How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[db_zero]

I’m waiting to see what happens on May 9th. If Putin mobilizes the country, declares WW3 as some have speculated then we’ll have to see what that entails.

Does it give the theater commander authorization to use a tac nuke at his discretion? 

 

[chuckdyke]

23 minutes ago, Machor said:

why are these howitzers designed this way?

[Machor]

nvm

Edited April 30, 2022 by Machor
Wrong info on the M777

[Machor]

Finally something lighthearted, as an A-10 fanboy: 

 

[db_zero]

Speaking of the economy the Russian economy isn’t the only one in trouble-the US economy is looking shaky. Not in the same category as Russia but a severe recession is not out of the cards…

While not highly probable something along the lines of 2008 isn’t out of the question. Putins use of a tac nuke could be a huge shock to the US economic prospects given it’s already fragile state….GDP falling last quarter, stock markets in bear territory, inflation raging and the Fed way behind the 8 ball, forced to aggressively raise rates while dumping 50 billion a month in MBS onto the markets…

Have a great weekend everyone!

Edited April 30, 2022 by db_zero

[chuckdyke]

1 minute ago, Machor said:

M777 has 360 degree traverse.

Required possibly in an isolated fire base. Depends on the mission. 

[danfrodo]

Given the massive, generational economic damage coming Russia's way, the only rational way out is it kill Putin and some of his cronies and blame everything on them, then make big concessions to Ukraine as a peace offering.  Of course, there will be a "stab in the back" myth in the Russian fascist circles, but hopefully they won't get to take power. 

There is no other way forward.  If Putin stays in power it's all bad possibilities: grinding war w increasingly powerful Ukraine, severe and never ending economic depression, dramatically increased repression within Russia, possible break-away regions from Russia.

When one little bullet could start Russia on the path to recovery.  One little bullet. 

[chuckdyke]

Soviet economy during the Cold War. It is not as good as last year but better than next year. For some reason they expelled 'The Times' correspondent. No good appealing to a sense of humor. 

[FancyCat]

Assuming Russia isn't attempting to bluff it's way into either nuclear war vs favorable peace, the use of a tactical nuke to gain a advantage in Ukraine is pretty useless. It won't give Russia a military advantage, it would utterly poison Ukrainian defeatism, it would shatter Russia's international image and invite escalation by NATO.

If Russia is intent on securing peace thru deployment of nuclear weapons, mind you it opens the door to new precedents, like the ability for nuclear armed states to strongarm non-nuclear states, it would allow Russia to threaten NATO in a future conflict over Eastern Europe, etc.

If it's meant for a terror weapon, I don't think it would work that way, if it is to secure a tactical advantage, it won't fix Russian disadvantages preventing their offensive into the rest of Ukraine.

While Putin may want to persuade the world into considering his position on nukes is dangerously close to launch, it is really vital the world holds against the viability of nuclear weapons in a war of aggression.

[Machor]

34 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

Required possibly in an isolated fire base. Depends on the mission. 

My bad: The M777 apparently has the same traverse as the M198, not 360 degrees - I deleted all my posts referring to this.

[Battlefront.com]

You can tell a lot by the state of an HQ:

 

[Battlefront.com]

4 hours ago, IMHO said:

Russia cannot borrow at whatever interest it may want to offer. It's prohibited under sanctions regime.

That is why I said it doesn't really matter right now, only after Russia is let back into the international community

Steve

[Alphaomega]

Since the start of this war, there's been a nagging fear of the consequences of Russia losing - and losing badly.

And that's exactly what appears to be happening based on the expert opinions brought forward in this forum and elsewhere.

Russia's economy, military power and international prestige is in danger of being crushed for decades. There just doesn't seem to be an acceptable end-game for someone with Putin's aspirations.

I'd really like to feel like a nuclear exchange is totally out of the question - and it should be.

So, help us sleep better at night: What other viable options does Russia have to get out of this conflict without resorting to the sum-of-all-fears?

[Battlefront.com]

3 hours ago, BeondTheGrave said:

In that case Russia has two solutions (one of which they have available now). First is China. Obviously they can borrow massive sums from China, and China would love to lend.

But might not be really able or willing to.  We chatted about this a bunch of pages back.  China is on the cusp of a real estate bubble bursting that some think might be big enough to bring the regime down.  I don't think that will happen, but that is the order of magnitude that's being kicked around amongst the economist types.

Steve

[sburke]

1 hour ago, db_zero said:

I’m waiting to see what happens on May 9th. If Putin mobilizes the country, declares WW3 as some have speculated then we’ll have to see what that entails.

Does it give the theater commander authorization to use a tac nuke at his discretion? 

 

enough of the tac nukes.  They wouldn't allow Russia to achieve anything other than a faster demise.  There is no military object worth it. The only other political object would be Kiev.  Doing that would insure a swift reaction.  There is no option on the table regardless of weapon used that causes Ukraine to surrender.

[sburke]

4 hours ago, BeondTheGrave said:

I agree here, Im not really sure what it would get him except a few more BTGs. It really seems like a 'bottom of the barrel' move. 

Thing is it doesn't get them any more BTGs.  A BTG implies levels of personnel at least basically trained in their function.  All this does is get the RU some untrained rabble to add into their units to get them up to a "assigned number of personnel".  If anything, it further dilutes the combat power of those units with unreliable, untrained guys whose names no one wants to know as they will die too fast.

Edited April 30, 2022 by sburke

[Battlefront.com]

The last two pages have beaten the same terrain for the 100th time or so   I'll make two quick recaps of what I (and others) have been saying about this war since before it started.  In my case a couple of years before it started:

1.  Putin has *NO* Plan B to come out of this with a "win" of any sort.  Absolutely none.  This is not a fault of Putin or his inner circle or his paper tiger military.  It is just a monumental task that Russia has no experience with.  As Afghanistan proved... you can not outlast a hostile population spread out over a vast amount of land.  Just can't do it.

Even if Putin's Plan A had gone way better than it did, the fact remains that Russia will be defeated.  It's just that Plan A was such crap that it's going to happen within months instead of years.

2.  Time is not on Russia's side.  Every day that goes by Ukraine gets stronger, Russia gets weaker.  And the more Russia fights to change this, the more it speeds up the process of losing.

3.  Russia does not have the resources to rebuild its military under these conditions, of which Sanctions is only one of them.  Russia has lost many years worth of production, much of it having been made under the Soviet banner.  Russia couldn't afford to maintain its previous military even without sanctions, it is laughable to think it can undo all that damage with vastly less resources in a time period that is measured in months at the most.  Anything that needs technology, BTW, is off the menu for good.

4.  China is not an option to allow it to overcome any of the problems it has.  The crack pipe smoking fantasy arguments so far haven't convinced me otherwise

5.  Nukes don't give Russia a win, it gives it a worse loss than it already has.  There is absolutely no scenario that allows Russia to come out ahead after using a nuke.  Period.  Therefore, the only way nukes would be used is if insanity reigns supreme in the minds of Putin and at least one of the two guys he needs for authorization.  Shoigu and... I forget who the other one is.  In any case, the insanity needed to use nukes would have to be shared by those who were tasked with using them too.  I'm not saying it couldn't happen, but so far nobody has made a case that either a) Putin/elite think nukes can get them out of this pickle or b) that Putin/elite are insane.  Gotta establish one or the other before nukes enter into the equation.

OK, so how does this end for Russia?  Coup or civil war is the most likely scenario.  Which is almost certainly why Putin has not mobilized yet.  He fears that his chances of being taken to a courtyard and shot dead go up dramatically if he mobilizes (not necessarily right away, could be after another few 10s of thousands die).

The other scenario is that Putin withdraws, murders a lot of people before they murder him, then settles into a North Korean situation until his death (natural or otherwise).  This is less likely as I don't think he has enough of a power base to survive that sort of scenario, but of course it is possible he does.

Steve

[LongLeftFlank]

And barring an utterly craven Western response, use of a nuke would bring China and the entire 'fence sitting' world urgently into the 'shut this maniac down, right now!' camp.

There is absolutely no 'win' for China in a nuclear war, whether or not it is a target (at once).

Among other consequences, I predict Japan would kit out a Trident fleet within 6 months to warn off both Xi and L'il Kim.

[Battlefront.com]

2 minutes ago, sburke said:

Thing is it doesn't get them any more BTGs.  A BTG implies levels of personnel at least basically trained in their function.  All this does is get the RU some untrained rabble to add into their units to get them up to a "assigned number of personnel".  If anything, it further dilutes the combat power of those units with unreliable, untrained guys whose names no one wants to know as they will die too fast.

Exactly.  BTGs require months to build with the proper cadres in place to train them.  Guess where all the cadres are?  Dead or in Ukraine manning the frontline.  So who the heck is going to train all the rabble that they raise through mobilization?  Nobody because withdrawing the cadre to train up new units means not having any units in Ukraine to keep the Ukrainians at bay.

Russia is beyond fooked.  It is royally fooked.  And there is absolutely no way out of this situation other than Ukraine waking up one day, looking itself in the mirror, and deciding "ya know what?  I think we really should be a vassal slave state to Russia.  OK, let's throw down or weapons and surrender".  That's Russia best hope right now.  And I think we can gauge how likely that is to happen.  White cold sphere in a super hot place not melting kind of chance.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

For a little insight into what MIGHT be going on within the Kremlin, there's this article to consider:

https://cepa.org/vicious-blame-game-erupts-among-putins-security-forces/

The short of it is; the military wants to expand the war, the intelligence services don't seem all that supportive.

Students of Russian history should know that in the past when the intelligence services lose faith in leadership, things tend to get very interesting.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Another probable coincidental Russian infrastructure disaster.  This is a power plant is in Sakhalin.  Sure, it's nice to think that Japan activated someone to make this happen, but it's likely just routine Russian neglect/incompetence.

 

[Battlefront.com]

What we've seen happening for some time now is official Ukrainian policy... deliberate transitioning to NATO caliber weaponry.  This is massive and won't be possible to do during this war, but it says a lot about how things are going to look after:

 

[Alphaomega]

Glad to hear there are "all sorts of possibilities" with a nuclear exchange being very low on the list.
 

[dan/california]

4 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

And barring an utterly craven Western response, use of a nuke would bring China and the entire 'fence sitting' world urgently into the 'shut this maniac down, right now!' camp.

There is absolutely no 'win' for China in a nuclear war, whether or not it is a target (at once).

Among other consequences, I predict Japan would kit out a Trident fleet within 6 months to warn off both Xi and L'il Kim.

My guess is they do that anyway. They have ALL the pieces. And the lesson of the last two decades is that people with nukes don't get the bleep bombed out of them......

[Battlefront.com]

Assassination of a LPR figure.  It's always difficult to know who kills DLPR people since they love to murder their own for various "business" reasons, but of course it could be that Ukraine might be taking advantage of the no-truce situation to settle some scores:

https://minifeednews.com/latest-news/near-the-lugansk-region-they-knew-a-dead-radnik-who-spivpratsyuvav-with-occupants/15652/