How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Vet 0369]

12 hours ago, Bearstronaut said:

Brother, no offense but it’s been over 40 years since you were in the military. I spent most of the last decade on active duty with the army and am currently a reservist. Trust me, it’s an 8 year service obligation. 
https://www.arpc.afrc.af.mil/IRR/

Well, live and learn, i stand corrected! Thank you for the reply. I imagine the change was due to the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Interesting that it’s codified in 10 U.S. Code. I wonder if they also changed the Selective Service Act?

[sburke]

1 hour ago, akd said:

@sburke @Kinophile

Maj. Kalmykov was Deputy Commander - Chief of Staff for the 16th Spetsnaz Brigade.

 

 

 

we already had this guy for that role

Major Dmitri Semenov, chief of staff / deputy commander of ?? Spetsnaz Detachment, 16th Separate Spetsnaz Brigade

[FancyCat]

That article is actually quite illuminating, clearly Ukraine has not reached the point of being able to mass together units without Russia blowing them to bits, but it lays out Ukraine's plan to turn the tide of the war, maybe someone link it to the Austrian colonel.

(On one hand I feel quite silly contesting a military man's judgement, I know nothing of military matters, on the other hand, I can't get over the fact he thinks the cauldron worked. I mean it may have but we have no proof of significant numbers of POWs, no proof of large numbers of destroyed equipment, Colonel Reisner thinks significant numbers of western weapons were successfully destroyed which again, Russia has shown nothing to indicate has occurred. Snake Island may be a sideshow so he ignored it in favor of the main fight in Donbas but if Ukraine was on the ropes, and Russia actually dominating, Ukraine should not have been able to force Russia off the island)

Edited July 14, 2022 by FancyCat

[keas66]

Others have noted that the Austrians are not necessarily neutral  onlookers ? I do not know how much truth there is in that ?

And to be totally honest - the complexities of the inter relationships and  associated feelings  between  different members of the EU are  quite eye opening for someone  not living there . Things really  have not changed a whole lot it seems .

Edited July 14, 2022 by keas66

[FancyCat]

And he mentioned Odesa in the briefing, ahh nevermind, nothing to feel silly about, how can he say "how can Ukraine survive the winter without the grain producing regions including Odesa if Russia gets that far" implying that one, Russia might well make it to Odesa, and two, would do so before winter in time to disrupt the harvest. Which is barring the collapse of the Ukrainian army, basically impossible, it took what, 2 months? for them to make and take this little cauldron in Donbas? How does he expect them to take Mykolaiv much less Odessa? Nah, he's either lacking in information, or is privy to much more information, or has taken the Russian viewpoint wholesale without consideration of Ukraine's. 

18 minutes ago, keas66 said:

Others have noted that the Austrians are not necessarily neutral  onlookers ? I do not know how much truth there is in that ?

Russia achieved significant penetration of both the Austrian Foreign Ministry, and their Intelligence Agency, and probably deeply politically.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/07/05/austria-russia-infuence/

Resulting in them being frozen out of intelligence sharing for a time? Wouldn't be surprised if still banned....

Edit: Say there are pro-Russian factions in the Austrian government, both to ensure Austria gets Russian gas, and maybe more personal (bribes) reasons. Russia in order to break European unity and support to Ukraine needs to portray the conflict as lost, in order to empower elements of pro-ceasefire, anti-war, and those against supplying Ukraine and against ruining relations with Russia on the basis that the conflict is decided. In that sense, especially with the banning of many Russian propaganda networks in the EU, it would make sense to get Western experts endorsing the Russian viewpoint.

Edited July 14, 2022 by FancyCat

[billbindc]

11 hours ago, dan/california said:

Are the Russians going to keep shoving lower and lower quality troops into the meat grinder until the average quality of their whole force is so bad that it is subject to a cascading rout/mutiny/surrender. So the surrender of one battalion or the loss of Kherson or similar just results in the whole thing coming apart? The full 1917 scenario?

