How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[db_zero]

7 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Drones have posed all kinds of problems for traditional AD systems.  Which makes sense because when you design something (like an SAM system) you have to make certain assumptions.  Nobody had drones in mind when the traditional (legacy) systems were designed.  Likewise, designing a heat seeking missile doesn't do much if the target doesn't have enough of a heat signature to track.

I wonder what Russia is using to shoot down the TB2s.  Cannon from helicopters might be the most effective?  Helicopters have far more control over speed and altitude than a fixed wing aircraft does.

Steve

I see YouTube videos that say latest version of the Stinger can shoot down small drones and you see Marines in practice shooting down small drones the size of a RC aircraft.

The tiny hand size drones may be a different story.

There are now drones that are the size and look of insects. Who knows what the military has or DARPA has developed that we don’t know about but ready to use if the need arises. 
 

This is from over 5 years ago:

 

Edited March 18, 2022 by db_zero

[Haiduk]

Footage from Russian Ka-52, damaged during assault of Hostomel airfield 24th Feb. On 1:29 pilot says "Guys, I'm hit, keep control, emergency landing"

 

 

[DesertFox]

38 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

Not so 100 AT wow, like BMP-1! I was shure Russia already doesn't have it in service, only LDPR forces, but... This is already second captured BMP-1 on Kyiv diredction. There is motor-rifle units of Far East Military district involved (or Syberian... I forgot), Probably they have some old equipment among conpanies. Also two Russian, not DLPR, T-72A were spotted. 

Yep, the brought up the cavalry...lol!

[db_zero]

12 hours ago, General Jack Ripper said:

If the objective is to negotiate for better terms, literally drum-firing a major city into rubble isn't going to help him one bit.
What he would need to do, is demonstrate an ability to hold onto the territory he has taken, and demonstrate the inability of the UKR to take it back.

That's if he's interested in negotiation, but the Russian has used a pretense of negotiation as a ruse before.
I know your comment is from a couple hours ago, (geez I don't want to be accused of being behind the curve already!) but my later point about kicking him back across the border applies here. I think the best outcome is to kick his ***, until he cries uncle.

But that's some starry-eyed dreaming there and I don't think things will be that clean or easy.

If Putin doesn’t get better terms from flattening cities then he’ll just satisfy is lust for vengeance.

Back in my early adult years I had a friend who played football. They were one of the top rated teams. A visiting team came to play that would be an easy win.

It was one of those bad weeks and they got the snot kicked out of them. By the third quarter it was over and the visiting team was talking smack…

So it was decided to extract some payback. They went out and started doing stuff like aiming for the knees and doing all sorts of dirty stuff. While doing so making sure the visiting team knew that sure you’re going to win but you’ll pay a price for your victory.

That sounds about right for Putin. It fact I can think of other prominent figures with the same sort of mindset.

 

[Haiduk]

UKR drone drops RKG-1600 ammunition (reworked for airdrop old RKG-3 hand HEAT grenades) on the enemy vehicles

 

Edited March 18, 2022 by Haiduk

[BeondTheGrave]

6 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Yes, Kamil is a fantastic strategist and historian, but is less sound on pure military stuff, so YMMV....

His tweet threads have become popular and so many get bombed midway through by the usual Twits.

So for those interested, here are links to the 'unrolled' versions (although these don't have most of the images he puts in the tweetstorms).

Not in order of posting:

Russian demographics 1: geography
https://kamilkazani2.substack.com/p/how-did-russia-get-so-big?s=w

 

Russian demographics 2: the southern 'ganglands'
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1493602653586264076.html

 

The Russian economy 1
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1501360272442896388.html

 

The Russian economy 2
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1499855858456567809.html

 

The rise of Putin
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1496711906412933121.html

 

Dormant Russian institutions
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1499048492358111235.html

 

Russia's State Security State
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1496506490202513413.html

 

Putin's elite
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1495790874235744258.html

 

Kadryov's Chechnya: Putin's warlord vassal
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1497612331953577991.html

 

Political institutions of the Mongol Golden Horde 
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1492164056962195457.html

 

Assabiyahs: Russia's autocracies over time
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1492549093771694082.html

 

Why doesn't the Russian Army rule Russia any more?
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1493968165717561346.html

 

The decay of the Russian Army
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1502673952572854278.html

