How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[JonS]

Just now, Ultradave said:

you wouldn't expect them to abide but such minor niceties as this, would you?

No, of course not. But that isn't the point. We don't expect murderers to abide by the prohibition on murder, or thieves the prohibition on theft, fast drivers the speed limit. The point is to provide a means for reckoning when the bill later comes due.

I.e., along with Bucha and Mariupol and the rest, add dicking around at Chernobyl to the charge sheet.

[db_zero]

Civilians getting massacred, raped, gassed...its been going on for years. Its been reported and in all honesty the West just sighed and went about business as usual.

Now that its happening in Europe its gaining traction. Its been alluded to in a previous post weeks ago. Not a pleasant reality to have to look at, but something to think about. 

[akd]

33 minutes ago, c3k said:

My point is that the only thing keeping Putin from deploying conscripted Russians into the attack on Ukraine is that there is a Russian law prohibiting such a thing.

Do you, or does anyone, think that Putin would let some words on paper keep him from his goal? That he'd rather be embarrassed, stymied, undermined, perhaps overthrown, than ignore a law? A law passed by a system which he controls?

And, whatever his excuses to use conscripts, if the West or anyone else (as if there is any effective internal resistance left in Russia) cries "foul", he'll resort to his usual threats.

So, I think I do have a deep understanding of how Putin can leverage his nation's manpower so he would not lose face.

Much like the West looked aside as he invaded in 2014 (tourists, little green men, Tigres from ebay, etc.) he'll toss out a facile excuse (Ukraine is a rogue province (hey, it's working for China vis a vis Taiwan)) and expect the West to look at their feet, mumble excuses, and not do anything.

The current modus operandi of the West supplying Ukraine with light weapons has not yet changed. Will it? I don't know. But I do know that Putin is a tyrant and that he can do what he wishes and just has to cloak it in the thinnest garb for it to be accepted by Russia.

There is no law that says conscripts cannot be used in Ukraine.  That was a “promise.”  The only legal constraint requires 4-months of training before deployment to combat.  But since nothing was changed to retain the previous draft and it seems that they will be released as planned (but probably not before heavy pressure to sign contracts), it doesn’t seem likely that is the current plan.  Why not drain occupied Donbass and Crimea of all fighting age males first at no political cost before even contemplating such changes?

Russia still functions as state of laws, or at least part of the legitimacy of the regime is an illusion / veneer of such for the people that matter (wealthy and middle class). The laws are corrupt and bent to favor those in power, and increasingly so, but Putin cannot wave his hand and say “I am now law.”  There are lawyers, courts, processes, etc. and changes require changes to the law via the legislature.  Putin can likely force that, but to maintain the illusion of a state based on laws, there is an extended process required.

As an example, see the internal security troops refusing service in Ukraine and taking their refusals to court with legal representation.  The law has not been waived or changed to force them to go to Ukraine.  The pressure being brought to bear on them is more social than legal.

Edited April 5, 2022 by akd

[c3k]

10 minutes ago, akd said:

There is no law that says conscripts cannot be used in Ukraine.  That was a “promise.”  The only legal constraint requires 4-months of training before deployment to combat.  But since nothing was changed to retain the previous draft and it seems that they will be released as planned (but probably not before heavy pressure to sign contracts), it doesn’t seem likely that is the current plan.  Why not drain occupied Donbass and Crimea of all fighting age males first at no political cost before even contemplating such changes?

Russia still functions as state of laws, or at least part of the legitimacy of the regime is an illusion / veneer of such for the people that matter (wealthy and middle class). The laws are corrupt and bent to favor those in power, and increasingly so, but Putin cannot wave his hand and say “I am now law.”  There are lawyers, courts, processes, etc. and changes require changes to the law via the legislature.  Putin can likely force that, but to maintain the illusion of a state based on laws, there is an extended process required.

As an example, see the internal security troops refusing service in Ukraine and taking their refusals to court with legal representation.  The law has not been waived or changed to force them to go to Ukraine.  The pressure being brought to bear on them is more social than legal.

Perhaps my understanding is not as deep as I thought?  to @The Steppenwulf

Glad to know the conscript use is just a "promise". 

Let's see what Putin does when the losses in the Donbas can no longer be sustained with the force-in-being as it was when it invaded.

