Billy Ringo

Since it was one of my comments that started some of the recent banter, I would like to clarify my post regarding red-lines and spineless positions.
My frustration is centered around Russia's use of force against purely civilian targets, with seemingly no counter other than some verbal condemnations and defensive weapons against missiles/drones.   IMO, right or wrong, Russia should be clearly warned that attacks against civilian targets will result in specific actions against the delivery vehicles of those actions.  (If militarily possible which is out of my area of expertise.)    NATO/US would supply a limited number of weapons that would be used to specifically target the ships/subs/planes that delivery civilian carnage.
It's not about using direct NATO/US forces, nuclear forces, etc.  But simply some kind of publicly stated red-line followed by a tangible response, if militarily possible, to make the Russians think twice before blowing up a cafe or apartment building.
Peace.
 
 

The West might not think it is in war with Russia, but Russia for sure is in war with the West. Not only do they say that like twice a day, their actions show it.
For example, the grain deal. Putin is attacking Ukraine's ability to sell grain, to cause famine and instability in Africa and Middle East, with the objective of causing refugee crisis - and those refugees will all try to get into EU, which would cause instability, get more power to fascists on his payroll, etc.
It's not a new tactic, they have been doing things like that for years, up to and including Belarus literally getting people in Middle East on planes, flying them to Belarus, driving them to Polish border and forcing them to cross, just to cause trouble And of course there are many other ways Russia and its allies are attacking the West - from disinformation to oil prices.
But some parts of the West are being suicidally stupid. They are shouting "I'm not in a fight" while the other guy is swinging for them. I do not understand why they have to lie to themselves. But they do.
Ultimately Russia is not that strong. But China will ramp up what Russia is doing now, and they will crush us if we don't give up this stupid, self-destructive pacifism.
But we won't. People would rather die than have to face they have been wrong. See Climate Change for the same example.

What the heck going on now? Seriously, I understand your point and fears of escalation. I just believe a war of the scale we are fighting can't be nuanced if the end result is something other than an ugly stalemate where Ukraine struggles to recover for years. Our so called leaders have to fess up and tell the world what their real goals are. Their actions do not support the stated objective that Ukraine will re-take its stolen lands. Something else is going on and it's as cold as a witch's tit. 

So worried about Russia's reaction,  Russia's red-lines and what might they do if "X" happens.
What about NATO's red-lines? EU red-lines? US red-lines?
They've bombed and killed citizens. Intentionally targeted civilian infrastructure and residential areas. Raped.  Tortured.  Kidnapped children.  Blown up dams resulting in the destruction of 1,000s of acres of prime farmland, blown up ports important to international shipping of food supplies and who knows what else.
Does NATO or the US even have red-lines? Are we so GD'md spineless to even dare state them publicly and hold the Russians accountable?
I've negotiated with major retailers for over 3 decades and one thing I've learned without exception--they'll keep asking for more until they are finally told NO.  A hard NO, and not before.   Maybe it's time to draw a hard line in the concrete, state it publicly and take control back from the Russians.
 

Highly useful. : 
 
https://theins.ru/en/politics/263596

They control Crimea and a chunk of Ukraine to the north. They control the defenses for both for the foreseeable future. Russia in the present is getting away with a lot. No war crime trials, commercial flights, vacations, plenty of stuff for those that play by the rules while sending their poor youth to the front. Status quo for now. Happy Happy. And grandmother China is there if all else fails. 
Russia has already been defeated geostrategically. That's conventional wisdom. They are facing new NATO members, they are under sanctions and otherwise in internal disarray. Good for the west. But they still hold non-negotiable land: Bad for Ukraine. 
How about a NATO no-fly zone over Ukrainian territory? No stomach for that. Well consider NATO donations have already killed Russians without which those troops would still be in the fight. 
BTW,  there never seems to be a discussion of Ukraine as a nation into the future. That is the entire point. If Ukraine evaporates as a nation and free society due to a prolonged war of attrition, what is this fight all about? Cool youtube videos and twitter posts? Putin is punting the ball to West. See what you can do. How about taking that ball and running with it?   

So worried about Russia's reaction,  Russia's red-lines and what might they do if "X" happens.
What about NATO's red-lines? EU red-lines? US red-lines?
They've bombed and killed citizens. Intentionally targeted civilian infrastructure and residential areas. Raped.  Tortured.  Kidnapped children.  Blown up dams resulting in the destruction of 1,000s of acres of prime farmland, blown up ports important to international shipping of food supplies and who knows what else.
Does NATO or the US even have red-lines? Are we so GD'md spineless to even dare state them publicly and hold the Russians accountable?
I've negotiated with major retailers for over 3 decades and one thing I've learned without exception--they'll keep asking for more until they are finally told NO.  A hard NO, and not before.   Maybe it's time to draw a hard line in the concrete, state it publicly and take control back from the Russians.
 

So worried about Russia's reaction,  Russia's red-lines and what might they do if "X" happens.
What about NATO's red-lines? EU red-lines? US red-lines?
They've bombed and killed citizens. Intentionally targeted civilian infrastructure and residential areas. Raped.  Tortured.  Kidnapped children.  Blown up dams resulting in the destruction of 1,000s of acres of prime farmland, blown up ports important to international shipping of food supplies and who knows what else.
Does NATO or the US even have red-lines? Are we so GD'md spineless to even dare state them publicly and hold the Russians accountable?
I've negotiated with major retailers for over 3 decades and one thing I've learned without exception--they'll keep asking for more until they are finally told NO.  A hard NO, and not before.   Maybe it's time to draw a hard line in the concrete, state it publicly and take control back from the Russians.
 

So worried about Russia's reaction,  Russia's red-lines and what might they do if "X" happens.
What about NATO's red-lines? EU red-lines? US red-lines?
They've bombed and killed citizens. Intentionally targeted civilian infrastructure and residential areas. Raped.  Tortured.  Kidnapped children.  Blown up dams resulting in the destruction of 1,000s of acres of prime farmland, blown up ports important to international shipping of food supplies and who knows what else.
Does NATO or the US even have red-lines? Are we so GD'md spineless to even dare state them publicly and hold the Russians accountable?
I've negotiated with major retailers for over 3 decades and one thing I've learned without exception--they'll keep asking for more until they are finally told NO.  A hard NO, and not before.   Maybe it's time to draw a hard line in the concrete, state it publicly and take control back from the Russians.
 

Both. But the latter should be more efficacious than a show of force. The west has almost met its geostrategic goals with NATO expanding and Russia is in disarray economically and socially. So the west appears to be in this thing not to lose rather than for Ukraine to win back its borders. I am not sure who they would like to break first - Russia or Ukraine? Either way that gets the west to negotiations which is their true aim anyway. But in the meantime the Ukraine is being led on by dribs and drabs of assistance for fear of actually pissing Putin off. So the heroes in Ukraine are fighting for the cowards in the west's capitols. We can't let nuclear blackmail stand. Or if we can't stomach that, we shouldn't stand by and let its use destroy a smaller country through conventional attrition.  

That is my point though. I don't think we are. The size of the explosive is only one variable. The shape of the change matters, the point of impact matters and (I think the most important here) the confined or openness of the space matters.
I used to study rail accidents. The same amount of material spilled on the ground and set a lite is spectacular and dangerous. The same amount or, worse, less confined inside a rail car is way way more dangerous and can cause fatal effects much further away. Not just because parts of the rail car can fly multi hundred meters away (record I found was 3000m) but because the explosive effect itself is even bigger. A large energy release in the open is nasty, the same energy release in a confined space is devastating.
The only caveat is I don't have good understanding of the other variables because I'm not an explosive expert but the confined space under that span will have a multiplicative modifier on the effects of the explosion. My guess is that was why that section of the bridge was targeted with this type of munition.

I think you are reacting in a very one sided way. An army that starts refusing orders undermines the authority of the state.  That army doesn't function independent of the state apparatus.  It doesn't mobilize troops, it doesn't make economic decisions, it doesn't drive the overall political process nor negotiate with the few allies Russia has. It undermines all that by making the state appear to not have control and therefore authority.  Think Xi wants to be in bed with a guy whose own army is in revolt?
Who decides who in the army gets resources?  Who decides that X artillery brigade supports which corps?  Who decides what aviation resources support which sector of the front? Chaos absolutely serves the interest of the UA.  With confusion as to who is in charge, the ability to respond to UA advances declines.  The RA isn't suddenly going to start fighting smarter, it is simply going to fight even less coordinated than it does now.
 

Close call on Ukrainian mavic, being cms away from hit by rocket (reportedly TOR):
Ok, but several users were still debating it hotly, so theme wasn't dead. Ok, anyway, agree it's better to push forward.
 
So, here a translation taken from one of Telegram channels regarding how wagnerites were quarelling with neighour units. Quite interesting how things were on the ground before the mutiny:
https://twitter.com/MarekMeissner/status/1679773210777190401
Extremely interesting dialogue caught on military TG, between two Russians:
"- They take toys  from the Wagners. They had a good stuff, many a brigade is not like that
- True. Because it was from the brigades
- How is it? did they steal?
- No, what for? They stole it once, when they laid their hands on the Luhansk and Donetsk artillery. But then nobody said anything, there was such a brothel [mess] that when Wagner came in it got better. Then it turned different -the people themselves went to them
- How did they simply pass to other unit?
- Normally. Do you know what that war with the 72nd brigade was about?
- Come on, food, ammo.
- **** no. it was about fact that the Wagners stole people from them. Because the command of 72 [brigade] are great gentlemen. They hadn't been on the line for weeks. Supply? Let the company commanders break their heads over it, not their business. Ammunition? If Moscow will give, it will be. Well, these poor guys were standing on the line, the ukrops were shelling them, and here next to them Wagner is standing and they have everything. At first they borrowed things from mercc, so later then they came from Utkin and said: >> do you want the same? then go to us << And so two companies from the 72nd escaped with their equipment. After a month a colonel arrives on the line and see his men are not there, Wagner is standing next. He sees that his people, yell his mouth on them and the Wagners say to him >> to go f..k himself<<. So he complained to the Syrian [probably the nickname of General Serowikina-] and he said to him >> How are you, colonel taking care of your own troops? << So command ****ed him over like a dog. This was the case with the Syrian.
After Moscow began to take command [probably Gerasimov and Shoigu-MM], it was less frequent, but they say that Prigozhin went to Moscow especially so as not to disturb those trooops that came over to him.
- You must have lost your mind. It's not allowed!
- F..k sake it is not allowed. They say you can't, but show me where it says you can't. With Tanks it was the same. When they went to Moscow, two companies of tankers went with them on their own. And the anti-aircraft guns, do you think they were all from them? F..k no.. And before that, near Sołedar near Bachmut, how was it? They come from the brigade command to the line, look, and here is their tank platoon with Wagner. >> What are you doing here? << And they said to him >> Major Kolcow gave the order that we are doing a joint operation with Wagner << . They tell us to connect to the headquarters: >> Give Kolcov << >> How to give him, when he died yesterday << . And f..k you know if he indeed gave this order or not, but Wagner says >> if you want to have the defense secured, give these tanks; so they went for the f..k [joined battle on their own] << . There was such a bardak [rus. term for complete mess] on the front that it was not known, not even who was in charge. Do you think that everything is in order there like yours? No f..k. Do you understand now why there are written orders and messengers being used now? Why orders from command are being coded now? It's not ukrops, but tool [to enforce] on lazy command, so that they don't sit behind the front, but stay at the front.
-It's true they're on the line more often now." I feel sorry for Wagner [  ]. When they were on the line, at least I knew that I had peace with my people, that they wouldn't throw us to plug the holes. They were telling the truth - they were like the SS."
Interesting view from trenches. As a bonus, reportedly fresh picture of Prig himself somewhere in the summer camp. To spoil the taste of your meal today...
 
 

No, Netherlands is not on "the far side of the moon".  This repeated dig at Netherlands seems quite uncalled for.  Netherlands support to Ukraine was immediate despite a large part of the population not being able to find Ukraine on a map.  After MH17 Netherlands has no illusions about modern russia.  MH17 was a deliberate act of war directed at Dutch people by russians.  Netherlands was immediately supportive of Ukraine in the current war.
Threats from Moscow were directed very early to Netherlands and the Port of Rotterdam in particular.  The nuclear hawks in Moscow were prominent.  The Dutch Government communicated a clear message that Patriot systems were on full alert and that Netherlands would not be intimidated.  The Dutch resolve has not faltered as far as I can see.  Netherlands is hosting more refugees than UK and is playing its part with provision of military and financial aid, as well as performing a vital logistics function.  Netherlands was one of the first if not the first to promise F16s.
Please let us resist the temptation to imagine fault lines in the Nato alliance.  When it comes to a russian threat to destroy the port of Rotterdam then believe me Netherlands is as much in the front line as Warsaw.

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.

regarding DPICM: we should put our ethical principles behind the needs of Ukraine, which follows a higher legal and moral imperative (defense against a war of aggression contrary to international law). One can remain of different opinion but ethics are nice to have when you are not bound to be eradicated by Russia. 

pretty sure those duds will cause much less issues long term than what russians did by mining every single meter of the frontlines with the whole USSR stock of AP mines. Breaches through that crap will be only meters wide and who knows how deep and maybe a hundred meters around them will be cleared, but a 1000 km line will not and walking through fields of Zaporizhya will cause dead and wounded for decades to come.

Dropping clusters in there is like dropping a stick of wood into a burning forest.

If you hate twitter:
 

I recognize the importance of managing escalation, but on moral or ethical objectives to cluster munitions, I dunno, tut tuting the Ukrainians, who are facing a war of aggression from a aggressor who’s objective is the destruction of their country and people just seems purely idiotic and morally wrong?
I mean, let’s objectively ask what side is worse, in terms of regard for the ideals and spirit of IHL and civilians. 
we have Russia….who refuses UN and NGO access to their occupied areas, who have camps to filtrate civilians, who deport by force civilians, who kidnap children, who bomb without regard, and very much seem to target civilians and civilian objects in unoccupied Ukraine, who has a history of targeting protected objects in Syria, who mined a Dam, and potentially destroyed it.
we have Ukraine, where the city of Kherson looked really well despite occupation, and now looks really unwell after Russian bombardment, that allows NGO and UN access to their controlled areas, that actually makes the attempt to follow principles of IHL….
personally, if I was a NGO like HRW, I would preface every statement on the conflict with big flaming sentences that demand Russia stop using cluster munitions, allow UN access to occupied zones, etc and then urge ukraine to be careful of deployment of cluster munitions, and strictly manage their use so that post war clean up can occur. Why? Cause I have a goddamn brain, by every freaking objective measure, Russia as a party to the conflict, has illustrated little regard for IHL and Ukraine has given much regard in comparison. 
It’s like Rwanda in a small sense, this need for neutrality, for not taking sides, the moral ground was ceded by Russia a long time ago prior to 2022, and the international community will face its failure soon enough.
it’s one thing for the ICRC to be neutral, but for NGOs like HRW, no excuse, you see the reports, hell you make the damn reports, Russian crimes in Ukraine are extensive, widespread, and unrelenting, when people rely on your expertise, and you are saying both sides are using cluster munitions and both sides are wrong, damn you, no both sides are not wrong, Russia is wrong, Russia is the aggressor, Russia is the genocidal actor, Russia is the one running over civilians, Russia is the only destroying dams and shooting rescuers and treating civilians like combatants.
it’s frankly appalling, and in the same vein as international organizations urging a ceasefire and frozen line in the middle of the Rwandan Genocide and no international force to stop the genocide, no the two sides are not the same.
if you stop the advance of the RPF and fail to police the government controlled areas of Rwanda, you are letting the genocide go unchecked and unchallenged. This is inexcusable. This was inexcusable. And NGOs are failing still since then.
we know what happens if we leave parts of Ukraine occupied by Russia. In a few years, the men of that occupied zone get turned into meat shields for the next invasion of unoccupied Ukraine. 

A solid point on PGM.  DPICM was really a better way to distribute lethality before PGM.  With PGM a few rounds can do the damage of many dumb, even DPICM.  However, what we do not know is the ammo situation of PGM in this war, nor that of dumb rounds either.  I doubt this decision ( if it is indeed not just a rumour) was taken on a whim “Oh hey, that’s right we got all those DPICM rounds” *slaps forehead*.  I suspect that this decision is an offset to another development, shortfalls in PGM ammo most likely.
So What?  Well the calculus is clearly between bad and worse, and they have gone with bad.  The terrain in the break in battle is already highly contaminated so this is fairly incremental risk at this point - I.e. happy rose cheeked Ukrainian children will not be frolicking in these fields for about a century regardless of UA DPICM or not.  So in order to keep the momentum of the grinding a hard decision was made…and here we are.
One thing this war has demonstrated is that when facing the harsh realities of long duration high intensity conventional warfare a lot of idealistic and aspirational ideas we had before the war have become strained.  The “quick clean weekend war” was the first one.  Facing existential conflict the dirty fact is that every nation on earth will likely abandon principles for interests and survival given enough pressure.  War is once again a race to the bottom.  Something to keep in mind on the whole unmanned debate. 
 

I've come to find that certain users just default to "HRW and UN not saying anything about Russia", and that everytime they do this is it is an emotional response with no basis in fact. We get it, but people looking at the forum may not do the research themselves and come away with false impressions.

No one will take the Cap's laurels away, under whose watchful eyes this thread has grown and sprouted into a fruitful garden. May he ever keep his lonely vigil.
But if it helps, this is a thread-summery, maybe it helps people without the Space Karen's app:
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1676753981333467136.html
 

Not really. Those of us unwilling to log in to the Twitter can't read threads or view author feeds. We just see the first tweet.

I admire this man.

I’m  sorry, what exactly are we basing this claim on? What are production rates? What actual technology standards are included? Considering they are fielding t 54s not so sure any of this is valid.