where armor matters, as god intended before the moral and spiritual degradations of the modern age.
-
50 minutes ago, Hapless said:
One way to look at it is to consider what the Russians get out of the Black Sea Fleet:
- Roving air defence/radar pickets that are much harder to track down than land-based assets.
- Strike capability with a much easier avenue of attack on Ukrainian grain exports- whether at sea or in port. As we've seen recently with Poland, forcing Ukraine to seek other means of distributing it's grain can create political friction within supporting international structures.
- Logistics back-up for the Kerch Bridge.
- A fleet-in-being: because naval forces can move faster and with less restrictions than land-based forces, Ukraine constantly needs to worry about what the BSF might do and where it might be today. That uses up assets and bandwidth that Ukraine could be using elsewhere, as well as impinging on Ukraine's freedom of action.
Remove the Black Sea Fleet and Ukraine should have an easier time striking Russian logistics infrastructure in Crimea (only having to deal with comparatitvely predictable land based air defence (which they've been striking)), which should significantly degrade Russian forces in the south and lube up the counter-offensive.
That's on top the psychological benefits- we all saw the reaction when Ukraine sank Moskva. That wasn't only an important boost for Ukraine, but demonstrated Ukrainian abilities and resolve to the world.
Stuff like that.Thanks Hapless and the others for providing some excellent info as per my question. I should just ask dumb questions to tee y'all up for easy answers
So it sounds like there's immediate good things and also UKR is reducing RU ability to do other things later -- threaten ships, backup transport if bridge blown
How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted · Edited by danfrodo
deleted, on second thought don't want to add to the politics stuff