 

Edited April 5, 2022 by c3k

[Machor]

3 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

a hot blond woman

Steve, time to get off the screen! 

Gevorg Mirzayan:

[Battlefront.com]

The way I see it, C3K and AKD are both correct.

C3K's point that if Putin wants it done he can find a way to do it is completely valid.  Putin wanted to serve as President again... boom, laws changed and he's President again.  Anybody that stands in his way of something he wants generally gets an "opportunity" to change his/her mind, and if not then become another of the regime's statistics.  Getting the rubber stamp Duma to approve something wouldn't be difficult.  Therefore, if Putin wanted to have unfettered "legal" grounds to pump hundreds of thousands of conscripts into Ukraine he can make it "legal" one way or another.

The primary problem with this is what AKD raised, which is the practical issues surrounding doing this.  A move for mass conscription to fight a war without calling it a war could be too much for Russians to swallow.  Russia lacks the equipment to outfit another large force with anything other than, maybe, uniforms.  I don't think he cares about having enough trainers and time for even the most basic military skills.  Then there's the lack of cash available to do any of this, not to mention increasing expenditures to replace things like food, ammo, fuel, etc. that's been consumed.

The fact is that from a practical standpoint it is going to take many months to put together an even 1/4 arsed infantry force to push into Ukraine.  The war will be decided before then. 

Steve

[LongLeftFlank]

9 hours ago, c3k said:

Military age males are about 10% of the total population according to that. That graphic says total is ~146 million, so MAMs number about 15 million.

If Russia has suffered 15,000 KIA and another 45,000 WIA, that's a mere 60k from that manpower barrel. 

Given that a society cannot draft 100% of the MAM into combat...let's say about 1/3 can be used. 5 million available, 60k casualties.

Russia can dig a lot deeper...

Edited to add: and, what the hell are they going to equip them with???

Ha! that's our 'tree of CM victory is watered with the blood of Pixeltruppen' @c3k we all know and love!

Small quibble: it's actually 7.5% of total, so cut everything by a quarter, but yeah, they could also call up some older reservists and women too....

As you know well, and others have touched on, drafting, training and deploying (I leave aside equipping) those theoretical 4-5 million souls, a good proportion of whom barely speak Russian, in finite time (even to World War 1 "Pals battalion" standards) is far from a straightforward exercise. 

But I will leave further commentary to those with 'egg on their hats.'

In contrast, Ukraine has a population of c40 million, (ex refugees)... c.20m males x 10% / 3 = 2/3 of a million, more or less? Plus older folks able to serve in TA militias, logistics etc.

But based on visual evidence alone, vastly better fighting material on average to fight a modern war.

Not to mention @The_Capt's factor of 'will', which often (not always) trumps numbers, at least in a 'short' war.

 

[Battlefront.com]

3 hours ago, Los said:

Any political decision that does not directly result in the destruction of as many Russian forces as possible is a waste of time at this point.

The maximum effective range of  Condemnations, proclamations, hopes, and prayers...is zero F'ing meters.....

Absolutely.  Grinding Russia's military capacity into dust and cutting off the money to rebuild it is the best way to ensure Russia isn't a threat for a long time to come.  It is also a really good way to undermine Putin's ability to remain in power.

Steve

P.S.  nice to see you Los!

[Machor]

4 hours ago, Haiduk said:

Today Russians issued a video with about 250 UKR soldiers surrendered in Mariupol. Probably they completely exhausted all ammunition and had no choise.

Here's the video of the surrender - said to be Ukrainian marines. Everyone's understandably concerned about the treatment of Ukrainian civilians, but we should be keeping a very close watch on the fate of these soldiers as well:

 

[db_zero]

I don't know how much credence you can give to reports, but Syrian mercenaries lured by money are currently being trained for deployment. What their actual number is who knows. Same with Wagner Mercenaries. Their combat effectiveness is doubtful, but their tendency to rape, pillage and plunder if given the opportunity should not be underestimated.

The word of Russian atrocities has undoubtedly leaked out to Ukrainian forces. 

We're probably entering a very brutal phase of the war and a cycle of unrelenting brutality.

