G.I. Joe

Civilian and cargo are not equal. Civilian is a passenger cruise liner, for example. Any "civil" cargo ship can potentially carry military or dual purpose cargo. Russian civil freighters for example, were involved in so-called "Syria express" along with military auxiliary vessels and landing ships, carring vehicles, ammunition and fuel.   
Since 21st of July, according to decision of National Security Council     A N Y   cargo ship, heading to Russian ports or to ports on occupied Ukrainian territory can be considered as those, which carry military-related cargo with all risks for them. Also since 20th of July, due to the same decision, Ukraine prohibited any shipping in Kerch strait as potentially dangerous and this statement was shared to all ship-operators. 
Also together with this decisions Zelenskiy made a statement that Ukraine will be more and more to transfer a war on Russian territory. Most of Russian population support the war or indiffrent and think this is "too far" from them.
This is not a border conflict, not a conflict with civilized opponent, where both sides stick to different rules of war and conventions. This is the same existential war on annihilation as WWII. We can't win this war wearing a "white coat" in order not to make nervous different lefist organizations like HRW and some western governments representatives, expectng in horror nukes because of each UKR strike on Russian territory. Of course, we can't do retaliation carpet bombing like on Drezden in 21st century, but we will strike enemy economical infrastructure and significant objects like Moscow towers (by the way only two "broken windows" caused start of exodus from these towers some commercial tenants and appartment leesess - and this is also economical losses for towers owners)
Video of strike on the tanker:
 

Helped track that ship last year, makes me happy to see it hopefully out of service. 

LOL, actually, the typical Norwegian can speak English better than most native speakers. Fun fact, Norway and Japan require English language classes from the first grade to secondary school for all students. All Airline Pilots and Air Traffic Controllers are required to use English to communicate. France once tried to require pilots in French airspace to use French instead of English. The International Aviation Community put a stop to that attempt real fast!

So US C4ISR is highly integrated with UA ops at this point, and has been noted many times is integral in the prosecution of this war…what language do you suppose that is being spoke in?  And the UA training support, I personally know guys doing this and the working language is English.  All this HIMARs, what language do you suppose the manuals are written in?There is no doubt translator support but English is all over this thing as it is the language of the support that is keeping Ukraine in this freakin war.
And as I have pointed out repeatedly…this is not solely Ukraines war.
As to our track record of lack of local language skills - of course it is an issue but what do you suggest?  Adding on a year of language training to already overloaded force generation systems.  “A few simple phrases”?  Which ones?  And then there is context because a few simple phrases can start a gunfight in the wrong context.
My overall point is that if a guy wants to go overseas and fight for Ukrainian freedoms, putting his life on the line everyday; a bunch of armchair generals on this forum getting huffy because his Ukrainian is not “up to snuff” is disrespectful and self-inflated.  It is also ignorant of 1) the extent English is employed in the theatre and 2) the realties of warfare.  Lack of language skills is going to limit the individuals utility and of course it would be great if everyone was fluent, but this is dire straits and harsh times - if he can freakin shoot Russians he is good enough for the job.  
Frankly the level of discourse on this entire forum is sinking if we honestly want to pick apart a volunteers willingness to serve in the cause of greater freedom because of some latent anti-Anglo/US -insecurities.  For all those that think this volunteer is “doing it wrong”.  Well go learn a bunch of Ukrainian and then go over and join the fight…then you might have a leg to stand on.

Economist
1843 magazine | Ukraine
How Ukraine’s virtually non-existent navy sank Russia’s flagship
The Moskva was the most advanced vessel in the Black Sea. But the Ukrainians had a secret weapon, reports Wendell Steavenson with Marta Rodionova
July 27th 2023

