Beleg85
-
Posts
2,009 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
9
Posts posted by Beleg85
-
-
14 minutes ago, Grigb said:
Suspected number floating around is less than 2 dozens.
Correction - this is not the final number.
Thanks.
BTw, seems they were another victims of Social Media Era. Here a short clip seemingly from 7th June of Wagnerites enyoing their coffee...
-
1 hour ago, Aragorn2002 said:
In 2002 the Bundeswehr practically gave away 128 Leopard 2s to Poland. Another 120 were bought by the Poles in 2013. Hundreds and hundreds of other Leopard 2s were sold, lent or donated to other NATO countries. There's indeed not much left to send. The Netherlands made the same idiotic mistake. Hence my statement that the politicians behind such decisions should politically be held responsible.
There was nothing idiotic about it, it was beneficial for both parties even if driven by selfish interests. Poland serves as bufor for rest of Europe anyway so this (as well as NATO enlargment in general) was very smart move in longer term.
Idiotic (I would rather say "short-sighted") was that Germany did not produce more of its own equipment to fill the vacuum and recreate capabilities. They have plenty of time for this.
Unfortunatelly there is a wider psychological problem with German attitude to war and security in general. Creation of Bundeswehr was basically forced by Americans, and large segments of society still seem to be happy they get over with it, believing that after Soviets fall apart "we don't need an army". Which is borderline naive, of course.
But it was widely discussed here before, so perhaps not doing offtopic:
There are conflicting reports about this Ukrainian barrage of stadium in Luhansk. Ukrainians are cheering and giving fantastic numbers of hundreds Wagnerites being killed, but anybody here observing Telegram accounts have any confirmation of this?
-
11 minutes ago, panzermartin said:
We think world has changed but the time frame is miniscule, it's only a generation since the colonial era. We are driven by capitalism and not values. Otherwise we wouldn't allow Turkey in, we wouldn't equip Saudi Arabia and all those countries that violate basic human rights.
Ekhmm sole purpose of admitting Turkey was to contain Soviets. And what has Saudi Arabia to NATO?
You also completelly ignore people like Balts, Poles, Romanians etc. For them (especially Balts) NATO is their literal lifeline, only bulwark against barbarity we see now. Hundreds of milions of people are at stake if we ever go Russia to behave like they always did. Which, sadly, some Westerners and Southerners are ready to accept.
5 minutes ago, panzermartin said:No disrespect taken, I get your points. Yes it's no surprise that Russia is a threat to its neighbors, every big power has historically been. But in the grand scale Russia is still the minor player,with little influence beyond its borders.
No other european country in modern history was more imperialistic and violent to their neighours than Russia. Maybe Turkey, occassionaly. And Germany going crazy. But none was so consistent in its claims and darwinistic in execution. Look at the sheer size of terrain they still claim to be "theirs" at some point. Nobody do this anymore, but hey- it's Russia.
-
15 minutes ago, Huba said:
Putin openly said that territorial conquest is his goal. At least there's no more BS...
He laso said Peter The Great waged wars for 21 years and in the end was victorious, i.e. bring "back" the lands.
Poor Dymitrij Treninn, will be very hard to translate this into language understandable to Washington security establishment and sell as "valid security concerns".
-
3 hours ago, The_Capt said:
This has been brought up before. What we are seeing in Ukraine is consistent with trends we saw back in the Donbas in 2014, in Iraq against ISIL, and in the Nagorno-Karbakh. I am sure some phenomenon are unique to this war and we will be spending some time trying to figure that one out. However, there has been a weird noise coming out of conventional warfare for some time now and this war has just underlined in bold some of that.
Fair points.
What I meant is that there are not many flashpoints in the world where US will find itself in a Putin situation. State vs. state war of aggression, against unified population with more numerous regular army/insurgents fighting conventional war. Oh, and without allies.
I don't know, maybe invasion of mainland China if somebody thinks about doomsday scenario. But other than that, every possible flashpoint (Taiwan) or highly-improbable scenario (Korea, Middle-East, Baltics?) involve actual boots on the ground by your allies rather than Americans putting their lives in line. They would main force to face attrition warfare.