 

Russia didn't launch a war, but a 'special operation'

 

 

Crisis and Jubilees: barons vs courtiers
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1503430216554795014.html

 

No, Ukraine isn't just a separatist Russian province...
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1495469553136066572.html

 

Geography shapes Ukraine's history
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1495200579919958021.html

 

Ethnopolitics in Ukraine (and Russia)
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1494334415446577153.html

 

A short background on Russian expansionism
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1492960693737463813.html

 

So who are the 'Nazis' anyway?
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1497306746330697738.html

 

"Z" Russia has gone full fascist
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1500495309595725831.html

 

Should we be 'giving Putin a way out?'
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1503053699798769666.html

 

Napoleon's 1812 error: deescalation
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1503768312236421120.html

 

How Putin 'derussified' East Ukraine
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1504103672019513345.html

 

I would just modify that a little bit, his longer term history is pretty far off (in this one thread he is saying things about Brandenburg/Prussia that are just wrong. In the 'doesnt know what he's even saying' fashion. Reading any of the basic texts,  ie: The German Way of War would undermine his argument here. His analysis of Soviet Naval policy is also wrong though more subtly, perhaps though this is even more of a blow to his overall argument.) Has good understanding of the Russian court, but its fairly limited. 

[DesertFox]

Is it just my impression or have the russians switched to operating with cruise missiles/rockets only mode?

 

 

[Haiduk]

Some information from local twiters:

- UKR forces secured next 10 km of H11 Mykolaiv-Bashtanka-Novyi Bug road (Kryvyi Rih direction). Russians without fight abandoned villages Maryivka, Vynohradivka, Dobra Krynytsia along this road and retreated to Bashtanka. So, secure zone NE from Mykolaiv expanded up to 36 km.

 - Russian troops partially sezed Rubizhne city, part of Rubizhne-Siverodonetsk-Lysychansk agglomeration in Lujansk oblast.

- Nova Kakhovka citizen reports the roads around the town is mostly securing DNR conscripts

- Russian conducted airstrike on the tran in Voznesensk, Mykolaiv oblast

- Russian aircraft bombed Velykodolynske settlement , 10 km SW from Odesa.

- Su-34 reportedly shot down with Stinger at the morning in Bucha area, Kyiv oblast. As if the jet fell on Russian-controlled territory. Pilot didn't eject

Edited March 18, 2022 by Haiduk

[Haiduk]

4 minutes ago, DesertFox said:

Is it just my impression or have the russians switched to operating with cruise missiles/rockets only mode?

No, they fire with this stuff each day. Pentagon claims over 1000 cruise and ballistic missiles were launched since 24th Feb.

Today one missile was shot down over Kyiv, but because of explosion and fragnents of missile falling one building was seriously damaged and six other got small damage. One woman got killed, 12 wounded. Russians also launced 8 Kh-555 cruise missiles over Black Sea from strategic bombers. Two were intercepted, but six hit L'viv aviation repair factory. One missile was intercepted over Odesa (probably from those, which flew on L'viv). Also three missiles were intercepred in Vinnytsia oblast

Edited March 18, 2022 by Haiduk

[Vacillator]

I was also wondering about the missiles, as we have seen notes like the one Steve mentioned below, but I suppose that is just about the Black Sea Fleet's stock?

8 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

ISW confirms several things that we've been speculating on regarding the activities of the Russian Black Sea Fleet:

1. Russian amphib ships are empty and being floated towards Odessa to keep Ukrainian forces tied down
2. Russia is out of cruise missiles, which has been suspected for a bit already

[Haiduk]

UKR Tochka-U launch

 

[c3k]

7 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Drones have posed all kinds of problems for traditional AD systems.  Which makes sense because when you design something (like an SAM system) you have to make certain assumptions.  Nobody had drones in mind when the traditional (legacy) systems were designed.  Likewise, designing a heat seeking missile doesn't do much if the target doesn't have enough of a heat signature to track.

I wonder what Russia is using to shoot down the TB2s.  Cannon from helicopters might be the most effective?  Helicopters have far more control over speed and altitude than a fixed wing aircraft does.

Steve

Radar is great...but raw radar returns are nothing but a noise-filled mess. All modern radars incorporate filters. That gives you a nice clean screen, but eliminates a lot of returns...  Like birds.

One common filter is a velocity-based one. Nothing below a certain speed is shown. Speed is determined by doppler effect. Filters are "notch" style (electrically speaking). That's why a common air combat tactic is to try to "doppler notch" your enemy's radar. If you are flying perpendicular to the emitter (e.g., enemy south of you, you're flying directly east), his radar filters will see 0 closure and filter you out. (<- Greatly simplified explanation and example.)

Drones, slow enough and small enough, fall into the "noise" and get filtered out of returns. It takes specifically "tuned" radars to spot drones, and then of a certain size (and range, etc.).

Using helos to shoot down drones would be incredibly difficult. Helos don't have air-to-air radar. So, finding the drone would be nearly impossible. Once found, to shoot it down, I refer you to WWI aerial kill rates: it would take a lot skill/luck to do so. How far away is the drone from the helo? Well...is it a big drone or a small drone? 

The larger, fixed-wing, drones could be vulnerable to this. But not anything smaller.

Any shootdowns would be few and far between. IMO.

[Taranis]

 

[Haiduk]

Russian ships have removed numbers and names from own hulls

Resently claimed as hit with MLRS Russian OPV Vasiliy Bykov with number 368 turned out to be intact. What vessel we hit and set fire - this question still open

[Haiduk]

US intelligence - Putin can threaten the West with nuclear weapon if war drags 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-17/putin-is-likely-to-make-nuclear-threats-if-war-drags-u-s-says?utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&utm_content=business&utm_medium=social&cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business

Edited March 18, 2022 by Haiduk

[billbindc]

15 hours ago, Machor said:

 

Curious if anyone's looking at or knows something about the reports of a Russian buildup northwest of Kyiv? Pretty obviously NATO is interested this morning: 

 

Edited March 18, 2022 by billbindc

[Haiduk]

Some Russian vehicles around Kyiv

Abandoned T-72B mod.1989 with TMT-K mine roller. Looks like this thing didn't help and the tank has "found" AT-mine. The tank has "O" marking, so this is Brovary direction

Damaged and abandoned BMD-2, NW direction

Edited March 18, 2022 by Haiduk

[LongLeftFlank]

1 hour ago, BeondTheGrave said:

I would just modify that a little bit, his longer term history is pretty far off (in this one thread he is saying things about Brandenburg/Prussia that are just wrong. In the 'doesnt know what he's even saying' fashion. Reading any of the basic texts,  ie: The German Way of War would undermine his argument here. His analysis of Soviet Naval policy is also wrong though more subtly, perhaps though this is even more of a blow to his overall argument.) Has good understanding of the Russian court, but its fairly limited. 

Perhaps you might honour us with your own better educated views on these issues then, instead of just pronouncing "he's wrong". Do these errors invalidate his conclusions?

Are we expected to defer to your say so and disregard him en bloc?

Falsum in unum, falsum in omnibus?

(And referring us to textbooks is not an refutation, it's handwaving).

EDIT:  Sorry, this comes across as a little snippy, but I would like to have better information on these topics if it's out there. However, I don't have time to wade through entire books, nor do I think that's necessary to understand the essential moving parts for this conflict.

Edited March 18, 2022 by LongLeftFlank

[akd]

2 hours ago, Sgt Joch said:

well I guess I am a bit disappointed. I think it would be important to have clear rules on what is allowed or not allowed in this discussion so that it does not degenerate into a free for all. I thought we were trying to keep this as an objective discussion of the war and strategy by both sides and not trying to drag domestic politics into it.

What col. Macgregor as said in various interviews, basically that the U.S. has no vital security interest in Ukraine is an opinion held by a lot of people, both democrats and republicans. You can agree or disagree, but that does not mean he should be painted as a Putin stooge or as U.S. Democrats have been saying that there is a "Putin wing of the GOP", which basically means anyone who does not think we should back Ukraine 110%.

also copying @BFCElvis, as moderator of the thread.