On the day that Russia invaded Ukraine, a flotilla of warships from the Russian Black Sea Fleet steamed out of its base in Sevastopol in occupied Crimea towards a small island 120km (75 miles) south of Odessa. This solitary speck of land, known as Snake Island, had strategic value beyond its size. If it were captured, the Russian navy would dominate the west of the Black Sea and threaten Ukraine’s coast. Snake Island housed a radar station and was garrisoned by a few dozen Ukrainian marines and border guards – no match for Russian ships.
Russian jets screamed overhead. A patrol boat began shelling the island, and smaller vessels full of Russian marines approached the jetty. The Ukrainian defenders knew they had little hope of resisting. They were armed only with rifles and a few rocket-propelled grenades. Over the horizon appeared the great shadowing hulk of the Moskva, the Russian flagship, 186 metres long and bristling with missiles. It demanded over the radio that the garrison surrender.
“Snake Island! I, a Russian warship, repeat our offer. Lay down your arms and surrender or you will be bombed. Have you understood? Do you copy?” On a recording of the exchange, one Ukrainian border guard can be heard remarking to another: “Well, that’s it then – or should we reply that they should **** off?” “Might as well,” said the second border guard. The first then uttered the riposte that would become a clarion call of Ukrainian resistance: “Russian warship, go **** yourself!” The Russians stormed the island and all communications with the defenders were lost.
The following day, a medical team set off to the island to retrieve the bodies of the Ukrainian soldiers, all of whom they presumed were dead. As they approached, their rescue vessel was hailed by a Russian ship and ordered to stop. Soon, a dozen members of the Russian special forces boarded their boat and detained those on board. A Russian officer pointed over his shoulder at the dark grey outline of the Moskva in the distance. “Do you see her?” he said. “You see how large she is, how powerful? She can destroy not only Snake Island but all of Ukraine!”
“Do you see her?” he said. “You see how large she is, how powerful? She can destroy not only Snake Island but all of Ukraine!”
Meanwhile the Russian army advanced from Crimea westwards along Ukraine’s southern coast. Everyone expected that the Russian navy would support it with an amphibious landing, either in Mykolaiv, a naval base and shipyard that was now on the front line, or – the great prize – Odessa, which housed the headquarters of the Ukrainian navy. The navy mined possible landing zones. In Odessa volunteers filled sandbags and strung bales of barbed wire to defend the beaches. Russian warships appeared so close that people could see them on the horizon.
In Berdiansk, farther to the east, the Russians had captured a dozen Ukrainian ships. The Ukrainians didn’t want to risk any more falling into the hands of the enemy. With a heavy heart, Oleksiy Neizhpapa, the head of the Ukrainian navy, ordered the scuttling in Mykolaiv harbour of his two largest ships, including his flagship. “This is a difficult decision for any commander,” he told me. The Ukrainian navy was now reduced to around three dozen vessels, mostly patrol and supply boats.
Russian warships manoeuvred close to the coast, seeking to draw fire in order to make the Ukrainians reveal their artillery positions. Then they retreated out of range and targeted Ukrainian defences and command posts with missiles. The Moskva, the largest vessel of the Russian attack force, provided air cover which allowed the other ships to operate unmolested. Commercial shipping was throttled by the presence of Russia’s ships and mines. Ukraine, the fifth-largest exporter of wheat in the world, was unable to transport any grain.
Neizhpapa lost a number of officers and men in those perilous days. Crucially, though, radar installations, which allowed the Ukrainians to identify the position of Russian ships, escaped unharmed. Neizhpapa realised that he had one, untested weapon that might drive the Russian threat away from the coast. “We were counting on this being a factor of surprise for the enemy,” he said. “I was very worried that the enemy would know about it. After all, the enemy had a lot of agents on the territory of Ukraine. I was concerned about keeping it as secret as possible – and then, of course, using it.”
The Moskva, launched in 1983 under the name Slava, was one of three warships in her class to enter service. They were built in Mykolaiv in the last decade of the Soviet Union and designed to sink the ships of us navy carrier strike groups. Its American equivalent has a wider array of weapons but the Slava-class has missiles with a greater range, rendering her potentially more dangerous in a duel. The Soviet navy was proud of the Slava-class ships and sailors vied to serve on them. The cabins were comparatively large and there was a swimming pool in which the crew could decompress during the months at sea.
A messy process of disentangling naval assets began after Ukrainian independence. Russia and Ukraine divided the Soviet Black Sea Fleet between them. Russia got 80% of the ships, Ukraine 20%
The Soviet Black Sea Fleet, which welcomed the Moskva, also employed Neizhpapa’s father, who served as an officer on a rescue vessel. Neizhpapa himself was born in 1975 and grew up in Sevastopol. As a child, he drew pictures of warships and dreamed of becoming a sailor too. The Soviet Union was collapsing as Neizhpapa entered adulthood. He chose to stay in Sevastopol for naval school, rather than go to St Petersburg to study. Neizhpapa means “Don’t-eat-bread” in Cossack dialect. The name identified him as Ukrainian at a time when national identities were re-emerging. Ukraine became independent in 1991, and Neizhpapa was certain where his loyalties lay. “I realised that I did not want to serve Russia,” he said.
During Neizhpapa’s first year at naval school, Russians and Ukrainians studied together, but when the cadets were required to take an oath of allegiance, those who chose Russia left for training in St Petersburg. A messy process of disentangling naval assets also began after Ukrainian independence. Russia and Ukraine divided the Soviet Black Sea Fleet between them. Russia got 80% of the ships, Ukraine 20%. The two countries continued to share naval bases and there were even cases of brothers serving on different sides. Relations between the cohabiting fleets shifted according to the politics of the day, becoming more strained in the aftermath of Ukraine’s Orange revolution in 2004 and warmer when Viktor Yanukovych, a pro-Russian president, came to power in 2010. There were tensions over money – salaries in the Russian navy were much higher – and sometimes with the local authorities. (The Ukrainian police would let off Ukrainians for traffic violations but fine the Russians.)
In 2012 Neizhpapa, by then a captain, was invited on board the Moskva, which had become the flagship of the Russian Black Sea Fleet. He remembers the imposing size of the vessel, its foredeck canted upwards to attack. It was armed with 16 huge missile-launchers, as large as aircraft fuselages. The command tower was flanked with the domes, curved dishes and antennae of several radar systems, and the deck swooped towards a helicopter pad overhanging the stern.
When he stepped aboard, Neizhpapa “felt pride and tradition and also a certain power in the cruiser. I would have never guessed that within a couple of years my naval forces would sink it.”