Of course this question is different for other armies. So for example India,Turkey or France like to wage their own peculiar wars but lacks this massive advantages US has, and questions you raised about future of warfare are more valid for them than for US itself.
Btw. China's attitude is something worth to remember. I frankly expected them to supply Russia with something non lethal (like at least their horrible field rations). But no, nothing - not even words of some special support.
This itself speaks volume about US power in the world.
-
1 hour ago, The_Capt said:
So I ask myself "what if the Taliban had NLAWs/Javelins, Stingers/Starstreak and UAVs all backed up with a modular cell network? And the support of a great power(s) behind them for training, force generation and ISR?"
I would say this "great power" behind would have serious troubles even before war starts.
The question is of course fair, but the answer lies not in military, but political terms. I don't think that any professional western military would make such mistake of epic proportions of underestimating enemy as Putin did. Even if they would invade, they would cut the country out of allies, supplies of modern weapons and secure inrormation wars first. some of them would be a problem still (like commercial drones), but there are not that many countries that can field decent ATGM's and Manpads.
Do really NLAW's cause so many lossess to RUS troops? Perhaps. But it may stem from Russian incompetence and lack of eqiuipment rather than ATGM's awesomeness. Also, there were several statements by Ukrainian top brass that ATGM's and drones are very helpfull, but it was artillery doing the real execution. I doubt Westerners would leave any enemy big guns in range intact before puting boots on the ground.
Add long-range artillery, situational awarness, horizontal-data sharing, airforce, airforce and airforce...and myriads other things.
Ok, I am just random historian with different specialization (antiquity) and no military service, so not even try to argue against your expertise. Only want to add a reflection (rather banal, need to admit) that militaries seriously need to rethink war in political/anthropological terms rather than strictly tactical. Western powers won almost every engagement since WWII, but lost quite many wars due to failed understanding of a country they fought in.Perhaps what is happening in Ukraine now is very specific to this conflict only and we should not draw wider conclusions about nature of future warfare. Especially we lack proper sources and our knowledge is very fragmentary.
14 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:One always has to look at both sides. What you just said is as true, if not even more true, for the Russians. So worst case it's a race to see which side gets exhausted first. Given how this war has gone on so far, my money is on Russia exhausting first. Remember, all the grumbling on the Ukrainian side is in the context of high motivation to keep the war going, all the grumbling on the Russian side is in the context of strategic demoralization. All else being equal, my money goes on the side that has the will to win. Especially if it's their home turf.
Steve
Yep, the Triumph of Will. Jesus, XXI century with all technical mambo-jambo and war boils to this, like in IIIrd century BC.
If only soldiers were grumbling of course it it would be slight problem. But High command is different matter. The Russian advantage in firepower is remendous, and (even remembering all Russian problems with mobilization and economy) it is difficult to understand how 140mln despoty like Russia could not find somewhere additional 50 or 100 k village boys to sustain offensive.
In other words- long and bloody war ahead. I just hoped the toll will close in something like thoise 50k KIA, but it doesn't seem to be the case unfortunatelly. What a mess.
-
11 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
Not really different. The view from the ground is always more "colorful" than those following the overall trends. Around Popasna, for example, ISW has correctly characterized the situation as initially very threatening transitioning to stalled or small gains by Russia. There was nothing in the reporting of the CBC or New Yorker articles that contradicted what ISW reports
First thanks for kind words.
As to the topic- well you are right about morale and grudging by common soldiers. However, ISW did several times repeated Russians are still unable to employ combined warfare tactics. Ukrainian commander seem to contradict those claims- at least at some sectors (I suspect northern forests) they successfully infiltrated with SF teams; perhaps they captured this way already a village with wooden church on the other side of Donec. They combine different elements -some of them by necessity probably- use massive firepower and then sweep defenders with infantry. So they are adapting, in awkward and bloody way, but they are learning in the end. Even higher echelons of Ukrainian command and civil administration seem to view situation in bleak terms now.
And don't get me wrong, I am not in the camp of "Russian Hords of Doom". Strategically Ukraine is winning or at least not loosing. The point is that if this form of attrition warfare will last longer, Ukrainians will be exhausted too, and even thousands of new recruits will have problems mounting any noticable offensives later if their instructors will be dead.