 

Okay, let’s stick to his idiotic analysis of the war on the ground then.  This was from Feb. 27th:

Quote

Macgregor, who previously supported Russia’s annexation of Crimea, argued, “What is happening now is the battle in Eastern Ukraine is really almost over, all the Ukrainian troops there have been largely surrounded and cut off... and if they don't surrender in next 24 hours, I suspect the Russians will ultimately annihilate them... The game is over.” Russian state media flooded their programs with translated clips of Macgregor’s proclamations, using them in support of their own messaging designed to demoralize the Ukrainians.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/russian-state-tv-tells-ukraine-to-listen-to-fox-news-guest-doug-macgregor-and-kneel-to-vladimir-putin

Edited March 18, 2022 by akd

[Haiduk]

Good thread why Ukraine didn't destroy Russian 40-miles supply convoy in first days of invasion and why this turned out as strategical victory

 

 

Edited March 18, 2022 by Haiduk

[akd]

Train meets advancing Russian BMP-3s on Feb. 24th:

https://t.me/periskop_pacific/150

[The_Capt]

2 hours ago, Sgt Joch said:

well I guess I am a bit disappointed. I think it would be important to have clear rules on what is allowed or not allowed in this discussion so that it does not degenerate into a free for all. I thought we were trying to keep this as an objective discussion of the war and strategy by both sides and not trying to drag domestic politics into it.

What col. Macgregor as said in various interviews, basically that the U.S. has no vital security interest in Ukraine is an opinion held by a lot of people, both democrats and republicans. You can agree or disagree, but that does not mean he should be painted as a Putin stooge or as U.S. Democrats have been saying that there is a "Putin wing of the GOP", which basically means anyone who does not think we should back Ukraine 110%.

also copying @BFCElvis, as moderator of the thread.

 

I will leave it to Steve and BFCElvis to determine what is, or is not, acceptable on their own forum. 

I can only judge Col (or is it LCol?) Macgregor on what he presented, which was "different" to say the least.  His assessment that "Russia has already won" is definitely contrary to most mainstream military assessment, or media for that matter.  However, Col M argues that Ukrainians are "cut off" and "in cauldrons", near a total collapse tipping point.  Further he argues that the Ukrainians are only capable of "pin pricks" against the Russian offensive.   His noted reason for the slow Russian advance is based on strict ROEs from Putin to "avoid/limit damaging Ukraine" as much as possible, so humanitarian bascially .

So, ok, that is one point of view.  I am left wondering where Col M is getting his information to build this picture because it clearly does not match what we have been seeing - the "so what?" here is that clearly either he is very wrong or mainstream analysis/assessment is very wrong, not a lot of middle ground here.  Thoughts:

- We have a very bad habit of "lack of accountability" for what gets said on the internet.  Once the smoke clears on all this I can only hope that credibility of sources are held to account (faint hope).  We have politicians who have said things, pundits who have said things and that needs to be remembered and assessed after this is over.  If Col M is correct, or even just mostly correct, then we clearly missed some big signs or were totally taken astray, and by "we" I mean just about every mainstream venue.

-  Based on what we have seen on social media, a steady stream of open source information, Col M's thesis appears the total opposite to observation.  If this is all "fake news", then it merits as one of the largest and most thorough disinformation campaigns in human history.  If the Ukrainians, who are according to Col M on their last legs, have managed to create enough "fakes" to show over 1500 lost Russian vehicles, and Russian damage to civilian centers rivalling the invasion of Poland, this is an incredible feat of information warfare and I am talking one that dwarfs Chinese capability.  There is "fake news" and then there is mountains of "fake news".

- If Col Ms assessment of Russians adhering to strict ROEs to the point that they have delayed operational advances to the amount we have seen, then the Russian military is likely be best disciplined military force in human history.  They have literally violated almost every doctrinal principle of warfare in order to meet the demands of the political level.  For a professional military, in the middle of a major invasion, to delay offensive action - particularly against an opponent on their last legs - is one of the most breathtaking displays of military discipline I have ever heard of.  The military risks associated with doing this are extreme, not the least of which is allowing time and space for a western-backed resistance to arm and organize.  Many Russian soldiers will die because of this "restraint".  Problem here is that the Russian military does not appear well disciplined; egregious attacks on civilians, videos of looting, abandoned vehicles, radio intercepts and "lost" PWs point the exact opposite way - unless of course this is also "fake news", and we are back to "how the hell did the Ukrainians pull that off?!".

So these are just a few of Col Ms points that I walked away with and I gotta say that if he is correct well we know that this has been a war changing use of information warfare on the part of the Ukrainians, and the Russian military is nearing Spartan levels of control and discipline.  However, I have to quote Carl Sagan here "the weight of evidence for an extraordinary claim must be proportioned to its strangeness" and one retired Col's "say so" is not enough to go on.

Finally as to "why Ukraine matters?"  Well I am not going to get drawn into a country-specific political debate; however, the simple reasons are 1) it is inhumane; however that is a little to "hippy dippy" for some, 2) there is no more "over there" in a globalized world and 3) Russia has fundamentally challenged the global system that has made all of us in the west, rich, powerful, entitled and frankly "dumb and lazy". 

Let's explore that last one.

The global system that our grandparents/great-grandparents fought and died for and despite all its inequities -there are many- it resulted in massive and persistent stability (crazy but true) and economic, population and technological growth orders of magnitude higher and faster than any point in human history.  This did not happen because a god(s) in heaven ordained it, or weird racial theories that still float out there, it happened because we built it and defended it.  Russia's actions in Ukraine are a threat to security because they challenge that system, they got out of line and they are (or at least were) a global power.  Such actions do nothing for all that stability I mentioned, in fact they act as a global disruptor, and that is definitely a threat to us all.  If anyone is too ignorant or thinks this is some sort of political leverage issue, they frankly deserve what happens next if we let this slide. And what happens next is a new global order being written by someone else while we most likely stand around and blame each other for it.

 

 

[billbindc]

7 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

 

The global system that our grandparents/great-grandparents fought and died for and despite all its inequities -there are many- it resulted in massive and persistent stability (crazy but true) and economic, population and technological growth orders of magnitude higher and faster than any point in human history.  This did not happen because a god(s) in heaven ordained it, or weird racial theories that still float out there, it happened because we built it and defended it.  Russia's actions in Ukraine are a threat to security because they challenge that system, they got out of line and they are (or at least were) a global power.  Such actions do nothing for all that stability I mentioned, in fact they act as a global disruptor, and that is definitely a threat to us all.  If anyone is too ignorant or thinks this is some sort of political leverage issue, they frankly deserve what happens next if we let this slide. And what happens next is a new global order being written by someone else while we most likely stand around and blame each other for it.

 

 

I love this summation and at the same time I'm embarrassed at how often I've had to give a similar one to people who should know better.

[BeondTheGrave]

56 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Perhaps you might honour us with your own better educated views on these issues then, instead of just pronouncing "he's wrong". Do these errors invalidate his conclusions?

Are we expected to defer to your say so and disregard him en bloc?

Falsum in unum, falsum in omnibus?

(And referring us to textbooks is not an refutation, it's handwaving).

 

Aggressive.

He refers to the history of Brandenburg, trying to make the point that Brandenburg was forced to chose between becoming a naval power and becoming a land power. This is part of his larger argument that, for reasons of court politics, Russia failed to develop a clear focus in land power primacy, and so this explains why it is today struggling. He argues that Prussia abandoned its naval power colonial aspirations in the 18th century to become a "land power max" country. Setting aside the rather burdensome video metaphor, this is pretty roundly wrong and ignores nearly 100 years of the countries history which led to this choice. Brandenburg was devastated by the 30yrs War, it had been forced to repeatedly 'pick sides' at the point of a pike as its military was not powerful enough to preserve the country from outside threats. This, not the failure of any maritime policy, led to the rise of Brandenburg as a land power. Robert Citino, in his book (which is not a textbook, and is very much worth the read) highlights that this initial choice for security transformed after the union with Prussia into a question for a land corridor. Excellence in Prussian arms was developed as early as the Scanian of 1678  in which the Prussian army famously mounted sleds and conducted a rapid winter march from its quarters into the depths of Swedish occupied Germany. So dramatic, and important, was this to the Prussian ethos that Heinz Guderian himself said the campaign was one of his inspirations for his ideas. 

Anyway I dispute even the basic premise of this 'naval max or land max' analysis. Is too brutish. The US is the preeminent global land, sea, and air power. Dont think most countries would challenge that really, except China. Who is currently a major land power trying to go to sea. And of course the British had the RN in the early 20th century. The British Army in 1938 was right up there with the German in terms of modernization, thought it was small. And nobody remembers that the British also had the largest volunteer army in the world, the British Army in India had almost 3.5mil volunteers in 1945. More even than the US. Lots of people like to talk about the German system, but really the British were probably still the worlds leading power right before WWII, they had the biggest and best navy, the biggest army, and one of the best motorized cores as well. 