On April 13th 2022, Neizhpapa received information that the Moskva had been located 115km off the coast. The vice admiral is tall and imposing with steel close-cut hair and bright blue eyes that seem to reflect some distant, sunny sea. Mild-mannered but military-correct, he would not be drawn on how the Ukrainians found the Moskva. “I can’t answer your question in much detail, but I can tell you that it was identified specifically by the Ukrainian naval forces,” he said.
It’s difficult to find warships at sea, not least because they are designed to hide. A ship can go quiet – turning off communications equipment so broadcasts cannot be intercepted – or use camouflage to make it difficult to see from above. Satellites can spot a ship only when their orbit passes overhead and most of them cannot penetrate cloud cover. Even when skies are clear, large warships are mere mites of grey on a vast grey ocean.
Most radar is limited to a range of 20-30km. It can transmit and receive electromagnetic pulses from objects only in its direct line of sight. Anything below the horizon remains invisible, in the radar’s so-called shadow. The Moskva remained on the other side of Snake Island, over 100km away.
Neizhpapa and other naval sources were understandably reluctant to furnish details on when and how they found the Moskva. According to their version of the story, low cloud cover that day meant that radar pulses were reflected in such a way that extended their reach far beyond their normal range. “The warship was found by two radar stations on the coast,” an insider told us. “We were so lucky.”
But Chris Carlson, a retired captain in the us navy and one of the designers of the naval-war game, “Harpoon V”, which is used to train armed forces around the world, believes that other methods were employed. “I have a hard time attributing it to just plain old luck,” he told me. He suggested that, even if a coastal radar station managed to ping the Moskva, the information relayed by the echo over such a distance would have been insufficient to identify the ship or target it effectively. Carlson pointed out that in 2021 Ukraine had announced that its advanced over-the-horizon radar system, called the Mineral-U, had completed factory testing. It’s possible that the navy rushed it into active service, even though the Ukrainians – given the need for wartime secrecy – have never admitted that they possess this capability. Neizhpapa said that this was not the first time the Ukrainians had spotted the Moskva and other warships.
The Ukrainians had also deployed Bayraktars – Turkish-made drones that became cult icons in the early months of the war – against the Russian fleet for observation, distraction and attack. It’s possible that a drone may have spotted the Moskva. In private, Western military sources have hinted that the Ukrainians had more help in locating the Moskva than they like to admit. American military sources have confirmed that they were asked to verify Ukraine’s sighting of the Moskva, which they probably did through a maritime-surveillance aircraft. It was clear, however, from the predictable changes of position made by the Moskva, that her crew believed she was invisible.
The Ukrainian navy went into the war with a depleted force. After the illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014, Russia seized much of the Ukrainian fleet, including 12 of the 17 ships moored in Sevastopol at the time. Training schools, artillery batteries and munition stores were claimed by the Russians. A cohort of Ukrainian naval officers, including three admirals, defected. Neizhpapa, who was at home in Sevastopol, was recalled to Odessa. He made it across the new de-facto border crammed into a car with his wife, two sons, the Ukrainian navy’s head of military communications and all the belongings they could fit. As they crossed to safety, Neizhpapa had a “feeling that I had been in captivity and was free at home”.
The Russians began to modernise their newly strengthened Black Sea Fleet; the Moskva was upgraded and ship-to-ship Vulkan missiles installed. These had a range of over 500km, which allowed them to target cities too. The Ukrainian fleet had been reduced to a handful of ships: one frigate and a few dozen smaller craft. The war in Donbas between the Ukrainian army and Russian-backed separatists stagnated into a stalemate and sucked up much of the armed forces’ attention and resources. When Neizhpapa was made commander of the navy in 2020 by President Volodymyr Zelensky, who had been elected the previous year, there was no money or time to build new ships. Neizhpapa decided that what he needed most of all were radar systems for surveillance, minefields for coastal defence and long-range missiles, which Ukraine had also lost in Crimea.
The Luch Design Bureau in Kyiv, a state-owned munitions developer since Soviet times, had begun work on the Neptune, a subsonic shore-to-ship missile system, shortly after the loss of Crimea. Based on an old Soviet design, the Neptune would have a range of over 200km. It was ready to be tested around the time Neizhpapa assumed command. A technical expert involved in the design, who didn’t want to be identified, showed me a video on his phone of one of the first live-fire tests. An old rusty tanker had been towed out to sea as a target and a small crowd of engineers and naval officers gathered in a field close to the launcher to await the results. When the news came that the tanker had been successfully hit, they clapped and hugged each other.
Yet the government dragged its feet on funding production and it took an intervention by Zelensky himself for manufacturing to begin. “I was in this meeting,” said the technical expert. “He was intelligent, he understood that we had only three or four [operationally effective] ships in the Ukrainian navy and that it was not enough to protect the coastline.”
Production began in early 2021. The first battery – comprising two command vehicles and four launch vehicles, each able to transport and fire four missiles – had been built in time to join the annual military parade in Kyiv on August 24th, Ukrainian Independence Day. That December, Neizhpapa announced that six batteries would be deployed to the southern coast the following spring.
On the morning of February 24th 2022, the technical expert woke to the sound of “shooting everywhere, helicopter attacks everywhere”. Russia had invaded and the Neptune batteries were still parked near Kyiv; they were in jeopardy from seizure by Russian soldiers. The technical expert’s superiors told him to transport the missile systems to the south of the country. It took three days for the launch vehicles to reach the coast. “We were worried because they were very visibly military vehicles,” said the expert. The missiles themselves were sent later, hidden in trucks.
The Neptunes were first fired in March 2022 at Russian landing craft. In April, they probably targeted a Russian frigate called the Admiral Essen – that month she was retired from service for a few weeks, suggesting that the damage sustained was slight – and at smaller ships threatening Mykolaiv. A number of sources suggested the Neptunes were not wholly successful. The system was untested in combat and there were teething problems: with the radar, with parts failing, with the software for identifying targets. The technical expert told us that the missiles had been launched from the west of Odessa at a high altitude, which would have made them more easily detectable by Russian radar. “We don’t know exactly what happened,” he said, “but it seems the missiles were intercepted.” Engineers were dispatched to fix the problems.
Once the location of the Moskva had been confirmed on April 13th, Neizhpapa ordered two Neptune missiles to be fired at it. The technical expert showed me a video on his phone of what he claimed was the launch of the missiles that day. The launcher truck was parked in a thin line of trees with bare branches. At ignition, the cap of the launching tube, which looks like the lid of a rubbish bin, was dispelled from the barrel and crashed into a field of green spring wheat. A fiery roar and a trail of black smoke followed. Then the second missile was launched.
A fiery roar and a trail of black smoke followed. Then the second missile was launched.
Silence reigned in Neizhpapa’s command centre. The Neptune, which is five metres long, flies at 900km per hour and is designed to skim ten metres above the surface of the sea in order to avoid detection. Neizhpapa watched the clock tick through the six minutes that it was supposed to take to reach the target. For a long time nothing seemed to happen. Then Russian radio channels erupted in chatter. It was apparent that smaller ships were hurrying towards the Moskva. The radio traffic was garbled and panicked. Neizhpapa inferred that the ship had been hit.
It didn’t take long for news to spread. “People started calling me from all over Ukraine,” Neizhpapa said. “There was only one question: ‘Did it sink or not?’ I said, ‘I can’t answer that!’ Hours passed. I was constantly asked the same thing. I joked I wanted to get on a boat myself and go and look. I said, ‘Do you realise that this is a very big ship? Even if it was hit by both missiles, it wouldn’t sink immediately.’”
Some hours later, satellites spotted a large red thermal image in the middle of the sea. Officials from nato phoned Neizhpapa, he recalled, “to say that they saw something burning beautifully”.
The only publicly available film taken of the Moskva after she was hit is three seconds long. The sea is calm, the sky pale grey. The full length of the ship is visible as she lists sharply to one side, thick black smoke billowing from the foredeck. Her life rafts are gone, suggesting that surviving crew members had been evacuated. The camera falls away sharply as a voice is heard saying, in Russian, “What the **** are you doing?”
It’s apparent from the film that the two Neptune missiles struck the Moskva near the foredeck on her port side, just above the waterline. The fire may have been caused by the missiles themselves, or fuel tanks or ammunition magazines in that part of the ship which ignited. We may never know exactly what happened but the attack clearly caused the Moskva to lose power and propulsion. Sometime in the early hours of April 14th she rolled over and sank.
Why had the Moskva, which had capable radar and surface-to-air missiles, failed to detect and intercept the incoming Neptunes? Carlson, the naval expert, has dug into the possible reasons. The ship was in dry dock for repairs several times over the past decade but upgrades to her weapons and operating systems seem to have been delayed or done piecemeal. A readiness report, briefly posted online in early 2022 before being removed from the internet, showed that many systems were broken or not fully functional. “All her major weapons systems had gripes,” said Carlson on a podcast last year. Moreover, the Moskva’s radar and targeting tools were not entirely automated and relied heavily on well-trained operators. But over half the ship’s crew, which numbered 500, were conscripts who served only a year. In consequence, the sailors “had extremely limited training which would be considered woefully insufficient by Western standards,” said Carlson. “The Moskva was not properly prepared to be doing combat operations.” This was yet another example of complacency by the Russian armed forces that has been evident throughout the war. Even so, Carlson was astonished that none of her radars appeared to have spotted the incoming missiles.
Officials from NATO phoned Neizhpapa, he recalled, “to say that they saw something burning beautifully
Once the Neptunes struck, the crew seems, in a panic, to have left watertight doors unsecured. Studying a screenshot of the Moskva on fire, Carlson observed that “you can see smoke coming out of the shutter doors for the torpedo tubes...That tells me that the smoke had a clear path, and if the smoke had a clear path so did water and so [did] flame.”
The Russians have never admitted that Neptune missiles were responsible for sinking the Moskva; they claimed she suffered an accidental fire at sea. But only a few days later, they bombed a Luch Design Bureau facility in Kyiv in apparent retaliation. The Russian authorities have also never been open about the number of casualties, but up to 250 sailors may have died. On November 4th 2022, more than six months after the sinking, a court in Sevastopol declared 17 of the missing dead.
Despite the reports of their heroic deaths, the defenders of Snake Island were in fact alive. They were taken captive and held in prison in Crimea before being transferred to a prison in Belograd, a city near the border with Ukraine. Conditions were brutal. Temperatures fell to -20°C, yet the prisoners were housed in tents for the first few days. Frequently, they were interrogated, beaten and electrocuted. They had no news of the outside world, beyond the names of the cities captured by the Russians, with which the guards taunted them.
One day, the prisoners overheard a news report on the guards’ radio saying that the Moskva “was not floating properly”. The expression puzzled them for a while, before they realised that it was a euphemism for “sunk”. They began to cheer. “The Russians increased our torture,” said one of them, who was later returned in a prisoner exchange, “but this was a great moment of happiness.”
The sinking of the Moskva was a turning point in the war. Neizhpapa said that “our fleet, which was considered non-existent a year ago, is now winning against the larger force, thought to be unbeatable.” nato allies began to take the Ukrainian navy seriously. Ukraine has limited stocks of Neptunes but the Danes and Americans are supplying Harpoon missiles, which are similar to the Neptune but carry a bigger warhead. Previously, Neizhpapa admitted, this kind of weapon and support would have been a “dream”.
Sometime in the early hours of April 14th she rolled over and sank.
Having destroyed the air-defence umbrella that the Moskva provided, the Ukrainian navy was able to harass the Russian navy in the west of the Black Sea with drones and missiles, damaging and sinking supply ships, and destroying air defences and radar stations installed on gas platforms. In June 2022 Ukraine retook Snake Island and the Russian Black Sea Fleet withdrew towards Crimea, leaving the Ukrainian coast safe from amphibious assault. Turkey and the United Nations were able to broker a deal to allow ships into Ukrainian ports to export grain. “Now,” said Neizhpapa, “they keep their ships outside of the range of our cruise missiles” – even state-of-the-art frigates that are armed up to the gunwales.
The Ukrainian coast has been secured. Neizhpapa pointed out an area of 25,000 square kilometres where neither the Russians nor Ukrainians can now operate freely. “There’s a certain kind of status quo that we need to take over,” he said. Neizhpapa maintains that the only way to secure peace in the Black Sea is to throw the Russians out of Crimea. “In imperial times, all of the emperors always said that whoever controls Crimea controls the Black Sea. In Soviet times, they called Crimea the aircraft-carrier that cannot be sunk. Nothing has changed since then.”
I asked Neizhpapa what he missed about his home. He gazed upwards for a moment. “Honestly, I miss the sea near Crimea the most. It’s not the same as here. It’s brighter, more transparent.” 
Wendell Steavenson has reported on post-Soviet Georgia, the Iraq war and the Egyptian revolution. You can read her previous dispatches from the war in Ukraine for 1843 magazine, and the rest of our coverage here. Marta Rodionova has worked as a television journalist and creative producer.
 
https://www.economist.com/interactive/1843/2023/07/27/how-ukraines-virtually-non-existent-navy-sank-russias-flagship
 

 

Hey all, just had a few minutes to go through the posts.  Thanks for the great info to keep folks like me informed. 
Looks like UKR really pushing now.  Spent 2 months attacking, shaping, more shaping more attacking, to get in best position possible. We've seen a huge amount of RU materiel go up in smoke, that has to help though might not be noticable the first few days.  After that RU arty shortages, if real, might become more apparent.  Also, RU wisely put lots of mechanized units up north plus a lot of arty -- Thanks Putin!  Fingers crossed for the next week or two.  Every UKR casualty is such a terrible tragedy, but hopefully they can cause RU collapse and end this damn war.
Now, back to day job, dang it.

I have the distinct feeling that compiling Unmanned Aircraft Systems of the Russo-Ukrainian War could become a fairly monumental undertaking for some ambitious aviation historian in the not too distant future.

Examples of "Shark" UAV work for artillery targeting. These UKR-developed systems got very excited feedback of drone pilots. First version of Shark had enough problems, but second revision got very good device. It has 80 km of range and very good optic with 30x optical superzoom, also it more stable against EW. Depending on missions it can be equipped with thermal camera. Though it price still large for such type of equipment. Alas, these drones have been ordering only by charity funds. 

Next Russian Buk turned out to firework, after "Shark" detected it position. Husarka village is in 18 km SE from Polohy town and about in 30 kn from frontline  
 
Russian EW asset R-330 Zhytel' was hit, though with second shell
 

And remember That Ukraine , and the AFU general staff in particular have lasted about 515 days longer than they were supposed to in this war. They get the benefit of the doubt about the quality of their planning.

exactly.  The threat from Ukraine wasn't NATO.  It was a country developing a democracy and trying to tackle existing corruption that had a strong potential influence on Russia.  For Putin it is also an ideological thing of wanting to restore the USSR and Russia's imperial dreams.

- In response to the current back and forth on the forum here -
With regards to certain enemy capabilities which we spend oh so much time discussing, I do not worry about it, though I respect it. It can be managed.  Personally, I (and many of my colleagues) are readier than ever to finally get into the fight and help win this. Everyday I wake up waiting for them to do something stupid and finally give NATO a clear, unambiguous, reason to intervene directly in this war. That’s the solider in me - - it hard to see all of our (combined) power not being used when everyday Ukrainians have to bear the burden alone (at least physically). That doesn’t sit right with me, never did. 
 
All of this to say I get it, it’s hard to watch this from the sidelines, whatever the reasons for that up to now. Still I read, learn about, and appreciate the challenges of leading the combined West through this crisis, with all of the diverse perspectives that it comes with. 
 
I trust the Alliance, and I trust the Ukrainian General Staff. I have my own opinions on what I would risk, which is more than current, but that isn't up to me. In the end, we are all on the same side here, let’s remember how important that is, even when it gets testy. 
 
 

Apparently the West's 'boil the frog' strategy has been so successful even some of its own citizens haven't noticed how much they've committed...
Russia crossed a red-line on February 24th, 2022.  It's been discussed on this board that, despite the obvious failings in the Russian invasion plan, they probably would have eventually succeeded if they has been fighting against Ukraine alone.  Historic levels of Western support have turned that into what will almost certainly be a crushing defeat for Russia.  What about that makes you think Russia are getting away with anything at all, here?  What exactly do you think the Russians have control of?  They are still humans, they still have agency of their own and they do not seem to be in the mood to compromise.  They will therefore continue to do stuff we don't like for a while, yet.  That's life.  No stopping it.
Fixed that for you.
EU membership is not a prize owed to anyone.  That's not how it works.  If you want to join you have to meet all the strict economic entry conditions, regardless of which war you just fought.  Being a good friend isn't enough; just ask Turkiye.
And I must have missed the bit where someone belonging to either NATO or the EU argued that we should let any warcrimes slide...?
 
Seriously, I get that the war is frustrating and we'd all like it to be over tomorrow but that just isn't going to happen.  Please, unless we have specific, realistic ideas to add to the discussion can we dial down the daily temper-tantrums and lashing-out at the West for not snapping its fingers and making the bad man go away?
 
Also, as a genuine aside, has anyone else noticed that parties who are accused of being "spineless" in almost any context often seem to end up winning?

The question facing military professionals everywhere out of this war are:
- "What is unique to this war?"
- "What is universal to all future wars?"
We had a whole thread going on the General Forum on development of warfare over the 19th century and I believe modern militaries are facing a similar conundrum.
"How would NATO do in this war?"  Well it depends which side we are going to be.  As Ukraine against Russia we would likely have seen a shorter sharper war but the costs would have been a serious shock to the western world. [note: let's not get dragged into another nuclear equation discussion, we can just put that one to the side]  We are talking likely tens of thousands of casualties and a lot of expensive kit lost.  Why?
- Air superiority.  I do not know what this means in a modern context.  A2AD capability is rapidly becoming distributed and highly portable.  We may have been able to gain air superiority over 20,000 feet but below that we would have been taking serious losses as there is not such thing as SEAD for MANPADs basically everywhere.  Modern MANPADs and IADs can operate independently all over the battlefield.  Further they can deny airspaces at much higher altitudes and higher ranges.  Why?  Because while we were stonking Iraq, Libya, Serbia and a bunch of dirt farmers in Afghanistan competing states were taking notes and investing heavily in the tech.  Take away our air supremacy and the western way of warfare is immediately in trouble.  And, shocker, places like Iran really don't like us and do not want to be invaded.
Below 20,000 feet it is the freakin wild west right now.  I do not care how many lasers we strap on every tank, IFV or truck.  I do not care how much EM is pumped into space - birds f#ucked up for the next 20 years.  Unmanned systems are 1) cheap, 2) highly effective and 3) everywhere.  Whether they are doing ISR or strike they have changed the fabric of warfare between about 3 to 20,000 feet...and they are just getting started.  Air superiority below 20,000 feet does not exist as a concept right now.  Hell we lost it below 2000 feet in Iraq to freakin ISIL, who were basically the lowest bar one can get with respect to conventional warfare.   If we were fighting the RA the UAS problem would be extremely costly...as in freakin nations pulling out after losing too many people, costly.  Can anyone imagine if the Taliban got their hands on this tech and started dropping old cluster munitions right on our heads back in the COPs and FOBs?  I slept for weeks about 200m from a 50,000 gallon fuel bladder that was resting under an open sky ...let that sink in.
So what?  Well "wither goest Air Superiority" is one of the biggest questions of this war, and as you can see it is a multi-dimensional one.
- C4ISR.  Russia does not have a world class C4ISR architecture.  But even with what they do have the principle of "making them go dark" to establish C4ISR superiority - far more important in this day and age then any domain superiority - is also in question.  With everything being a sensor hooked into crazy comms and networks - hell with hotspotting everything can be a node in a comms network.  So I am not even sure how to make an opponent go dark anymore (see unmanned).  I am sure we got people working on it but the fact that an even poorly armed opponent can see me tens of kms out makes me nervous.  Worse, they can see my logistics train as well.  The fact they can record all this and stream it all over the planet in real time turns really concerns me.  A half decent opponent would be broadcasting every screw up and horror show, which makes sustainment of national will a big problem.
- PGM.  Artillery, ATGM...insert whatever nightmare comes next.  No one is ready to face this.  I cannot begin to imagine trying to do an obstacle crossing when my opponent can hit me at 3-4kms with an 80% success rate with ATGM.  "Oh that is ok, we have APS"...fantastic, right up until someone comes up with workarounds like sub-munitions or EFP.  And even if we do magically put bubble wrap around ourselves, nothing on earth can stop artillery round that can land directly on my head.  Oh and this is while I am still trying to deal with old stuff like mines, and new stuff like UAS.
All of that  adds up to some very disconcerting calculus.  As in "is combined arms dead as we know it?" type of calculus (someone is going to try and answer this, someone always does...just don't bother.  I do not post my mil quals for some very good reasons but trust me when I say no one has this figured out yet).
Now here is the punchline: this is all if we were fighting Russia.  I, frankly, am far less concerned about fighting Russia - now more than ever.  I am very worried about fighting Ukraine.  If we get stuck on the wrong side of a proxy war and our opponent is armed with C4ISR, PGM and A2AD like Ukraine is right now, we are in very serious trouble. 
"Well we just won't fight those wars."  Ya, that is not how it works.  We don't get to choose the wars we decide to fight, gawd that is a post-Cold War perception that needs to die, and fast.  This is the nightmare scenario and I do not know if you guys have been paying attention but we kinda been doing a lot of expeditionary operations in all sort of places to push the brand.  What happens when Chinese space based ISR start lighting us up?  We wind up in a hybrid fight with the other side armed with HJ-12s?
I do not know.  This is a big reason when [insert talking head] says "Ukraine needs to do this"  "We need to give them that"...and the war will be over in a week.  My advice is to stop listening.  No one in the west has been in a war like this since Korea and the freakin needle has moved miles since Korea.  I say this without hyperbole, we are going to be spending the rest of this century trying to figure this all out as things like UGVs start coming online.  Tell your (grand) kids to get into the sciences of killing because it is a major growth industry.  For now, the best we can do is watch and learn.  Both the UA and RA are feeling their way through a war unlike any we have seen before.   

I'd say fervent, zealous nationalism, or any other form of zealotry that separates b/w 'us & them' is just another form of religion.  One can be fervent and zealous in many good things, like kitten videos on youtube, without the destructive side, of course, but nationalism has been shown by history to have a very, very dark side, often. 
Am I a US nationalist -- Yes!  'specially the sports & chicken wings aspects of USA.  And I like that zany constitution we sorta follow when it's convenient (generally we're getting better at this, I think, overall).  But do I think we are better than everyone else?  No.  Do I think we need to rule over others?  No.  Though it's nice when they buy our stuff, for sure.

Of course, Slavic settelmnent names are like abrakadabra for western readers, especially if it has more that 15 letters ))), but yes each name of city, town and village can be roughly translated in English. 
Urozhayne is adjective, so it better to translate not like "harvest", but "fruitful"  ) Though, of course geographical names aren't translated, even partilly like Velyka Novosilka can't be Large Novosilka ) - full rough translated name will be "Large Newcomerville" )
Typical Ukrainian village or rarely setlement/town name has ending -(il/in/ian/iv)ka. Then this in noun. It consists from some significant part and the ending. This "-ka" usually means founding /belonging/first settlers name/name originated from some charakter - so, for example Ivanivka - "Ivan's village", "originated from Ivan", "belonged to Ivan" or Dubivka - "originated from oaks".  Nesterianka - "originated from Nestor"
Some villages and towns rarely have only significant word, without ending.  For example Kopani  - old Ukrainian word "Kopan' ", means "the pit for keeping a water or the well without the frame", so it translated like "Waterpits", or Lyman - despite this word is equal to "liman, firth" for Donbas it has local means "the lake". Or Tokmak - name derived from name of the river Tokmak, which has turk origins means "poll/butt"
Many villages have endings in the names "-le", "-ne", "-te", "-s'ke", "-ve", "-che" and then this is just adjectives. Verbove - from "verba" ("willow"). Sometime it has means of belongings like "-ka". If Ivanivka is "originated from Ivan", that "Ivanivs'ke" is "belonging to Ivan". Robotyne, btw, it more similar to the noun - it's from the word "work", so maybe "place of [field] work", but I think it likely was initially Russian name "Rabotino" more typical for Russian names, which was just translated on Ukrainian manner.   

He isn't right at all- he missess a lot of historical instances when Russians marched west to obtain their goals, and that is why he was punctured by other users. I would add attempt to suppress Belgian revolution in 1830, which was to be, according to specific wishes of devout Tsar, being drown in blood- his armies already marched West but didn't managed due to pacification in Belgium itself and Polish uprising. Not many people know this fact- liberal movement in Brussels was inches from being butchered by army of Holy Alliance (Russia was only country that took the adjective "Holy" very seriously back then, after rule of fanatic Alexander I).
Ofc. Bolsheviks hordes also had very excplicit, verbalized aim of "joining with revolutionary brothers" in the West in 1920. It is disputeable if they would succeed, but being Red was cool sexy novelty back than and many people envisaged that social war would become new, future form of warfare across the globe, independent from traditional geography. So it is quite likely that without effort of people of Central-Eastern Europe (Poles, Belarussians, Balts, and Ukrainians + Finns, waging their own brutal civil war) they would put their feet on westerners door as well. In this or other form.
Now, as you see, this pattern repeats itself fairly constanty throug history- many times they tried to reach West, but were cut down due to problems in subjugating Central Europe. They finally did manage to do this after 1945. And that is why Western soldiers were forced to drill holes for stationary nukes along German roads. Soviet Army of conquest loomed over horizon for damn half century- it is still beyond me, frankly, that so many people don't get this as sign of ultimate imperialism. Anyone ever heard about "Seven Days to Rhine"? How is that not aggression? Or were there any serious scenarios where it was NATO actually attacking Warsaw Pact?
 
Btw. folks, some day we need to clarify what we understand under those broad terms "Western, Central, and Eastern" Europe, since there is hell lot of confusion, as some seem to also misread Russian usage of these terms- which is quite different than this in London, which in turn is different than in for example Tallin. Unfortunatelly, people in the West have this post-WWII habit of neatly dividing the continent on Western and Eastern part that serves perfectly Russian interests. But if you look culturally and politically, it was usually bollocks much more often than not. But we will perhaps discuss this another time.

Hey Aragorn!  Hopefully he didn't do too much damage.  He's had outbursts like this before.
The pressure is probably a big factor in his words.  Zelensky has watched as NATO 'escalatory' aid increases have kept UKR from damaging RU as much as would have been possible w more aid, earlier.  Imagine the stress he is under! 
Not that NATO et al haven't been generous, but they have sometimes pissed around too long on things that ended up being delivered anyway.  3-4 months left in the campaign season -- why are we just be giving ATACAMS now??  Why not to help start the offensive season??  It's is sooooo much in interest of the world to have Putin lose so we need stop slow walking important weapons systems.

One would think that totalitarian empire keeping largest mechanized force on this planet in constant readiness for 45 years, with only one goal in mind- offensive (preferably over nuked battlefield), would be enough to convince some people Russians indeed were/are a threat to the West as well. This studio even made entire game about it.
Just to give addendum to previous discussion about validity of muscovite danger. Since perhaps many viewers of this forum not reading Russian are not familiar with state of collective current Russian psyche, as expressed in myriads of their TV channels, internet discussons on media platforms as well as in private conversations, it is worth to reitorate how things stand now:
1. Large swath of population seems to be convinced they already wage kinetic war with NATO, but limited in scope to Ukraine. Kinetic, not just proxy- NATO officers and special forces are everywhere in banderistan, according to them. This notion is far more widespread than just core nationalists; it is common among less literate strata of population, probably a minority but still large, maybe 20-40% overall (no hard and undisputable sociological data make assessment difficult). But surely many more than 50% are at least convinced this is purely defensive (= rightous or even holy) war ont heir behalf that West started, though. For quite many Russians hot "war with NATO", even if geographically limited*, wouldn't be totally new quality, but just formalization of current state of affairs. Many would probably even be relieved in that case- mental blocks nurished by propaganda of Great War for motherland, heroic soldiers, imagined social solidarity would finally fit in right place. It is minority of population, but growing.
*Yes- basically CMBS setting.
2. I don't even enumerate soft actions like spy attacks, use of nerve agents on foreign soil (let's count this as "Whoopsie..."), countless provocation by planes and ships, political meddling, etc. Many of them in other historical context, and with actors less patient than the Western states, could lead to war by themselves.
3. They made artificial flood on largest river in Europe, stationed tanks in the centre of Chernobyl zone and are possibly not far from considering blowing another nuclear power plant.
4. Western Europe in popular Russian imagination (especially older generations) starts on Elbe, not even Odra river. Just a reminder for our German friends. Reason? Beginning of this post. ^
5. Again, perhaps many people are unfamiliar with Russian media (or understandably unwilling to dive in this sewer)- potentiall use of WMD was long ago inernalized and is opnely being discussed daily. To the point they have special programms in public TV (with folks who claim to personally dine with the Tsar) dedicated only to this issue of "preventive" nuclear attacks, with real specialists discussing potentiall fallout, how many nukes would be needed to blow off Amsterdam, Hague ("Hehe, you know why..."  as Skabaieva once giggled joyously with her guests) or London. Highest Russian officials, including twice the president of this country, routinely throw their nuclear phantasies publically. Public, sory for words, intellectual mastrubation with Cossacs drinking their horses in Paris 200 years ago or Soviet Army soldiers "teaching German women proper behaviour" in 1945 are part of very normal, mainstream discourse now.
Now of course this is internal game and a pose to bargain something, one could say; they surely really don't mean it, right? Perhaps. But sole fact that nuclear devastation became a casual topic they are very proud upon, touched even during morning breakfast with kids or being shared by Russian teenagers with girlfriends in chats, should make us much more worried of Russia than we did for last 30 years. I am pretty sure many professional people dealing with MAD in Washington and other places are scratching their heads how to proprely assess what is real in this nev environment, and how to differentiate between real and token danger. Muscovia AD 2023 is much less predicatble even than late Soviet Union in this respect. Especially after we saw how its internal system of power is vulerable in last months.
So yeah- even if you live in charming Provence countryside, well-connected commercial megalopolis like Amsterdam/London/Berlin or some Greek island- it doesn't matter, Russian madness and never satisfacted urge to being proper Empire can reach you in various ways.  Don't fool yourself folks; there are many more ways to do this than just conventional military power.
 
Sorry for long post. As a bonus, clip of Kornets bouncing off of Leopards 2A6 :
 

Do not get me wrong - the discussion on this forum has been positively scholarly and gentile compared to other corners of the internet right now.  I think we have some leanings among the group, some stronger than others.  I do tend to want to ensure that any discussion around stuff like this be given the broadest treatment possible.  So for example if we are going to start doing maths, let's do all the maths.  If we are going to argue for human security issues, lets call spades, 'spades' and underline the inconsistencies.  You will remember that I was just as hard on the whole warcrimes discussions that hijacked us last year.
The "firmly against DPICM" has not occurred here, it occurred places like my own government.  I am just not a fan of it taking root here without being challenged anymore than the even more distasteful topics we have had to cover.  I am firmly in JonS's camp on "why dumb DPICM, when we have HE PGM?"  Further, I am also in the "PGM DPICM with a 100% (or at least comparable to dumb HE) dud rates" camp.  The issue is that context appears to have changed and we should change with it.  When I start to hear "DPICM bad no matter what because it makes baby Jesus (or certain Canadian political parties) cry", that would be when I start to push back and call out hypocrisy when I see it.  There are weapons that should (and are) universally outlawed - chemical, biological and nuclear/radiation are at the top of that list.  
Finally my own biases are showing when I hear from preachy political parties that basically did nothing to deter Russia from this war, even after 2014, beyond harsh language and finger waving.  "But now that Ukraine is using cluster munitions well we had better speak up!"  How about we worry less about which munitions are being employed in a war and work harder on stopping the wars before they start in the first place?  Perhaps that is my preachy windmill on a hill of sand to tilt at.

China has got to be pissed
As China threat grows in Asia, Japan to open NATO liaison office to counter Beijing (yahoo.com)

A little bit too optimized for counter insurgency, but a good example of what is coming down road now that Ukraine has proved beyond all doubt how valuable small drones are.

Best viewed on their website; IIB is always worth a visit.
https://informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/ukraine-russian-war-infographics-data-visuals/#one-year

Edit: He used a ton of emojis and symbols, I can't get it to post as plain text in any legible way, sorry.