On October 29th, the Russian minister of food procurement admitted that there was little or no grain in government storage to feed the army or the capital. The armies had grain for a week or a day depending on the front. The Bolshevik coup seized the government 10 days later. 

As in 1917, the quality of the force will suffer but shortages will have their part to play as well. This time it may be bullets instead of bread.

[Beleg85]

25 minutes ago, keas66 said:

Others have noted that the Austrians are not necessarily neutral  onlookers ? I do not know how much truth there is in that ?

And to be totally honest - the complexities of the inter relationships and  associated feelings  between  different members of the EU are  quite eye opening for someone  not living there . Things really  have not changed a whole lot it seems .

Yep, Europe was always very diverse. Definitelly there are many Austrians (like everywhere in Europe) that are firmly pro-Ukraine. But general mood in political, business, mainstream media and probably military circles seems to be that whole war is, let's say, "unprofitable" and it is unwise to help Ukraine that much. Which of course is effect of economical-banking ties, energy market, Putin-loving elites (actually much more than Germany) and -let's face it- not viewing Ukrainiane as sovereign nation or state.

That's why I wouldn't worry about this Theresiana colonel level of insight. Let's rember that not only Austria is not in NATO and is corrupted by Russia-lovers. Most important is that its military last time saw major combat 100 years ago. You cannot fake experience, even with long and rich Habsburg military traditions.

He make nice presentations, though. Very colorful and appealing to the public.

 

https://twitter.com/saintjavelin/status/1547564858228346881

Today was  bloody day in Vinnytsa. Russians sabotaging their own war effort, episode 1000+...

Edited July 14, 2022 by Beleg85

[Armorgunner]

17 hours ago, rocketman said:

Information on the RBS-15 anti-sea missile Sweden will supply to Ukraine. Pretty impressive (I might say in a slightly biased way):

 

Sorry to say it! But it was the RBS 17 Hellfire, not the RBS 15, Sweden supplied Ukraine with. And in the video, he mixed it up too. Saying RBS 15 is short range, which it´s not. But RBS-17 Hellfire is, which is what Sweden supplied Ukraine with!

[Battlefront.com]

7 hours ago, Grigb said:

HIMARS is really spooking RU.  Girkin advises to read the article HIMARS – just MLRS, [or] a new generation weapon, or a Doomsday machine?

Why don't the Russians just use their Terminators on them?  You know, the ones they hyped a couple of months ago.  We haven't seen them mentioned since, so they must be living up to expectations!  And by that I mean our expectations

Seriously, now that I think about it... has anybody on the RU side talked about Terminators since they were first deployed?

Steve

[LongLeftFlank]

5 hours ago, Grigb said:

Not going to waste my time disproving an initial extremely inaccurate assessment. 

What I am going to do is to put several quotes:

1. Pro-war Nat Girkin: RU population will stop supporting the war because they do not really understand why RU started the war
2. Pro-war Nat military expert Maxim Klimov (42:46) : ...Regional high-ranking officials discussed the drain [loss] in Ukraine
3. Anti-war RU Na Nesmyan: ...only 3 percent of respondents said they would be happy to unite the territories in any form...the goals of the entire event [SMO] are perceived distantly and indirectly by the absolute majority of the population.

It is very clear that there is no deep public support for the war. There is shallow and fragile support of convenience. 

Thanks. I have been gagging on his 'Russians = mongoloid orcs who take murder and rapine in with their mothers milk' line for the entire thread.

...That said, there's definitely something very disturbing about Russian 'high culture'. This Galeev thread gets into part of it. Curious what your take might be, at your convenience....

 

 

...FWIW, I actually take away something a little hopeful, which is that there's a grumpy strain of individualism in Russians that could shrug off all the worn out Czar worship / Third Rome suprisingly quickly if given a chance. More here...

Their crabs-in-the-bucket mentality (envy), sadly, might take them a while longer to get free of. But prosperity too, can create more generous hearts in time. Nobody is born that way.

****

P.S.  Speaking of Galeev, he's been prodding at German double-dealing for some time now....

And I can neither confirm nor deny that this *exactly* describes the dynamic in developing energy and infra projects in most emerging market countries lol.

 

Edited July 14, 2022 by LongLeftFlank

[Battlefront.com]

7 hours ago, Grigb said:

The article itself. It is just an educational article. Funny - it took them multiply HIMARS missiles to the face to realize that it is not just MLRS and to start respecting it. 

That's a very nice summary of HIMARS and especially interesting to see it in Russian language and mentioned by RU mil bloggers like Girkin.  The article is factually correct and doesn't indicate there are any weaknesses for Russia to leverage in combating them.  In fact, the author under-sold the capabilities a little bit.

Once Ukraine gets the longer ranged rockets they will have the option to launch them from so far away that by the time they are noticed by the Russians the launchers will have already moved.  There will be no ability to counter battery them.  Only loitering air assets would have a chance and we know that Russia won't dare hang around in Ukraine's airspace due to high chance of getting shot down.

Further, with the extremely long ranges Ukraine can keep a small number of launchers moving around constantly and yet be able to respond to pretty much any sudden need to fire upon something.  Picture a HIMARS driving around Kharkiv and someone radios in that 50km away there's a train unloading troops or supplies.  Within a couple of minutes, faster than the unloading can complete, the target can be engaged.  No having to drive 30 minutes and deploy only to see the target disappear.

The author has a good handle on what is coming next.  Currently there are a small number of systems and they are (correctly) being used for strategic battlefield targets.  That will change when more systems are in Ukraine's service.  They will continue to have the strategic capabilities when there's opportunity, but they will also be able to eliminate operational and tactical targets that are deemed important enough.  Russian artillery concentrations likely being the most likely top priority.

Steve

[Billy Ringo]

Would welcome a more knowledgeable and experienced opinion on the following:

Does artillery success result in an exponentially increasing advantage?  For every artillery detection system and artillery unit destroyed, it would seem that one's advantage increases--exponentially.  There is less counter artillery to contend with and, thus, less threat. Making existing assets even more dangerous.  And, with each hit, it would increase the advantage further until even less sophisticated and costly artillery and/or mortars become more effective with less risk of being attacked.

Is this flawed logic?  Thanks in advance.

[Taranis]

"Soldiers prepare to fire at Russian positions using a US-supplied M777 howitzer, in Kharkiv Oblast, Ukraine, July 14, 2022. EVGENIY MALOLETKA / AP"

[Vanir Ausf B]

9 hours ago, Grigb said:

Civilian "Girkin" (Nesmyan) regarding China interests and RU Oil prices

• China has confirmed negotiations with the United States on the price limit for Russian oil
• If negotiations are successful, then there will be a significant reduction in Russian budget revenues
• For RU the fraternal or at least partner China is an illusion

 

A quick follow-up on this. China has apparently declined to cap the price, at least for now.

_____

China has refrained from supporting the United States’ call for a price cap on Russian oil while continuing to call for dialogue to address the “complicated issue”.

Thursday’s comments by the Ministry of Commerce came after US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said she had raised the possibility of setting a cap on the price of Russian oil during a virtual meeting with Chinese Vice-Premier Liu He last week.

Yellen said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal that the Chinese side had listened and was prepared to have further discussions with the US.

https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3185306/russian-oil-china-shuns-us-call-cap-prices-and-urges-dialogue

[Haiduk]

20 hours ago, Beleg85 said:

Yes, but we didn't see evidence on any massive heavy equipment loss. How many destroyed M777 there were...5-8? Maybe two additionally broken M109's. No Krabs or Panzerhaubitze which would be real prize.

According to Oryx, including the last one from Lysychansk, 5 M777 were lost

[LongLeftFlank]

2 minutes ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

Yellen said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal that the Chinese side had listened and was prepared to have further discussions with the US.

Wow, anyone with the tiniest familiarity with Chinese knows this statement is utterly meaningless as a signal to intent.

[Vanir Ausf B]

2 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Wow, anyone with the tiniest familiarity with Chinese knows this statement is utterly meaningless as a signal to intent.

It's not meant to signal anything. It's all diplo-speak.

[Battlefront.com]

4 hours ago, Grigb said:

Fun fact - currently RU Nats are discussing that commanders of UKR HIMARS are Americans.

Yeah, we saw all of that nonsense in 2014 as well.  Giving Ukrainians credit for their own successes undermines the üntermensch argument. 

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

3 hours ago, The_MonkeyKing said:

 

Thanks for the footage.  A small segment was seen before, but the rest is new.

The really strange thing to me is this was edited and produced after nearly all the soldiers in the footage had been killed.  Yet the propagandists didn't let that stop them from making it seem like things went well.

I wonder when this footage was first released.  If it was early February that would make sense.  Any time after that, when everybody knew the attack had been a complete failure, would not make sense at all.

Steve

[Grigb]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

Why don't the Russians just use their Terminators on them?  You know, the ones they hyped a couple of months ago.  We haven't seen them mentioned since, so they must be living up to expectations!  And by that I mean our expectations

Seriously, now that I think about it... has anybody on the RU side talked about Terminators since they were first deployed?

Steve

Wow! Now you said it - I haven't seen any reference to Terminators since they arrived at the front. 

[Huba]

Polish MoD confirmed (link) that apart from 250 new M1A2SepV3s, Poland will receive additional used M1s to backfill for tanks sent to Ukraine. No mention about PT-91 transfer, if (when) this happens, we'll be informed post factum as always. Nonetheless, it looks like things are going in the right direction regarding Polish (and Ukrainian!) armor.

[poesel]

2 hours ago, Beleg85 said:

Let's rember that not only Austria is not in NATO and is corrupted by Russia-lovers. Most important is that its military last time saw major combat 100 years ago.

I'd like to point out that Austria DID fight in WW2. They even had their own leader...

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, Billy Ringo said:

Would welcome a more knowledgeable and experienced opinion on the following:

Does artillery success result in an exponentially increasing advantage?  For every artillery detection system and artillery unit destroyed, it would seem that one's advantage increases--exponentially.  There is less counter artillery to contend with and, thus, less threat. Making existing assets even more dangerous.  And, with each hit, it would increase the advantage further until even less sophisticated and costly artillery and/or mortars become more effective with less risk of being attacked.

Is this flawed logic?  Thanks in advance.

Your logic is spot on.  This is a usual part of war, not just artillery.  You can easily see this in CM if you put 10 tanks on one side of a perfectly flat map and 10 of the same tanks on the other.  Whichever side scores some hits first is likely to win.  Why?  Because the ratio starts out a 1:1, but as soon as one side scores some kills the ratio shifts in their favor.  Now there's 10 tanks shooting at 8.  Now there's 9 tanks shooting at 5.  Now there's 7 tanks shooting at 2.  Etc.

The best way to avoid a "death spiral" is to defeat the enemy before it gets to that point.  Russia is in a bad spot now because it has lost so much of everything that it's initially highly favorable ratios at the start are much less so now.  To the point that in some spots Ukraine is able to have some types of superiority.

Steve

[Harmon Rabb]

Did not read the Financial Times article myself about weapon smuggling in Ukraine but apparently it was so false that the European Union needed to make this statement.

As far as the article itself as the Romans would ask, Cui bono?

 

[Grigb]

1 hour ago, LongLeftFlank said:

...That said, there's definitely something very disturbing about Russian 'high culture'. 

There is a lot wrong with the whole RU culture. But the thing is painting everything in black is not an accurate description. There is black (a lot of black actually), but there is also white and there are a lot more different shades of grey in between.

 

1 hour ago, LongLeftFlank said:

...That said, there's definitely something very disturbing about Russian 'high culture'. This Galeev thread gets into part of it. Curious what your take might be, at your convenience....

This thread is good. Like really good. I cannot vouch for the deep historical part but personally I agree with it.

That being said Galeev view is view of intellectual. As result in my personal opinion, he might overemphasize the significance of cultural wars. It is the low level thugs that do the killing, and they have little idea who Schevchenko was or what he wrote. But that's my personal opinion and I might be wrong.