How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[sburke]

Russia Fills Ukraine Meatpacking Plant With Bodies of Dead Soldiers: Report (msn.com)

[Splinty]

3 hours ago, Vet 0369 said:

One of the most important observations of an NCO or Staff NCO has to be that complaining and grumbling are normal for any “good order” units. What you look for and pay attention to is when they stop complaining. That means that they’ve given up any hope of anything being changed. That’s when there’s trouble brewing and you have to correct the root causes.

Or as we used to say in my infantry NCO days. If they're not complaining they're plotting.

[dan/california]

I

49 minutes ago, MikeyD said:

There's a hazard to waging war in the age of Twitter. Most notably sticking around in order to get a good video for posting later. A lot of these videos I think to myself 'Should there be something else for you to pay attention to at this moment?' Weren't Chechens mockingly referred to as 'Tik Tok soldiers', or something like that?

Ever so slightly in their defense this might be the first batch of Russians they have ever seen with more situational awareness than an amoeba. Happily they lived to learn from the experience. 

[Calamine Waffles]

https://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2022/06/blog-post_8.html

 

Quote

Once again about the state of the Russian "defense industry"



Here is a message I came across today in VK. I will not comment, so that again something is not sewn at the suggestion of informers ...

 

[LongLeftFlank]

15 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Back on the 'Collapse: How Soon?' topic, astute Chinese OSINT analyst Suyi had a few more observations in the 'scraping the barrel' category:

Yanking forces from Kaliningrad, as well as the Far East.

And he has grasped the true nature of the attrition battle, as we have here.  Westerners though just can't give up the 'Russia has endless manpower' meme....

 

The town-then-forest fights in the Seviersky Donetz valley are taking a toll. There's clearly a reason the UA didn't simply retreat to the river line.

BREAKING: unconfirmed but widely reported... 

 Occupied Stakhanov (Kadiivka), Luhansk region. the dead Russians at the Pobeda stadium - while there is different information about the number. Conversations go from 150 to  300

 

That's a heavy blow, if true. A BTG of Russia's best soldiers, poof! 

Edited June 9, 2022 by LongLeftFlank

[poesel]

A few pages back there was the question if Germany would upgrade the PzH2000 software so that it would integrate into the Ukrainian Gis Arta system. There was a slightly ambiguous interview with a German general.

There is now this article from SPIEGEL (https://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/flakpanzer-gepard-warum-es-auf-die-munition-ankommt-a-9f96637e-40a7-4e4c-9db2-0b8c49a9ff3b sorry, paywall) that explicitly states that the PzH will be integrated.

If that works it could be a blueprint for other western systems, too.

 

[panzermartin]

3 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

And has absolutely nothing to do with NATO

You see, here is where I disagree with your whole post. NATO is not United Nations . NATO serves a post modern colonialism in disguise. It's a defensive pact only in paper. But it actually serves the interests of the big players. Energy, strategic, weapons sales etc.

We think world has changed but the time frame is miniscule, it's only a generation since the colonial era. We are driven by capitalism and not values. Otherwise we wouldn't allow Turkey in, we wouldn't equip Saudi Arabia and all those countries that violate basic human rights. 

NATO is like the NRA that claims we will stop shootings by arming the lawful citizens. 

 

 

[billbindc]

5 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

You see, here is where I disagree with your whole post. NATO is not United Nations . NATO serves a post modern colonialism in disguise. It's a defensive pact only in paper. But it actually serves the interests of the big players. Energy, strategic, weapons sales etc.

We think world has changed but the time frame is miniscule, it's only a generation since the colonial era. We are driven by capitalism and not values. Otherwise we wouldn't allow Turkey in, we wouldn't equip Saudi Arabia and all those countries that violate basic human rights. 

NATO is like the NRA that claims we will stop shootings by arming the lawful citizens. 

 

 

NATO was designed to stop Soviet imperialism and now serves to limit revanchist Russian imperialism. It serves to prevent war in by far the most dangerous place in the world for a large war to start. That expressly does *not* mean it solves every other problem and no alliance does. Or does Russian colonialism not count for you?

[panzermartin]

3 hours ago, Vet 0369 said:

I have always felt the Soviet/Russian paranoia is based on the facts that the French (Napoleon), the Germans (through the Middle Ages and WWI and WWII), the Swedes, the Finns, the British, and the U.S. have all invaded them (joint British/U.S. expeditionary force at Arcangel in support of the “White” Russians, and is probably just as justified as the fears of all their neighbors and the rest of Europe. However, Putin’s statements that he’s looking to rebuild the former Russian Empire and that Sweden and Finland were part of Russia lends credence to the concerns of all the countries that at any time were ruled by Russia. Of course he conveniently fails to note that the name of his country is derived from the name of the Swedish tribe (the Rus) that settled Kyiv and Novograd. 

I've been saying this since forever. Just the memories of WW2 are enough to go paranoid . They are probably serious when talking about Nazis although we might find this paranoic.