[Battlefront.com]

7 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Ha! that's our 'tree of CM victory is watered with the blood of Pixeltruppen' @c3k we all know and love!

Small quibble: it's actually 7.5% of total, so cut everything by a quarter, but yeah, they could also call up some older reservists and women too....

As you know well, and others have touched on, drafting, training and deploying (I leave aside equipping) those theoretical 4-5 million souls, a good proportion of whom barely speak Russian, in finite time (even to World War 1 "Pals battalion" standards) is far from a straightforward exercise. 

But I will leave further commentary to those with 'egg on their hats.'

In contrast, Ukraine has a population of c40 million, (ex refugees)... c.20m males x 10% / 3 = 2/3 of a million, more or less? Plus older folks able to serve in TA militias, logistics etc.

But based on visual evidence alone, vastly better fighting material on average to fight a modern war.

Not to mention @The_Capt's factor of 'will', which often (not always) trumps numbers, at least in a 'short' war.

 

There is another constraint on Russia's ability to call up military aged males... they are needed to keep the economy going.

I know Putin isn't thinking long term here, but this war is causing Russia's "brain drain" to turn into "brain hemorrhage".  The best and the brightest have already been leaving Russia, with the start of the war another wave left.  Add an expanded draft into the mix and even more will leave.  Russia's demographics are already pretty grim, this just makes it so much worse.

Steve

[sburke]

12 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

The fact is that from a practical standpoint it is going to take many months to put together an even 1/4 arsed infantry force to push into Ukraine.  The war will be decided before then. 

Steve

Like these guys?

Conscripts sent to fight by pro-Russia Donbas get little training, old rifles, poor supplies - sources (msn.com)

[db_zero]

Its already been said the Sun isn't the most reputable source of information and the story is in the tinfoil or coverup category depending on how you lean. 

In either case that's not what I find interesting. 

What is interesting is the "ghostbuster anti-drone" tech and the Stingers at the ready, which in youtube videos is reputedly anti-drone capable...

My uneducated guess is if whiz bang anti drone tech is light enough to be carried on the back of a soldier, then its light enough to be mounted on a tank and the tank can generate a lot more juice (power) to a jamming device.

Next question-is IFF installed and used on drones.

https://www.the-sun.com/news/5045679/us-warship-car-sized-ball-of-light-ufos/

Edited April 5, 2022 by db_zero

[Battlefront.com]

NYT article (paywall) on the battle for Vasylkiv.  The article casts doubt on Ukraine shooting down any large transport aircraft in the first days of the war.:

Quote

But the wreckage of any downed planes has proved elusive. Members of the territorial defense units, many of them ex-military volunteers as well as local hunters, said they have combed the woods and surrounding countryside but have not found wreckage of any planes.

But Ukraine’s skies were full of Russian helicopters in the first nights of the war, said Yuriy Ignat, public relations officer at the Ukrainian Air Force Command. “We do not think they came in big planes, but there were many saboteur groups in many places.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/02/world/europe/ukraine-russian-defeat-vasylkiv.html?action=click&algo=bandit-alpha-decay-0.4-time-cutoff-30&alpha=0.02&block=trending_recirc&fellback=false&imp_id=693546391&impression_id=2fa5fc6b-b485-11ec-84b9-9188482e2ce5&index=7&pgtype=Article&pool=pool%2F91fcf81c-4fb0-49ff-bd57-a24647c85ea1&region=footer&req_id=929001741&surface=eos-most-popular-story&variant=2_bandit-alpha-decay-0.4-time-cutoff-30

[dan/california]

2 hours ago, c3k said:

My point is that the only thing keeping Putin from deploying conscripted Russians into the attack on Ukraine is that there is a Russian law prohibiting such a thing.

Do you, or does anyone, think that Putin would let some words on paper keep him from his goal? That he'd rather be embarrassed, stymied, undermined, perhaps overthrown, than ignore a law? A law passed by a system which he controls?

And, whatever his excuses to use conscripts, if the West or anyone else (as if there is any effective internal resistance left in Russia) cries "foul", he'll resort to his usual threats.

So, I think I do have a deep understanding of how Putin can leverage his nation's manpower so he would not lose face.

Much like the West looked aside as he invaded in 2014 (tourists, little green men, Tigres from ebay, etc.) he'll toss out a facile excuse (Ukraine is a rogue province (hey, it's working for China vis a vis Taiwan)) and expect the West to look at their feet, mumble excuses, and not do anything.

The current modus operandi of the West supplying Ukraine with light weapons has not yet changed. Will it? I don't know. But I do know that Putin is a tyrant and that he can do what he wishes and just has to cloak it in the thinnest garb for it to be accepted by Russia.

It is not that he can't ,but there are several layers of friction he has to deal with. First of all he has to admit that it has gone VERY badly so far. He doesn't want to do that. And then he almost has to train the trainers to turn more conscripts than the usual yearly take into even the current lousy Russian standard of soldier. Since they are apparently raiding the training schools for competent personnel now, that is even harder than usual. Then he has too equip said conscripts when 15 years of supposedly significant investment has gone up in smoke. All of these problems could be addressed, mostly, with time and enormous amounts of money. I would hazard a guess that he is a lot closer to two years to show up with a whole lot more army than he currently has, than two months, though.  Even then he would need REAL help from the Chinese to equip them with much more than rifles. Russia's supposedly vast war stocks seem to be mostly unprocessed scrap metal.

Edited April 5, 2022 by dan/california
spelling

[chris talpas]

Could this approach work offensively?

Use switchblade drones to target artillery assets, then use javelin NLAW to deal with tanks & IFVs and then finally artillery going after the softer targets.  Use SAM assets to protect the artillery since ATGM equipped infantry can be more dispersed and easily hidden.

Essentially trying to use stand-off technology  to minimize UA losses.

Edited April 5, 2022 by chris talpas
Grammar

[Kinophile]

A real danger with Russia now concentrating on the East is that its basically doing now, what it should have done on D1 - a large scale operation yet in limited geographic scope, close to its bases & supply, within a cockpit-type geographic area that it surrounds on 3 sides, using every available unit, with long open spaces for some good ol' fashioned GoW hammer time and PGM use.

Great for them, they're finally doing the "right" thing despite their very best efforts, but yes - this AO and basic plan (cut off the JTO forces) was the original and best option for them. They're on a course that makes strategic AND operational AND tactical sense.

Except, of course, instead of coming out of the gate fresh and mean and spanky clean, now they're doing it with badly eroded morale, numbers, equipment and munitions (PGMs and other techy toys), the army-wide knowledge that the UA has the edge on them in tactical ability and weaponry, the RuAF is STILL faffing about (wtf!?), Generals keep dying, their officers keep using the same ****ty tactics, the new guys are utterly unaware of combat reality and more of a danger to the vets than the UKR, UKR has started blowing up Russian fuel depots in Russia and also now they're getting "extra days leave" instead of money (IF they live through this, of course).

So...not ideal. 

Plus the real mud is starting and the geographic area is one giant drainage plain. The Steppe is dryer than the north of Ukraine but it absolutely gets Spring rains and they're about to start. This will make paved roads even more vital, and vulnerable. 

If this turns into Kiev 2.0 ref "Light" Infantry plinking tens of Russian wagons every day then this battle will become the death march of the Russian Army.

So, Drone & ATGM happy time is a'coming, boys!

Edited April 5, 2022 by Kinophile

[LongLeftFlank]

1 hour ago, db_zero said:

Their combat effectiveness is doubtful, but their tendency to rape, pillage and plunder if given the opportunity should not be underestimated.

If given the opportunity....

I am thinking that Rus longship has sailed, excepting despoilment of the unfortunate (heavily Russian speaking) swathe running Kherson to Izium.

Operationally, I am wondering whether the UA "Eighth Route Army" forces can manage to shift and execute a double 'backhand blow' while the rasputitza remains?

1.   Relentless annihilation of Russian forces (VDV) north of the Dniepr, in parallel with liberation (or perhaps isolation) of Kherson and environs, putting the Crimea land bridge to Melitopol under artillery fire.

2.  Envelop and defeat Russian forces in the forming salient around Izium. They will have dug in by now (been looking for imagery to confirm) and doctrinally are still very much tied to their supply hog AFVs (read bunkers / zinc coffins / graves for seven brothers).

Grab the good ground (in these times, that actually means ground the *enemy* values, not you necessarily), then let those battered RA 'reinforcements' from the north feed themselves futilely into the wood chipper as they frantically try to reinforce beleaguered hedgehogs and clear their LOCs. Compel them to keep attacking while they are still off balance and terrible at it, that's the point!

Risky? Bloody? Hell yes, of course, RAF air power is no joke. But taking no risks means accepting the loss of the southern oblasts, spun as another 'genius Putin win'. And a rematch later once the RA has had a chance to reorg and refit....

P.S.  Could Izium be the 'Ukrainian Stalingrad?' After a month, the UA still firmly holds the battered south bank....

FWIW (30 March):  https://theglobalherald.com/news/ukraine-war-ukrainian-troops-in-izium-confident-of-victory/

 

Edited April 5, 2022 by LongLeftFlank

[danfrodo]

13 minutes ago, chris talpas said:

Could this approach work offensively?

Use switchblade drones to target artillery assets, then use javelin NLAW to deal with tanks & IFVs and then finally artillery going after the softer targets.  Use SAM assets to protect the artillery since ATGM equipped infantry can be more dispersed and easily hidden.

Essentially trying to use stand-off technology  to minimize UA losses.

maybe that's the way to go.  And mask these offensives by conspicuous shows of heavy weapons in other sectors to draw Russian forces & attention. 

I wonder if UA now or soon has the the ability to dictate the action.  If Russia can't make any significant offensive action, then UA can thin line w less risk.  Kind of like eastern front after Stalingrad.  Russians could locally mass because they could thin lines without much fear of major german breakthroughs -- where were the germans going to go that was going to threaten soviets in a strategic manner?  The russians were able to locally have big numerical advantages locally despite not having huge numerical advantage over the whole front (until late in war).

[dan/california]

My concern is that while the Russians are having one attack of sense, at least in strictly military sense, they might have another one. I agree completely that if the Russians try to attack on any scale they will get wrecked, and hopefully wrecked so badly they have withdraw to 2/24 lines at a minimum. I am concerned that if they just stand pat with exactly what they have they are going to be HARD to dig out. Putin can BS that hie has a land bridge and that constitutes some sort of victory. The parts of Kherson on the far side of the bridge excepted. That bridge can be dropped, and then Russians on the other side would be bleeped. But I just can't figure out how the Ukrainians conduct a set piece attack against prepared positions without vastly more air and missile defence in terrain as exposed as it is around the Black Sea coast.

[Kinophile]

UKR wont do a set piece against prepared RUS defenses.  That would be dumb and suicidal, and the UA GHQ aint that.

Russia digging in is a good thing, IF UKR can retain tactical ISR superiority.

[dan/california]

https://saveualist.com/

 A sort of official version of the the Ukrainians' shopping list.

[Combatintman]

5 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Well, a hot blond woman said it so it must be true!

Steve

That drew me into watching the clip ... and then I discovered this epic Ukrainian-themed jacket, shirt and tie combo wardrobe fail by the tinfoil hat wearing guy ...

Their info ops are, like most other things we've seen, mediocre beyond belief.

[Combatintman]

7 hours ago, Vacillator said:

I assume that's only the very first part of the 'huge convoy' but it looks like some artillery with several issues.  From their point of view at least they have some fuel I suppose.

2S19 battery group - seems that eight guns is the norm these days, up from six in the Cold War.  I've seen other footage of D-30s in groups of eight which leads to the eight vs six assessment.

[sburke]

8 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

UKR wont do a set piece against prepared RUS defenses.  That would be dumb and suicidal, and the UA GHQ aint that.

Russia digging in is a good thing, IF UKR can retain tactical ISR superiority.

it is 150 km from Belgorod to Izium that passes by Kharkov.  Assuming at a minimum they have to secure 3 km on each side of their supply route that is 450 sq km they need to establish control over. (that is just accounting for AT teams not arty)  Assuming the northern pincer has a goal of Kramatorsk that is almost another 60 km.  Mariupol is about 180 km from Kramatorsk.

Russia could try to dig in, but they simply don't have the manpower.  Assuming they could even pull off an advance of that length.  Every km Russia advances is just that much more ground they have to secure for an increasingly tenuous and vulnerable supply line.