FancyCat

How much do you suppose the focus on airpower in the west has impacted artillery, particularly in the realm of material being supplied to Ukraine? On that note, do we have any numbers for Russian artillery? At all? I know 10,000 tanks were thrown around, but what about artillery?

Assuming this isn't another instance of Ukraine just no to their visit soon, would mean more weapons and equipment for Ukraine is about to be pledged.

That's a take. I doubt if you asked the Irish if they enjoyed the famines, the answer would be positive. India, I'm sure their famines and deindustrialization aren't taken as a positive. I could go on, but that's some silly stuff, imperial conquest is good, jeez.

Mind you Erdogan is facing a election and he's completely ****ed the economy, this is probably a nationalistic ploy to win votes. While he's veered towards authoritarianism, turkey is still a democracy and he is on the chopping block.

Via Phillip O'Brien, the Ministry of Defense has issued a update regarding foreign assistance to Ukraine. Lots of interesting tidbits, but I'll highlight this:

You know, had the invasion not occurred, i would have largely agreed with you, but....since the invasion has occurred, and suddenly everyone in Europe (aside from the Balkans), must confront the idea of war and military conflict once more, with EE feeling pensive about the faithfulness of its Western European allies, NATO serves to defend Europe, and especially Eastern Europe. For all the idea of Russia suffering massive damage in Ukraine, lets not underscore the fact Ukraine has been severely damaged. No state in EE wants to suffer any of that, and NATO remains the best guarantee at warding off Russian threats. The damage Russia is inflicting on a nation of 44 million people, with hundreds of millions suffering side effects from the economic damage of the food conflict does not endorse your viewpoint.

Well yes nuclear escalation can happen, but there are steps to escalation. stuff like mobilizing the nuclear fleet, placing it on higher alert, actually/pretending to prep for nuclear launch, raising of rhetoric, hell, even conventional attacks are escalatory and are part of the nuclear climb up, in that russia would for example, bomb Poland with a conventional weapon to warn it from pursuing further support of Ukraine or risk more serious, potential nuclear escalation. that Russia has refrained from it, indicates that they dont want to risk escalation, they cant afford to escalate as they lose more, and that they worry the west matches the escalation.

Exactly. If NATO is this enduring threat that Ukraine, whom was nowhere at all close to being allowed in NATO was attacked in a full scale war upon the justification of safeguarding Russian security, than Finland, with it's borders near Russia's major cities and Northern Fleet bases, should garner some sort of escalation, even if ultimately posturing and not real force buildup for a defense/offense of the region. That Russia's reply is a muted "shrug" or the Russian public whom Ukraine's invasion was justified as partly avoiding NATO encirclement gives no regard to Finland joining NATO as a credible threat just tells everyone worried about Russian escalation that their reasoning was a lie. If the Russian public, supposedly very worried about NATO expanding and invading, gives no regard to Finland joining, yes Russians may be annoyed at NATO encroaching, pissed, but this betrays that Russia actually does not fear NATO and speaks instead to Russia's fear of NATO limiting Russian interference in their backyard.

I mean hell, consider two months ago Ukraine was asking for anti-ship missiles and people were fretting over sinking a Russian ship and Russian escalation and now? Nada, Ukraine's Neptunes defend Odessa and UK and US are increasingly likely to supply more anti-ship missiles to Ukraine. We were worried about Ukraine attacking Russia on its own soil and then Ukraine conducts a dashing attack on a oil facility with helicopters and now every so often a ammo dump on Russia's side of the border blows up and nada, we barely hear about it on the news. Caesar SPGs? Nada. U.S MLRS? Nada. Broaching armed UAVs. Nada. During the beginning of the war, we were fretting over Stingers and NLAWs in Ukrainian hands and now we are supplying Rocket, SPG, long range anti-ship missile systems. We never gave Afghanistan close to anything this advanced after 10 years of occupation and nation building (I reference Afghanistan as it's a common refrain for those opposed to arming Ukraine), and in 4 months Ukraine is getting all this. Clearly the pattern is in the positive for Ukraine, and I think Ukraine is well aware of the pattern and I think the fact that Russia has been unwilling or unable to stem it illustrates it is the right decision to undertake.

While Germany is doing gods knows what, other NATO partners are supplying artillery to Ukraine. Hopefully before winter aircraft will be supplied, (tho no indications at all this will occur) while obviously the situation is painful for Ukraine right now, Russia cannot afford to suffer losses that it cannot replace, and to be this slow on the offensive. Russia was supposed to have used artillery to break a hole to stream armored and mechanized units into Ukraine's rear and destroy their supply lines. This should have been what occurred at the beginning of the war, that Russia is reduced to this WWI grinding mass is just pitiful. That President Zelensky can visit a sailent while 10 Russian generals are dead so far is just damning of Russia. I am confident NATO will continue to supply increasing and more advanced weapon systems to Ukraine. Russia has so far been unable to stem the tide of western weapons to Ukraine and with each passing week and month, they have risen in complexity and amount. (Forget Germany tho even the promised equipment is rising in technology wise) No real ability to stop the movement of equipment to Ukraine, no risk of escalation by attacking and daring NATO retaliation by attacking the airfields where the supplies land. NATO is about to be enlarged, such that Russia will virtually face a "hostile" force that directly threatens the Northern Fleet bases and nada in terms of escalation. If I were a cautious NATO member, worried about nuclear war, I'm seeing Russia basically conceding that the weapon shipments are not worth escalation, I'm watching Finland about to give NATO clear approaches to Russia's northern flank and Russia giving barely a peep and I'm watching Russia reduced to WWI combat grind when prior to the war, where we were dreaming of Russian tanks reaching Berlin! If I were Scholz, I'm sweating over the fact that my "fear" of nuclear war over German tanks in Ukraine is just poof, nothing, and how to explain to a increasingly emboldened opposition and coalition my untenable positions.

And yet Putin when asked about the Swedish and Finnish attempt to join NATO, said it changed nothing strategically for Russia. Clearly now that the risk of NATO coming closer nears, Russia does nothing like push troops to the Finnish border, that it would do if NATO were really a threat to Russia.

How much credibility does Business Insider have in Germany? Seriously doubtful about the M270s unless more sources confirm the excuse.

Turkey.

Regarding Turkey and Ukraine and Russia, the grain must flow. both to sustain ukraine's export industry, and feed the world, i hope Ukraine will take the deal, even if mines are removed, and apparently, Russia is demanding the right of inspection over the ships inbound to Odessa. That I don't think should be agreed to, but the grain needs to go. Hopefully, as part of the concessions to Ukraine, Ukraine can get more anti-ship missiles, and anything else NATO has been resisting to hand over so far. Maybe some goddamn tanks.... edit: this bloomberg article says Zelensky wants weapons in return for the opening of Odessa. so, i think the mines in the sea lane are not vital for sea defense, and this is a good way of getting more guns from NATO in return. whether, Russia actually intends to open the sealane remains more uncertain. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-06/ukraine-cautious-as-turkey-russia-push-black-sea-grain-deal

Kamil Galeev has a interesting point regarding Putin and discontent in Russian society. Dunno if it pans out but hey, I'll trust Kamil on it. https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1533868061014511621.html

While it would have been nice for Ukraine to retake the entire city, Russia rushing in reinforcements and turning it into Mariupol 2.0 where they have to grind themselves down in urban combat probably serves just as well.

whoa, Zelensky visited a lot of the frontlines, including inside the salient, ballsy, and impressive they felt confident enough to make it happen.

18 Caesars are in Ukraine now, up from 6 in May. 6 diverted from the French Army, 12 from a existing order for Morocco. A review of Oryx's sheet shows 100 SPGs at least in the process of being sent to Ukraine/in Ukraine already. Hopefully this will ramp up with more from the U.S.

If Russia didn't have nukes, sure, I could see a situation like the Persian Gulf patrols. But....it does. So NATO is not going to risk nuclear confrontation and war. Plus commercial shipping won't go into the Black Sea unless a country seizes their ships or somehow legally forces them to work in the Black Sea.

The fact that the General Staff is stating the goal is for the liberation of all of Severodonetsk and not merely just holding part of the city, bolds very poorly for the Russian forces remaining in the city. Should Ukraine achieve full control of the city, after Russia proclaimed its "liberation" and touted it all over social media, the news, it would be immensely demoralizing for Russian forces, as it's a demonstration of Ukrainian counterattack prowess and the utter failure of Russian forces to predict and deal with stout Ukrainian offensives, and a damning view of the remaining Russian offensive power remaining. It would also signal to the world, and especially Ukraine's allies, that the views of the UK MoD, U.S, are more accurate than the more cautious views of France and Germany, and those who argue that stalemate is the current foreseeable outlook if not Ukraine's defeat.

Ding, Ding, Ding, truly Macron and Scholz are in the process of fundamentally cracking the independent European foreign policy movement, when in response to Putin's aggression towards the EU, they act more in concern with national interests than the interest of all EU states, especially ignoring the sensibilities of the EU eastern flank. The U.S, U.K, and Eastern flank will be quite strengthened at least, but certainly Germany and France are being utterly idiotic, short-sighted, they will not earn goodwill with EE like this. Ultimately, France and Germany remain cautious, and will remain so while the conflict seems stalemated, but whoever is doing their military analysis needs to be fired in Berlin and Paris. Luckily, Germany at least has major parties supporting Ukraine, and Marcon, while being flighty on Ukraine's victory, indicated in the same interview that France seeks to increase military aid to Ukraine, so i don't think Ukraine is being left to dry supplies wise. Let me ask yall this question, if Putin felt that he was truly going to lose in Ukraine (say Germany and France had made the same sort of Ukraine victory statements like U.S and U.K), do you think he would go to the negotiation table faster? Or double down? Cause on one hand, i can see him accepting the loss and retreat back to pre-Feb 26 borders, but on the other hand, this man made the decision to invade Ukraine full-scale in the first place. Let me propose to you a interesting alternative, imagine Putin believes he cannot win in Ukraine. Imagine instead of striving for more territories, more optimal positioning for the seizure of territories for Novorossiya, continuing to seek victory (some sort of clear victory) in Ukraine, imagine instead he realizes victory is impossible for Russia, and instead of these absolutely destructive offensives at Izyum, Severodonetsk, Popasna, he had instead went for total stalemate. Imagine how much improved the Russian position would be had they not done the offensives prior, and how much more strengthened their ability to counter and inflict damage on the Ukrainian armed forces would be oriented purely defensively. In that sense, its perfectly fine Putin thinks the West is cracking. Ukraine needs Russia to bleed out in these poorly done, rushed offensives. Putin will keep ordering these offensives since his wish is not stalemate, not yet, Russian attempts to "liberate" the remaining areas of the disputed oblasts in the East (including the entirety of Kherson oblast) indicate to me, that stalemate is not the Russian goal, Russia seeks to ekk out a victory like the total liberation of Kherson, Luhansk, Donetsk oblasts, and as long as Russia intends on bleeding itself out for those goals, Ukraine should absolutely strive for maximizing the bloodletting. In that sense, Macron's words aren't too important, as long as those SPGs get sent to Ukraine. Thats all that matters now, supplies for Ukraine.

France likes to look independent from the rest of the West. While it is in my opinion, a mistake, i guess it serves France domestically, as foreign policy wise, Eastern Europe is gonna be pissed for a good while at Germany and France, and Italy I suppose. As long as they keep sending those Caesar SPGs, they can say whatever they want tho, it won't change the battlefield reality when Ukraine routs the Russians (when that day occurs) and Ukraine's ability to tell France to shove it at the peace talks.

You weren't kidding about RFE, they are heading into Severodonetsk. Crazy especially after the French journalist died in the city.

Its one thing to let the enemy close in and then ambush and kill them, if they really retook Met'olkine, uh...that might actually count as a point for "it's a trap!" Considering the Russians reached the center of town. I mean sure ambush the guys inside Severodonetsk but how the hell did they get the upper hand on the Russians in Met'olkine?