BTW- what struck me that instead of dedicating entire interview to general, the journalist gave him two paragraphs and sandwiched between some unimportant stories. And this would be primary source, far better than conjectures of OSINT guys or military bloggers. What a pitty for people interested in militrary side of conflict.
2 hours ago, The_Capt said:I keep coming back to the idea of smart-mass and massed precision in a attrition-to-manoeuvre-to-attrition cycle. This may seem minor but if one does the math, one has to ask "is manoeuvre warfare as we know it, dead?" How does one achieve conation shock, leading to physical collapse when your opponent can see everything you are doing well in advance? [aside: JasonC has to be loving this]
Exactly my take from this war. Instead of pointless tank debate, the real question is how nowadays anybody can concentrate enough forces for serious attack before being seen and blown to pieces by enemy artillery/air force. As for now, a lot of attacks in this war reminds SDF's "village hopping" raids from Northern Syria, just with extra firepower, rather than serious military manouvers of large bodies of troops.
Of course US has its superior air force, ISR and all of that, so question is rather theoretical, as there are probably no "peer" armies that could face US and Allies in such a war. But it may be valid for all other militaries and paramilitaries.
-
Hi
Just to say hallo. I was lurker in this topic for last 450+ pages and must say I am impressed by what I read here; it's probably one of the best discussion boards regarding this war on anglophone net. Being forced to work for several years on different social platforms like Fb or Discord one cannot appreciate enough old Forum form. Lengthly posts, experts, culture of discussions- kudos, gentlemen.
Anyway, I wanted to draw your attention to this article in New Yorker that is really worth reading. https://www.newyorker.com/news/dispatch/the-fight-to-survive-russias-onslaught-in-eastern-ukraine
Beside veristic accounts on being under artillery barrage, the reporter spoke with deputy commander of Ukraine forces in Donbass gen. Tarnavsky and mayor of Kramatorsk, so really "big fishes". Some takes:
-Improved Russian tactics “If before they simply marched in large columns, now they have started to actually fight,” he said. The Russian Army has split its forces into smaller groups, which it uses, along with a sizable fleet of drones, to identify and target Ukrainian positions, hitting them with artillery and air strikes. When a particular zone or village has effectively been levelled, ground troops—a mixture of regular Russian soldiers, Wagner mercenaries, and fighters mobilized from the Russia-backed separatist territories in Donetsk and Luhansk, Tarnavsky said—move in to try to seize the rubble."
-Accounts of massive bombardments, sometimes even (hard to believe) of small Ukrainian squads being targeted by several Tochka missiles. Regular artillery advantage is 7:1, after which follows infantry in advantage 5:1 (mind you, it's general so probably best source around). Seems interesting in the light of changing balance between mass-firepower-manouver hypothesis by Freeman.
-Very heavy Ukrainian lossess, especially among regulars and specialists. “They are replaced by doctors and mechanics. We have manpower, but much of this core is dfead or wounded”
-Kramatorsk is being fortified in case enemy come. Mayor has no illusions- the city will become a battleground sooner or later.“We shouldn’t expect any miracles,” he told me. “It’s clear that the longer this goes on, the more territory Russia will gain.” His voice was both jovial and grave. “Let me give you my professional opinion as mayor: if we don’t get heavy weapons in two or three weeks, we’re ****ed.”
So here are rather grim conclusions, different than those from for example ISW.
Oh, just spotted other user posted article. Anyway, some of these takes may be interesting.
How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
Yep, that is one of great questions of this war- how many soldiers Ukraine has behind the lines.
@Haiduk if I remember wrote about something like several brigades maximum in training+ those rotating the front and covering the border. I also heard from several military experts about entire Reserve Corps being prepared behind Dnieper. But it is hard to believe frankly, given how many problems with rotation they had in Doneck salient. The piecemeal character of Ukrianian advance in Kherson axis may be due to this rather than some deeper military goal.
On lighter note, interesting piece about hygiene of top politicians. It seems Putin obsession with keeping secret is not something that peculiar to him only: