G.I. Joe

Absolutely.  All war is sacrifice.  I use that term deliberately and it does not mean to simply be willing to "give something up".  Sacrifice actually means "to make holy" or "sacred".  This is a point Clausewitz completely missed.  War is extremely personal as we literally sacrifice people for something bigger.  The real question is just how much we believe in that "bigger" thing.  This is more than "cost", it is the fundamental changes that happen at both macro and micro cultural levels as a result of any war.
Ukraine is sacrificing - making holy costs - in defence of their ability to be free to chose their own future.  Russia is sacrificing - making unholy costs - in defence of some false vision/narrative being sold to them by a kleptocrate and his cronies to stay in power. Sacrifice negotiates with Certainty, now whose certainty is more righteous?
No society can withstand endless sacrifice without breaking.  However, when I see Ukrainian boys holding wooden rifles better than a lot of western soldiers, I can only see a society that has a pretty deep cultural zeitgeist right now - killing Russians.  The Ukraine that went into this war, will not be the one that comes out.  Russia and Putin have likely created a regional power pole in all this that will change the face of Eastern Europe, just to add to the bafflingly bad strategic outcomes they constructed in all this.   
However, after all that we are back to "when does it end?"  Well I think that is directly tied to the point when the Sacrifice gets close enough to the Certainty.  Kherson was painful.  There will be other operations that are just as painful.  Hell we may see a Ukrainian defeat before this is all over.  But to my mind, the average Russian's ability to "change the channel" is waning everyday - e.g. a lot of the middle-class Russian's left.  And the Russian Sacrifice-to-Certainty equation is very different then Ukraine's - time is not on Russia's side. 
This war will end when Ukraine and the West have won enough, and Russia has lost enough.  A lot of people post that "this war will end when Putin decides", or "it will end when Ukraine decides" - this is incorrect.  A war is a living breathing entity, it carries its own weight and influence.  History is filled with wars that should have stopped but didn't.  Or ones where the job was not finished but stopped anyway.  Wars have stopped on executive decision.  They have stopped on broader public decision.  They have also stopped because of weather events and eclipses.
In the end this war will end when it makes sense to end it. The "making sense" part is the hardest thing to determine as it is filled with relative rationality, emotion, power, culture, relationships and human failings/strengths.

As 100% of Forumites will know, 'Tank' is an English word, originally a WW1 codename.  Both Americans and Russians adopted the term, hence yбак.
...But as @Taranis and our other copains here can advise us, the French term is char, which is applied freely to a broad range of tracked and wheeled military vehicles (e.g. char d'assaut), both armoured and unarmoured, as well as, wait for it, ordinary cars (voitures). Specific chars are differentiated by adjectives (e.g. light, etc.).  But I believe even the VBCI (Véhicule Blindé de Combat d'Infanterie), which Anglophones would call an IFV is still un char for short.
And since the first modern pattern 'tank' is the FT17, the Armée de Terre has as good a claim as anyone.

...Meanwhile, panzer is literally, armour (as in a mail coat).
(OK, the Acadian branch of my family is proud of me now, in spite of my miserable French marks)
P.S.
 
 

Yes.

I think the more appropriate term is Cavalry Tank. Because it is the French doctrine that wants it.

It is therefore not an MBT because of its light weight, low armor and mobility. The MBT descending among other medium and heavy tanks, while AMX-10RC does not have the capacity to carry out frontal attacks at all. While a cavalry tank in French and British WWII concepts, are mobile vehicles that must achieve rapid surprise attacks and reconnaissance. What our good old cavalry did before tanks. To this, we must add the anti-tank capacity thanks to its powerful gun and there it comes more from the doctrines of in-depth defenses of the Germans.

Guys, we really need to use the term AMX-10RC ! AMX-10 is the tracked IFV on a completely different chassis.

Oryx wants "tank" to mean MBT.  It doesn't. 
some relevant words:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armoured_fighting_vehicle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_battle_tank
Leopard 2 is a tank, AFV and an MBT
AMX-10 is a tank, AFV but not an MBT
AMX-10 can be a light tank, cavarly tank, tank destroyer or a scout tank. 
Leopard 2 is an MBT

https://phillipspobrien.substack.com/p/misunderstanding-soviet-power-in-761?sd=pf
Not sure where I came across this but well worth reading with high application to the current war.

“No dumb bastard ever won a war by going out and dying for his country. He won it by making some other dumb bastard die for his country."
 

An elegant weapon for a more civilised age?

Your Shwarz is as big as mine (C) 😄

Can't find a link right now, but UA estimate is that they are able to produce 20 Kalibrs and 30 Kh-101 per month - one barrage per month, at best. 
In other news, France is sending more and more serious AFVs:
 

It's clear that the Russian system already lacks the resilience and the depth to do the most basic things such that it is almost working against itself at this point. Too few few officers and NCOs? Well, then you cannot properly disperse your troops if you don't want them wandering off and they are susceptible to catastrophic HIMARS strikes. A completely fubared replacement system? Well, then you are stuck throwing untrained or incorrectly matched troops towards whatever crisis is currently most dire. Etc, rinse and repeat.
I wouldn't dare say when this war will end but it's quite clear that some form of collapse has been happening for 6 months already. 
Also, it's quite notable that Xi chose Qin Gang as his foreign minister. China's not coming to save Putin and that will add to the political stresses bubbling below the surface.
 
 

Wow, a lot of absolutes there.  I would offer it is nowhere near that cut and dry.  Victory is a pretty squishy concept and hard tying it to lines on a map is a good way to get people killed for nothing.
Pre-2014 borders are not a pre-requisite for NATO membership, it is a political body that makes up the rules as it goes.  We could simply redraw the borders and allow Ukraine to enter.  What we do need is for the shooting to stop because no one wants an article 5 on signing day.
As to Russian withdraw, well a political collapse back home would definitely work, has before.  Or they could get pushed back to Feb 24 lines, when I suspect the pressure to end this thing will increase.  I mean seriously the risks of retaking some of these areas is not small.
In the end “decision of force of arms” sounds good and plays well in movies but the reality is that at some point people are going to get tired of dying and some sort of negotiable end state will be put forward.  In that package the real dealing can start on reparations, warcrimes and possible renormalization with Russia.  Or Russia can choose the way of pain and drive off a cliff, at which point we will feel good for about 12 seconds and then have a whole other set of world ending problems. 

I think there is a coherent argument that the Russian military is in collapse, the rate of that collapse is really the outstanding question.  Personally I see collapse a "a failure to be able to sustain option spaces".  Collapses come in many flavors, the dramatic cascade failures get all the ink but I think history demonstrates that these are really just the punctuation marks on a longer process of systemic degradation.
Russia has seen its option spaces continually shrink in the prosecution of this war.  They had the most options on 24 Feb, and ever since then it has been a slow and steady compression.  Some has been forced by the UA and some by Russia itself.  Examples:
- On 23 Feb 22 Russia had pretty broad options, which included to not-invade.  Then on the 24th those options began to shrink.  They committed pretty much their entire ready-force on one Hail Mary plan: no Lviv cut-off back up, no strategic erosion campaign fall back.
- By the end of March, they had lost all viable options in the North around Kyiv and their main effort.  So they politically weaseled into new "real" objectives, which was simply accepting and re-selling the reduced options they already had.
 -  By the summer, they had run out of strategic options that relied on manoeuvre.  Recall those maps with sweeping red arrows drawn all over them - those were utter fiction.  The RA had lost an ability to sustain that sort of warfare over the Spring.  So they were down to attrition and mass based options at Severodonetsk, making incremental gains while simply trying to hold on everywhere else.
- Enter the HIMAR campaigns, along with other capability and by Aug/Sep 22 Russia no longer had viable offensive options at the operational level. 
- Then they lost any an all options around Kharkiv and Kherson over the Fall.
They are literally down to symbolic tactical grinding at Bakhmut and holding on by their fingernails everywhere else.  Their force generation capability is slumping downward and their last option of nuclear weapons is a dead end.
All the while the UA develops capability and a broader array of options in an expanding portfolio.  Simple equation that says a lot about this war:
Capability x Speed/Agility/Precision = Options.  Options x Cognitive Advantage (Information) = Outcomes.
A whole lot is trending towards zero  for Russia.  As to when the whole thing starts failing fast...l that is the big question.  My money is the next major move by the UA is flank pressure to pull the RA east and west simultaneously.  Lotta opportunity on that Eastern flank and keeping pressure up south of Kherson - in my dreams an amphib action is on the table, but that is likely asking way too much (now there is one interesting CM campaign).  And then when the the RA is stretched thin in the middle, they will try to cut that corridor and separate the two.  A drive to Melitopol is the most likely, but there are other...wait for it...options.
With the strategic corridor cut the two AOs are now connected by land only thru that bridge Ukraine already damaged, and air/sea but those are not optimal if the UA hold the North Coast of the Azov Sea.  All traffic basically has to go around the back across the Black Sea while that big bridge gets HIMARsed - Crimea basically becomes another larger Kherson pocket on the wrong side of a water obstacle.  The UA can then squeeze until things turn purple.
Will this be enough for the political house to come down - unknown, but I definitely think it has potential.  Someone in the Russian power mechanism, as ponzi as it is, has to realize that one 70 year old losing a major land war is simply not worth it at some point.  

Canadian LAV ACSV Super Bison seen in Ukraine.
https://en.defence-ua.com/weapon_and_tech/canadian_lav_acsv_armored_personnel_carriers_was_spotted_in_ukraine-5303.html

Now I have a HARM...Ho Ho Ho. 🎅🚀

Out of likes - - Keep em flying! 

The link below describes why the U.S disagrees with the exclusion of mercenaries from IHL.
https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v2/rule108?country=us
Notably, IHL defines mercenary such that none of Wagner's personnel who are citizens or residents of Russia meet the definition of a mercenary. note the definition of mercenary here:
https://casebook.icrc.org/glossary/mercenaries
See here that the ICRC states that mercenaries are entitled to IHL protection same as belligerent combatants.
https://blogs.icrc.org/law-and-policy/2022/10/06/third-country-nationals-international-armed-conflict
What was the violation of IHL? Hitting a Wagner hospital with HIMARS? Regardless of mercenaries or not, that is a violation. Tho, this protection stops once the hospital is used for:
"unless they are used to commit, outside their humanitarian duties, acts harmful to the enemy”. Examples of such acts include “the use of a hospital as a shelter for able-bodied combatants or fugitives, as an arms or ammunition store, as a military observation post, or as a centre for liaison with fighting troops”. These transgressions can lead to the withdrawal of protection."
From: http://international-review.icrc.org/articles/breaking-the-silence-advocacy-and-accountability-for-attacks-on-hospitals-in-armed-conflict-915
 

I respect Mashovets, but in this post he "discovered America". About Aeroscope usage was knowingly as far as in two years ago, maybe even earlier. Since this time all DJI drones, sending to frontline via volunteer charity funds have patched firmware, which shows to Aeroscope coordinated X 0, Y 0. Of course, if some unexperienced soldiers buy single Mavic without patching, they can be a victim of Aeroscope targeting.   

My favourite comment:  'It's only a Light Tank if it comes from the Light Tank region of France. Otherwise it's a Sparkling Armored Vehicle'
I am old enough to remember the naysayers slagging off the Bradley as like the old definition of a camel: a horse designed by committee.
 
 

Could not have said it better.  Lot of Hollywood myths about Law of Armed Conflict and it serves no one any good to play fast and loose with them.  That said, bad shoots happen all the time - e.g.  the infamous Iraq/Afghan wedding Pred strikes.  The right answer is “we will fully investigate this incident and share the results with our partners in due course”…not sure why some are having so much trouble with that one.  Russia is pissing missiles all over the place like a blind tomcat, so stay on the high road and go back to killing legit targets, not like there is a shortage on that market.

Happy New Year for all!
This night instead fireworks we had bright light&acoustic performance "Shakheds attack". 32 drones attacked Kyiv. Projectors beams, flashes in the dark sky, thunders of explosions and flaming debrises. On background of this hundreds of shouts from the windows "Putin khuilo!", "Glory to Ukraine!" and national anthem singing. All 32 drones were shot down (NASAMS participated too), fragments of one slightly damaged one infrastructure object. Recently more 13 Shakheds were shot down in other regions of Ukraine
PS. During the day attack Russia launched at least 6-8 Iskanders. Most of them on Mykolaiv. But one or even two missiles reportedly were intercepted - one Iskander was shot down over Kyiv and probably one in Mykolaiv.   
 

It seems I have lost my bet that the Russian Federation would dissolve by the end of the year. But obviously I meant the Chinese New Year. So Russia has another 3 weeks to fall apart.
Come on, you can do it!

Happy New Year to all! Slava Ukraine!

Happy New Year everyone. I hope it will be better than the previous one for everyone.

Not sure negotiating in bad faith is the best play.  I mean I agree Russia is in a terrible strategic position but this entire premise ignores the realities of strategic narrative.  Further it could end up reinforcing Russian will to continue.
All war is sacrifice and negotiation.  Sullying one could taint the other.

I think we are taking a lot of notes on this war - https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/canadian-army-eyeing-new-weapons-in-response-to-lessons-learned-from-ukraine-war-1.6212004
I know I am, and every now and then someone does a still ask me.