Later, the poster discusses the history of Soviet maritime strategy. But its also pretty off, to be honest. Documents are quite clear really that Stalin wanted, after WWII, to build a navy which he thought would be able to challenge the RN and USN for control of the seas. But, just as important, Stalin saw the navy as a prestige tool. Some have tried to explain the Second World War, especially the war in Asia, as having been driven in part by the unequal distribution of battleship allotments in the interwar naval treaties. While I dont think he thought in those exact terms, Stalin felt that capital ships equated to great power status on some level and so he wanted them built. The plans were laid out and IIRC the keels of several ships were laid, but Stalin's death interrupted this program. Khrushchev diverted those resources both into the Army and into civilian programs. But his successor, Brezhnev, rebuilt some of the naval program. While the technology had changed, many of the motivations were the same. Brezhnev, especially after 1968, tried to rehabilitate the USSR to the rest of the world. He introduce a global strategy which aimed to turn decolonizing and decolonized nations over to the USSR and defeat the west this way. Prestige and good relations are important to that, and nothing says good relations like a port visit. Building up the navy also gave the USSR the ability to participate more directly in global crises, ala 1973 and the Yom Kippur War. And of course it would have checked Khrushchev's biggest failure: the Cuban Missile Crisis. This is also the era of admiral Gorchakov, the Soviet submarine theorist. Westerners love him because he thinks like we do about naval power and wanted the USSR to do what we would have, fight a third battle of the Atlantic. But Gorchakov is really actually a marginal figure in the USSR's military establishment. Its critical to see the revived Soviet Navy in the context of what it was meant to do. 1) it had to secure the SLBM bastions in the White Sea and around the Artic ice cap. 2) It had to protect the USSR's long coastlines from both subsurface and naval aviation threats, a big fear was a rapid USN deep penetration raid against USSR nuclear facilities or, of course, the SSBNs. Something BTW the USN practiced and was very good at. 3) Only once these two were done would the navy be permitted to move onto an offensive footing and operate along traditional lines. Which is to say never, as the new US maritime strategy of the 70s and 80s called for projecting power against the Soviet coasts in a way that would have never allowed for the security required to satisfy 1&2. More importantly, the basic defensive mission of the Navy was important in that it did not detract from the Army's offensive mission in central Europe. That is, the Navy was always the branch getting leftovers, not dictating the whole pie. It was assumed that what was at sea would be destroyed (so better have it take a shot at a carrier at least!) Once war was declared reserves, safe in the bastions, would be parceled out to accomplish the three missions as befitted the strategic and operational situation in central & norther Europe. 

And then we get into more minor things, like the fact that he calls the Russian operational theory Blitzkrieg. Its not. They grew from the same root, Cold War or even modern Deep Battle is very different than the modern form of the blitz practiced by western nations. 

Like I said, the person seems to have a strong understanding of Putin and his court, but his use of history is pretty clumsy. Worse yet this makes some of the analysis suspect because a big part of his argument in the thread that was first linked is based on this idea that Russia has a historical tendency of overdiversification of arms. Except, historically, thats not really true. So it kind of leaves him out there twisting in the wind with some of these conclusions. 

Also do we really need to worship all our sources as heroes? Just because Col M served once and said some things people like doesn't mean his word is inviolate forever. Just because someone published a book you like doesn't meant this time theyre right by default. Just because a guy on twitter says one thing you like doesn't make it a personal attack if someone else disagrees. I dont like a lot of the things I read, and if I didn't complain I'd hardly be a Grognard now would I?  Judge somebody by their words and ideas on a case by case basis. Does what they say pass the smell test? Does it fit into the other information youre reading? Is this person mainstream on this issue or are they are bucking the orthodox, if so why? Is it to be contrarian, or because theyre crazy, or dumb, or are they on to something truly different? You can even apply the same test to me! Im an asshole and surely most of the dumb things I say will wither under a critical gaze, but better to be critical than to accept the things I say whole cloth. After all I could be a crazyperson. 

Edited March 18, 2022 by BeondTheGrave

[Haiduk]

Looks like tank directly hit EW asset (R-330 family?) with HE

 

Edited March 18, 2022 by Haiduk