[panzermartin]

5 hours ago, danfrodo said:

The only problem with this is that RU absolutely is a threat to its neighbors, while RU's neighbors couldn't possibly invade RU and win.  So those neighbors want to join NATO to survive.  This makes RU feelings feel hurty.  Tough s--t.  If RU wasn't a threat in the first place these nations wouldn't join NATO. 

So RU causes the problem then claims to be scared because of it.  It's totally backwards thinking.  If RU was a peaceful, trustworthy nation NATO wouldn't even exist. 

As has been said here a thousand times, if Lithuania/Estonia/Latvia weren't in NATO he would've attacked and annexed them long ago. 

Edit:  PanzerMartin -- no disrespect intended, I totally get that you were presenting an RU view.  Putin's aggressions over the last 20 years make it clear how distorted that view is. 

No disrespect taken, I get your points. Yes it's no surprise that Russia is a threat to its neighbors, every big power has historically been. But in the grand scale Russia is still the minor player,with little influence beyond its borders. 

[FancyCat]

11 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

You see, here is where I disagree with your whole post. NATO is not United Nations . NATO serves a post modern colonialism in disguise. It's a defensive pact only in paper. But it actually serves the interests of the big players. Energy, strategic, weapons sales etc.

We think world has changed but the time frame is miniscule, it's only a generation since the colonial era. We are driven by capitalism and not values. Otherwise we wouldn't allow Turkey in, we wouldn't equip Saudi Arabia and all those countries that violate basic human rights. 

NATO is like the NRA that claims we will stop shootings by arming the lawful citizens. 

 

 

You know, had the invasion not occurred, i would have largely agreed with you, but....since the invasion has occurred, and suddenly everyone in Europe (aside from the Balkans), must confront the idea of war and military conflict once more, with EE feeling pensive about the faithfulness of its Western European allies, NATO serves to defend Europe, and especially Eastern Europe. 

For all the idea of Russia suffering massive damage in Ukraine, lets not underscore the fact Ukraine has been severely damaged. No state in EE wants to suffer any of that, and NATO remains the best guarantee at warding off Russian threats. 

2 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

No disrespect taken, I get your points. Yes it's no surprise that Russia is a threat to its neighbors, every big power has historically been. But in the grand scale Russia is still the minor player,with little influence beyond its borders. 

The damage Russia is inflicting on a nation of 44 million people, with hundreds of millions suffering side effects from the economic damage of the food conflict does not endorse your viewpoint. 

[Sojourner]

15 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

You see, here is where I disagree with your whole post. NATO is not United Nations . NATO serves a post modern colonialism in disguise. It's a defensive pact only in paper. But it actually serves the interests of the big players. Energy, strategic, weapons sales etc.

We think world has changed but the time frame is miniscule, it's only a generation since the colonial era. We are driven by capitalism and not values. Otherwise we wouldn't allow Turkey in, we wouldn't equip Saudi Arabia and all those countries that violate basic human rights. 

NATO is like the NRA that claims we will stop shootings by arming the lawful citizens. 

 

 

Respectfully, I think you're conflating NATO with its member states. NATO doesn't manufacture weapons or equip anybody. Russia may have reason to fear some NATO countries but no reason to fear NATO. I'd be interested in some examples of how it serves the "interests of the big players", and not just "on paper".

[Calamine Waffles]

13 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

I've been saying this since forever. Just the memories of WW2 are enough to go paranoid . They are probably serious when talking about Nazis although we might find this paranoic.

Yeah, they have a very selective memory of World War 2 where they "liberated" the Russo-Ukrainian populations in Poland in 1939 and stopped the Nazis in Finland in 1940...

[Battlefront.com]

31 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

You see, here is where I disagree with your whole post. NATO is not United Nations .

Thank god for that!  The United Nations is not an effective organization, if you hadn't noticed.  What has it done since this war started?  Effectively nothing.  What did it do for the Balkans?  Syria?  Myanmar?  Congo?  Libya?  Nothing.  Why?  Because China and Russia have veto power over any action.

In fact, the ineptitude of the UN is an argument for more organizations like NATO.

31 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

NATO serves a post modern colonialism in disguise. It's a defensive pact only in paper. But it actually serves the interests of the big players. Energy, strategic, weapons sales etc.

Except that this is not true.  I addressed this with your previous post's fallacies.

31 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

We think world has changed but the time frame is miniscule, it's only a generation since the colonial era. We are driven by capitalism and not values. Otherwise we wouldn't allow Turkey in, we wouldn't equip Saudi Arabia and all those countries that violate basic human rights. 

Turkey was allowed in because of its strategic position bordering the southern Soviet Union.  Saudi Arabia has nothing to do with NATO, so again you are off track.

31 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

NATO is like the NRA that claims we will stop shootings by arming the lawful citizens. 

Terrible analogy.  NATO doesn't arm countries, the countries that make up NATO do.  Two different things.  Evidence of that?  France's Thales dodged sanctions to equip Russians with thermal systems that could potentially used against NATO.

So what is your alternative?  Every country for itself?  I'm sure Estonia would not be too happy about that.

And if NATO members weren't arming countries, don't you think Russia and China would be?  Countries acquire weapons because they don't want their neighbors taking bits of their land or killing their people.  That dynamic predates NATO and even nation states by a few tens of thousands of years.

Steve

[Beleg85]

11 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

We think world has changed but the time frame is miniscule, it's only a generation since the colonial era. We are driven by capitalism and not values. Otherwise we wouldn't allow Turkey in, we wouldn't equip Saudi Arabia and all those countries that violate basic human rights. 

Ekhmm sole purpose of admitting Turkey was to contain Soviets. And what has Saudi Arabia to NATO?

You also completelly ignore people like Balts, Poles, Romanians etc. For them (especially Balts) NATO is their literal lifeline, only bulwark against barbarity we see now. Hundreds of milions of people are at stake if we ever go Russia to behave like they always did. Which, sadly, some Westerners and Southerners are ready to accept.

5 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

No disrespect taken, I get your points. Yes it's no surprise that Russia is a threat to its neighbors, every big power has historically been. But in the grand scale Russia is still the minor player,with little influence beyond its borders.

No other european country in modern history was more imperialistic and violent to their neighours than Russia. Maybe Turkey, occassionaly. And Germany going crazy. But none was so consistent in its claims and darwinistic in execution. Look at the sheer size of terrain they still claim to be "theirs" at some point. Nobody do this anymore, but hey- it's Russia.

[danfrodo]

steve beat me to it, nevermind

Edited June 9, 2022 by danfrodo
superfluous

[Battlefront.com]

9 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

No disrespect taken, I get your points. Yes it's no surprise that Russia is a threat to its neighbors, every big power has historically been. But in the grand scale Russia is still the minor player,with little influence beyond its borders. 

I don't think that the tens of thousands of dead Ukrainians, the millions of displaced people, the hundreds of thousands that are now under the boot heal of Russian occupation, and the entire nation that has the prospect of rebuilding a brutally destroyed nation likely don't view this as "minor".

Steve

[danfrodo]

Back on the war:  I now am hoping, based on some evidence, that Ukraine is using the Severodonetsk pocket as what has been called 'flypaper'.  It's drawing in lots of RU units in areas that UKR can shell like crazy w excellent observation from the higher area of Lyschansk. 

Or  I am just wishful thinking, in your minds? 

I was thinking UKR was just trying to tie down RU forces because was about to attack elsewhere, but maybe this is all there is -- a chance to kill russians and destroy their gear.  Which aint bad if it can be done w 'reasonable' UKR losses.  (each 'loss' being someone's life isn't a 'reasonable' thing, but unfortunately that's the situation)

Edited June 10, 2022 by danfrodo
typo

[Vanir Ausf B]

Distressing if true.

 

[MikeyD]

24 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

NATO is like the NRA

NATO is like a box of chocolates. You don't know what you're going to get until you bite into one of them. 

[dan/california]

I think we have a sort of. barely, ok picture of each sides vehicle losses. In that Oryx seems to set a checkable minimum number. I really don't think we have solid numbers on actual soldiers. Even if assume some confidence in KIA numbers, I don't, but even if. We are just clueless about the situation with the wounded, and how many are getting back to their units after a week or a month. The one thing we think we KNOW is that the Russians want the rest of the Donbas BADLY, and the Ukrainians seem to be capable of holding it anyway. We are fairly certain time favors Ukraine. They may actually be getting stronger, and at a minimum are losing capability far more slowly than the Russians. Where all those curves intersect, only time, and sadly blood, will tell.

 

[Machor]

1 hour ago, panzermartin said:

We are driven by capitalism and not values. Otherwise we wouldn't allow Turkey in

 

45 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Turkey was allowed in because of its strategic position bordering the southern Soviet Union.

 

44 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

Ekhmm sole purpose of admitting Turkey was to contain Soviets.

A reminder that when Turkey joined NATO along with Greece in February 1952, it had free-and-fair elections with a two party system, an independent judiciary, and a GDP close to that of Italy. The only criterion by which Greece would be allowed to join and Turkey refused would be declaring membership open solely to Christian nations.

[Machor]

4 hours ago, MSBoxer said:

Is it possible that RU blew the barrel before retreating?

 

4 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Possible, but doubtful.

@cyrano01

That it was a barrel failure was disseminated through separatist channels themselves. You can also see that the guys hanging around aren't in standard Ukrainian camo, and looking too unprofessional to suggest Ukrainian elites.

[MikeyD]

About Turkey in NATO. Erdogen's Turkey is not quite the same country as the Turkey of president Bayar in 1952 when they first joined. You can't blame 1952 NATO for not 'Minority Reporting' the government of Turkey 70 years in the future.

[Machor]

5 hours ago, kraze said:

Oi! me and me green boyz say rok is da 'ard armor - it meanz its da 'ard armor!

'rok armor' is the first upgrade for Ork vehicles. You can spend a few points more per vehicle and upgrade to 'loot armor', which does not increase protection, but provides a morale bonus for the crew: