How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Grigb]

Fresh post from Girkin (I skipped most of it and also his other rant because he just repeats that Shoigu is bad)

Quote

So, very briefly about the current military situation:

1. The third ("Effective" - R.A. Kadyrov) stage of SMO smoothly transformed into the 4th [stage] ("saving civilians" by slowing down the pace of the operation - personally S.K.Shoigu [aka static stage]) in just three weeks from the start. 

2. In fact, all the "effectiveness" of the 3rd stage ended with minor (but expensive [bold is mine - remember they claimed they were suffering few losses? Well, they were economical with the truth]) tactical advances near Donetsk, culminating in the capture of the Piski village. On the Kherson front there was a "change" - our 5 km advanced to Mykolaiv from Snihirevka [capture of Blagodatne settlement], UKR - captured two villages and a bridgehead on the river Inuglet between Snihirevka and Davydov Ford [Lozove and Belohirka]. On other fronts also, in general, the front line has not changed.

3. During the summer, the enemy sharply (many times) increased the number of missile and unmanned strikes on the deep and near rear of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and the Armed Forces of the L-DPR, achieving new successes, now quite comparable (in terms of damage inflicted) with missile strikes on his own territory, received from the Armed Forces of RU since the beginning of its SMO, - and in this respect, the Armed Forces of RU have lost "exclusive superiority", and the AFU have achieved a certain parity. It's sad, but a fact.

Based on the above, it can be concluded that within the framework of SMO, the Russian command not only failed to achieve the defeat of the AFU, but [failed to achieve] even the complete displacement of the enemy forces from the territory of the DPR with the available own forces - [it] went into the category of "impossible dreams". It is clear that new offensive attempts will be made and may even lead to new tactical successes, but - in general - there is a balance at the front. And the "scales" on the part of the AFU are now very slowly but steadily outweighing the Russian one.

Both sides are experiencing problems with the replenishment of troops and their growing demotivation, however, given the overall numerical superiority of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, this problem is less critical for them than for the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.

Another thing is that the Russian Federation, indeed, has not yet decided to fight in full force and has not even tried to carry out limited mobilization measures at the front and in the rear, that (theoretically, and, of course, not immediately) is capable of sharply tilting the "scales" in our direction.

 

[Grigb]

Interesting observation regarding RU Nats - it looks like the split is appearing between RU Nat reporters who are leaning to please Kremlin and shut up, and RU Nat volunteers who are at frontlines [not simple RU volunteers in RU army like in 3 Army Corps] and who do not want to shut up.

 

[Grigb]

Looks like the Corps is moving to DPR territory now.

 

  Movement of equipment towards Donbass from the Russian Federation is observed.

[Grigb]

I am getting more and more reports about the increased effectiveness of UKR anti-drone EW. It looks like some time ago UKR forces started to deploy more and better EW equipment at Donetsk front to combat RU arty drones. RU reports that in more and more places RU operators have to keep drones at friendly side and observe from afar.  That may be the reason that in recent weeks RU slowed down significantly and now stalled.

it looks like this 

 

 

Quote

• 00:00 [unimportant background chat, then reporter says in camera]: this is how Mavic is taken
• 00:00 [drone operator]: Yes, that's it [we are] losing it, losing
• 00:15 [drone operator]: Mavic, BTW, is [custom] patched. Here it has stronger signal. [UKR EW] does not give a f*ck [ignore it] 
• 00:21 [drone operator]: Let's see where it lands
• 00:25 [somebody behind camera]: did not listen to the old [experienced] men. Told you not to launch it
• 00:29 [guy behind drone operator]: and video channel is not blocked, [drone operator]: yes, yes, yes
• 00:38 [reported]: [we are] losing copter.
• 00:50 [drone operator]: that's it.
• 00:50 [guy behind operator]: gents, I suggest bolting away at max speed [drone operator]: yes! [guy behind operator]: because [reporter listening to the sound of guns]: [they] shoot [guy behind operator]: if they took it good, there is chance they will try to locate [our] place
• 01:08 [guy behind operator]: aviation...first [one] [reporter]: where? Where [it can be] seen? From where it is better to shoot it [with camera]?
• 01:15 [guy behind operator]: now we will launch our [second] drone and the second strike - what is the time? [reporter]: I will shoot at least the first one [guy behind operator]: the first one will be in the field; we will not see it. The first one will be in the field, the second one will be exactly where they took [drone], that direction. 
•  01:27 [reporter]: so, let's move? [drone operator]: yes [somebody behind camera] move here 
• 01:37 [drone operator]: Well, it is not some sort of gun, is it? It is stationery bull**** [guy behind operator]:[inaudible]
• 01:46 [reporter]: well, if it is lucky for Ukrainians, Mavic landed [properly]. They will figure where we are and start shooting. 

So, UKR have now EW device that is very effective against commercial drones. It is not a magic anti-drone weapon as it has some limitations. Range seems do not allow it to deal with drones above enemy territory. Also, AFAIK if you are lucky and fast (and probably your drone has better customization) you have some chance to escape it. But it is good.

If you are in NATO forces check with UKR and get it fast for yourself.

[Calamine Waffles]

 

Edited August 27, 2022 by Calamine Waffles

[Huba]

It's HIMARS O'clock again. I see reports about hits in Melitopol and Kakhovka too. In Kherson, reportedly Russian barracks in former penal facility were hit. It seems that GMLRS supplies are steady and Ukrainians don't feel the need to conserve ammunition too much (I hope they build the stockpile for a rainy day) and keep on pressure on the RU forces.

 

[Calamine Waffles]

9 minutes ago, Grigb said:

I am getting more and more reports about the increased effectiveness of UKR anti-drone EW. It looks like some time ago UKR forces started to deploy more and better EW equipment at Donetsk front to combat RU arty drones. RU reports that in more and more places RU operators have to keep drones at friendly side and observe from afar.  That may be the reason that in recent weeks RU slowed down significantly and now stalled.

it looks like this 

 

 

So, UKR have now EW device that is very effective against commercial drones. It is not a magic anti-drone weapon as it has some limitations. Range seems do not allow it to deal with drones above enemy territory. Also, AFAIK if you are lucky and fast (and probably your drone has better customization) you have some chance to escape it. But it is good.

If you are in NATO forces check with UKR and get it fast for yourself.

I think this is the next best thing to giving Ukraine enough artillery, though I wonder how effective this is against Orlan-10.

[dan/california]

15 minutes ago, Calamine Waffles said:

I think this is the next best thing to giving Ukraine enough artillery, though I wonder how effective this is against Orlan-10.

The best thing would be giving them this, AND enough artillery. We could spend Christmas thinking about something else.

 

Edited August 27, 2022 by dan/california

[danfrodo]

45 minutes ago, Calamine Waffles said:

 

so first they had cardboard for reactive armor, now cheap plastic instead of kevlar?  wow, corruption at its finest.

[Huba]

WP article about how stuff from US reaches Ukraine. Obviously there isn't much detail in it, but still an interesting read. Interviewed officer mentions that transport aircraft mission planning is being done by an automated system that calculates ready solutions to choose from (sounds like Skyscanner :P), an interesting detail to a layman.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/08/27/ukraine-weapons-shipping-sea

Edited August 27, 2022 by Huba

[LongLeftFlank]

7 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

FFL made a post last page that is a "violation" of the concept of looking at both sides before drawing conclusions.  For sure, presented the way he presented tings does raise some questions and concerns about how long Ukraine can keep this up.  The "violation" is that he didn't check each point to see if there are parallels on the Russian side and, if so, what possible conclusions might come to light....

I won't go through point by point to show that whatever concerns there might be for Ukraine there are vastly more facing Russia.  And this is problematic for any argument showing Ukraine as being the one more likely to "blink first".  In fact, it is quite the opposite.

...

In conclusion... it is fine to look at what challenges Ukraine faces and to be concerned about them.  But doing so without looking at what is facing Russia is pointless. 

Here's a new word for you, Steve: превентивный.

The Praesidium of the Supreme Soviet has censured Comrade Grigorenko for his politically immature speech....

So whataboutism is mandatory on this thread now?

...i.e. we can't discuss the pressures facing Ukraine without also constantly chanting to ourselves 'but you should see the other guy!'

We can read pages and pages and pages of confident stuff here every day about the myriad of ways Russia sux.  Done to death, in fact. How do I count the ways?

....and with that, I'm standing down for a bit. The air has gotten a little thick in here.

[sburke]

7 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Here's a new word for you, Steve: превентивный.

The Praesidium of the Supreme Soviet has censured Comrade Grigorenko for his politically immature speech....

So whataboutism is mandatory on this thread now?

...i.e. we can't discuss the pressures facing Ukraine without also constantly chanting to ourselves 'but you should see the other guy!'

We can read pages and pages and pages of confident stuff here every day about the myriad of ways Russia sux.  Done to death, in fact. How do I count the ways?

....and with that, I'm standing down for a bit. The air has gotten a little thick in here.

and here I was waiting for you to say - who the heck is this FFL guy?  

 

[LongLeftFlank]

1 minute ago, sburke said:

and here I was waiting for you to say - who the heck is this FFL guy?  

Dyslexia rules K.O.

[danfrodo]

On a happier note, these folks in my neighborhood have been showing support for Ukraine for a while.  They planted most of front yard w sunflowers, which are now ~10 feet tall.  It's been great that most every kind of american is supportive of Ukraine.  While there's a few snakes in the US senate and house, the votes have ~+95% in favor for months. 

 

[Butschi]

23 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Germany was in deep long before Putin came around when the supplier was the Soviet Union.  A supplier that was militarily occupying half of its territory and threatening the other half with conventional and/or nuclear destruction.  The Germans made their peace with the devil a long time ago.

There was a link a bunch of pages ago that detailed how the US, in particular, consistently since the very start tried to get Germany to recognize this was not in their own best interests long term.  Germany did not listen and instead made things worse each successive year.

Humph. Actually I had intended not to comment on this... Arguing with a historian on, well, history, is a losing battle. Oh well, here we go. Far as I can tell noone here - including the Germans - will argue that we (Germans) really made a few wrong decisions. But. Saying that we misjudged Russia under Putin doesn't imply that German "Ostpolitik" was also wrong (re: that link you posted a few pages ago). Detente (Entspannungspolitik) - trade was part of that - was in the best interest of Germany because as you say yourself we were threatened with conventional and nuclear destruction. From both sides! Because Germany would have been the battlefield and it would have been Germans having to kill Germans. Germany would have been devastated even had such a war stayed conventional. And let's not forget that both sides had planned to use nukes on German territory. And so I'd argue that some if the mote hawkish US hardliners also didn't have Getmany's best interest in mind.

The Soviet Union was not Russia under Putin. I don't say they were better, just that the situation back then was different and therefore saying the US were right during the recent years does not proof the US were right during the cold war.

Reagan played a very dangerous game with his idea of letting the Soviets ruin themselves over an arms race. It was a very realistic possibility that the Soviets would have started a war seeing that at this rate it wouldn't have been possible later on. In the end it seems to have worked, at least we weren't all vaporized. (West) Germany on the other hand didn't make peace with the devil, we made deals with the devil (there's a difference, I'd argue). In a slightly different way than today, though. Because we were far less dependent on the Soviet Union than they were (later on) on German money. That's even more true for the GDR, btw. All in all, that may have been dangerous, too. But the comparatively good relations to the Soviet Union did help  keeping the fall of the Berlin Wall and the subsequent retreat of the Soviet Army peaceful.

The grave mistake was in giving into greed and afterwards, further increasing German dependency on Russian gas and oil and then either ignoring the signs or just going full capitalism and not caring as long as there was enough profit. Btw that was the trademark of Angels Merkel: "marktkonforme Demokratie" (dunno, market compatible democracy comes close enough, I guess), politics has to serve the economy.

Edited August 28, 2022 by Butschi

[Battlefront.com]

2 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Dyslexia rules K.O.

That and I just picked up something from an FFL earlier in the day.  That time no dyslexia

Steve

[Kinophile]

It's not whataboutism.  It's analysis within context, comparing and contrasting A / B as they are structurally connected and directly connected to each other. 

Otherwise its like talking about how a boxer has all these strengths and weaknesses, but what really matters is who are they up against,  and what do those strengths /weaknesses mean within that context. One could describe Boxer A's amazing left-hook haymaker, but that matters way more if we know the opponent is also left handed. If we didn't know that, then we'd rightly assume A has a significant feature and advantage. 

But you know this stuff, so I'm a little surprised you're getting a but wound up.  I mean no offence or attack,  to be clear. 

Edited August 28, 2022 by Kinophile

[Battlefront.com]

2 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Here's a new word for you, Steve: превентивный.

The Praesidium of the Supreme Soviet has censured Comrade Grigorenko for his politically immature speech....

So whataboutism is mandatory on this thread now?

No, it's not whataboutism... it's context. 

2 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

...i.e. we can't discuss the pressures facing Ukraine without also constantly chanting to ourselves 'but you should see the other guy!'

When trying to make an assessment of who is going to win a fight, you have to look at both sides.  Have to. 

Looking at a guy with a bashed in nose and a limp arm might seem really bad, but how do you know what it means?  If the other guy is standing there without a scratch or with a gaping shotgun wound to the chest matters.  A lot.

2 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

We can read pages and pages and pages of confident stuff here every day about the myriad of ways Russia sux.  Done to death, in fact. How do I count the ways?

I don't really see it that way.  You posted a bunch of legitimate points regarding Ukraine's status, some of which are debatable and others less so.  Good thing to do, no problems there.  But without context it is relatively meaningless.  Did you intend your post to be meaningless?  I doubt it, so you should be pleased you started a meaningful discussion.

2 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

....and with that, I'm standing down for a bit. The air has gotten a little thick in here.

Not sure why.  I see nothing to get upset about.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

9 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

It's not whataboutism.  It's analysis within context, comparing and contrasting A / B as they are structurally connected and directly connected to each other. 

Otherwise its like talking about how a boxer has all these strengths and weaknesses, but what really matters is who are they up against,  and what do those strengths /weaknesses mean within that context. One could describe Boxer A's amazing left-hook haymaker, but that matters way more if we know the opponent is also left handed. If we didn't know that, then we'd rightly assume A has a significant feature and advantage. 

But you know this stuff, so I'm a little surprised you're getting a but wound up.  I mean no offence or attack,  to be clear. 

Hah!  You were faster on the draw than me

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

31 minutes ago, Butschi said:

Saying that we misjudged Russia under Putin doesn't imply that German "Ostpolitik" was also wrong (re: that link you posted a few pages ago). Detente (Entspannungspolitik) - trade was part of that - was in the best interest of Germany because as you say yourself we were threatened with conventional and nuclear destruction. From both sides! Because Germany would have been the battlefield and it would have been Germans having to kill Germans. Germany would have been devastated even had such a war stayed conventional. And let's not forget that both sides had planned to use nukes on German territory.

I agree that Ostpolitik itself wasn't worth trying.  In fact, I think it was a very worthy experiment.  I'd even grant you that it is possible that the way the Soviet Union collapsed (largely peacefully) was aided by Ostpolitik.  However, it should have been pretty clear by the 1980s that the fundamental concept of Ostpolitik didn't work.  And that was trade would on its own bring about political change in the East.  A failed war of aggression, decades of corrupt and inept industrial management, and brewing resentment within the Warsaw Pact against Soviet domination is what eventually brought about the end of Soviet Union.  I'd even say the arms race only made it happen sooner.

I am no expert on how Ostpolitik was implemented, which means I could be way off here.  To me it seems the mistake Germany made is it didn't appear to fully realize what a failure of Ostpolitik would look like.  To the US it was a failure by simply engaging in it as hard currency from the West flowed into Moscow without getting anything other than energy in return.  That hard currency could be used to further the Soviet's expansionist goals and thereby put Germany at increased risk.  This could be American paranoia, but it could also have been the correct read of Soviet intentions.  I think we can now see that it's likely that the American position was more realistic than the German one.

OK, so let's say we give Germany a break for what happened under the Soviet Union.  It didn't work, yet it didn't blow up in Germany's face.  It was worth a shot, though, so learn from it and move on with that knowledge.  Germany did the exact opposite with Russia.  They should have known better and, sadly, probably did.  Profit was put ahead of principle or even commonsense. This time it did blow up in Germany's face.

31 minutes ago, Butschi said:

And so I'd argue that some if the mote hawkish US hardliners also didn't have Getmany's best interest in mind.

Yup, context is important.  Very easy for someone in Washington to say "Better Dead Than Red" when there's no Soviet forces just a few miles away.

31 minutes ago, Butschi said:

The Soviet Union was not Russia under Putin. I don't say they were better, just that the situation back then was different and therefore saying the US were right during the recent years does not proof the US were right during the cold war.

Reagan played a very dangerous game with his idea of letting the Soviets ruin themselves over an arms race. It was a very realistic possibility that the Soviets would have started a war seeing that at this rate it wouldn't have been possible later on. In the end it seems to have worked, at least we weren't all vaporized. (West) Germany on the other hand didn't make peace with the devil, we made deals with the devil (there's a difference, I'd argue). In a slightly different way than today, though. Because we were far less dependent on the Soviet Union than they were (later on) on German money. That's even more true for the GDR, btw. All in all, that may have been dangerous, too. But the comparatively good relations to the Soviet Union did help  keeping the fall of the Berlin Wall and the subsequent retreat of the Soviet Army peaceful.

The grave mistake was in giving into greed and afterwards, further increasing German dependency on Russian gas and oil and then either ignoring the signs or just going full capitalism and not caring as long as there was enough profit. Btw that was the trademark of Angels Merkel: "marktkonforme Demokratie" (dunno, market compatible democracy comes close enough, I guess), politics has to serve the economy.

I don't disagree with anything you wrote.  Dealing with Soviet Union the way Germany did has some room for debate about pros and cons.  I'm in the camp that thinks Germany should be cut slack there, even if I do side with the American view more.  Dealing with Russia, on the other hand, was a complete failure.  Germany absolutely should have known better early in the relationship and definitely did the more it went on.

Again, I am not picking on Germany.  I see much of the same behavior towards Saudi Arabia by my own country as Germany did with Russia.  The difference is that Saudi Arabia's ability to harm others is limited to political corruption, small scale conventional warfare, and terrorism.  Also, Saudi Arabia on its worst day is more aligned with US foreign policy than Russia was on its best day.  So there is that

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

8 hours ago, billbindc said:

We should be careful of the assumption that there's perfect information available to virtually anyone involved. The RusNats clearly ducked a bit when it happened. Now they've started to stick their heads up again. I'd say that tells us that at minimum they weren't sure at first who it was aimed at but that they've been either reassured or know it wasn't for a message for them. But that's all it tells us.

Not quite   As I said there is another option... the message was intended for them, they know it was, and they don't care. 

Reminds me a wise ass friend of mine in middle school.  He was picking on a girlfriend of a guy that shouldn't have been messed with.  The guy (not a bad guy, just a tough guy) warned my friend that he needed to keep it to himself.  My friend knew what he was doing, new the message was intended for him, and should have known the guy wasn't kidding around.  So what did he do?  Made a comment about her thighs.  The guy approached him in the hallway after class and with one punch broke his nose.  Should he have seen it coming?  Yup, but he just couldn't help himself.

If I'm correct about the Duginia's killing being a message from the GRU (Steve Bannon just said it is the CIA that killed her, so hey... I could be wrong!), it seems Girkin, Murz, and perhaps others felt they didn't need to pay attention to it for whatever reason.  But it seems Murz belatedly is now paying attention.  That post of his was exactly the sort of thing the GRU is most definitely not interested in seeing any more.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Putin critic in Washington DC died under mysterious circumstances.  Russia followers will recognize quite a few names in this article:

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/08/26/dan-rapoport-putin-critic-was-it-suicide-00053836

Steve

[Grigb]

5 hours ago, Calamine Waffles said:

I think this is the next best thing to giving Ukraine enough artillery, though I wonder how effective this is against Orlan-10.

it is unlikely to be effective against Orlan-10. The range is too big. However, Orlan is vulnerable to normal AD systems. So, in a way good field AD should be able to handle it. 

[dan/california]

16 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Not quite   As I said there is another option... the message was intended for them, they know it was, and they don't care. 

Reminds me a wise ass friend of mine in middle school.  He was picking on a girlfriend of a guy that shouldn't have been messed with.  The guy (not a bad guy, just a tough guy) warned my friend that he needed to keep it to himself.  My friend knew what he was doing, new the message was intended for him, and should have known the guy wasn't kidding around.  So what did he do?  Made a comment about her thighs.  The guy approached him in the hallway after class and with one punch broke his nose.  Should he have seen it coming?  Yup, but he just couldn't help himself.

If I'm correct about the Duginia's killing being a message from the GRU (Steve Bannon just said it is the CIA that killed her, so hey... I could be wrong!), it seems Girkin, Murz, and perhaps others felt they didn't need to pay attention to it for whatever reason.  But it seems Murz belatedly is now paying attention.  That post of his was exactly the sort of thing the GRU is most definitely not interested in seeing any more.

Steve

So the next question is how the Ru Nats take these multiple "messages"? Do they just slink off into their very dark corners and whisper to each other quietly? Or is slapping them down the equivalent of screwing the relief valve on a water heater shut, and there is going to be one heck a loud noise sometime soon, and a hole in the roof to go with it? There is a rather large difference between those scenarios. Of course the Nats might try something and fail pitifully, allowing Putin's regime to go on about losing this war at their own pace.

[Calamine Waffles]

26 minutes ago, Grigb said:

it is unlikely to be effective against Orlan-10. The range is too big. However, Orlan is vulnerable to normal AD systems. So, in a way good field AD should be able to handle it. 

Good field AD like MANPADS is more expensive than Orlan-10, though.