How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[kraze]

10 minutes ago, Maquisard manqué said:

Isn’t that the same logic for Russia’s treatment of reputedly (contested by Russia) humanitarian aid workers being killed in Ukraine?

No?

[kraze]

5 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

Not under the control or in the power of another; able to act or be done as one wishes. The meaning in plain English.

who's saying russian elections aren't mostly 'free' in the first place?

Sure getting 86% of votes looks a lot better on TV screens (and to whomever is the tsar of russia as you are reading this sometime in the future) than getting 76% or even 66% - but they would still vote for the tsar regardless. Not to mention that huge jump in tsar's popularity with a whatever war Russia started now, as you are reading this sometime in the future, although I do hope Russia simply doesn't exist in your time, my friend.

[chuckdyke]

A special operation is not a war according to putin. It is only logical that they are not entitled to protection under the Geneva convention. Anyway Russia withdrew recognition of the Geneva convention.

Russia Withdrew Recognition of the Geneva Convention on International Armed Conflicts – Сталкер Zone (stalkerzone.org)

[chuckdyke]

4 minutes ago, kraze said:

Sure getting 86% of votes looks a lot better on TV screens (and to whomever is the tsar of russia as you are reading this sometime in the future) than getting 76% or even 66% -

Getting these figures are highly suspect in Australia. You need a booming economy, social safety nets and fully funded education. Then in Australia you're lucky to have 60% of the vote. Sad is how skeptical people are in interpreting the word freedom. 

[Bulletpoint]

44 minutes ago, Offshoot said:

the conditions for Ukrainian POWs and Russian interrogations (they seem to be obsessed with foreigners fighting for and training and equipping the Ukrainians).

Obsessed with good reason, I'd say. Western support is the biggest reason why Ukraine is winning.

[chuckdyke]

1 minute ago, Bulletpoint said:

Obsessed with good reason, I'd say. Western support is the biggest reason why Ukraine is winning.

It is like making a cup of coffee. Not possible because the department store sells coffee machines. But the reason is some one likes a cup of coffee. They would win anyway in the long run now it goes a little quicker.

 

[chuckdyke]

Here a good look at the Bushmaster 4X4. Wish they would make a civilian version called the Bushcamper or something like that. Nicely explained in crystal clear English. 

 

[Grossman]

[Taranis]

"Ukrainian military vehicles move on a road in the liberated territory of the Kharkiv region, Ukraine, Monday, September 12, 2022. KOSTIANTYN LIBEROV / AP"
*BREM-1

[kraze]

1 hour ago, chuckdyke said:

Getting these figures are highly suspect in Australia. You need a booming economy, social safety nets and fully funded education. Then in Australia you're lucky to have 60% of the vote. Sad is how skeptical people are in interpreting the word freedom. 

That's because in Australia democracy is deeply rooted in the mentality of society - you treat people you elect as temporary managers, not as "strong leaders" you grant an absolute power to "lead" (e.g. do whatever they want with the country). So of course you are not mentally stuck with a familiar face, you want change.

In Ukraine we still have remnants of mental trauma from imperialism like that - like people electing the same mayor for 15+ years straight simply because... well... he's kinda a local feudal everybody knows - and the more he stays - the more he's treated as an inherent part of the land in question. Presidents are, thankfully, not so lucky.

[chuckdyke]

2 minutes ago, kraze said:

That's because in Australia democracy is deeply rooted in the mentality of society

Years ago, the prime minister visited a mining town where I was employed at the time and enjoyed a BBQ. He said my name is Bob and cooked his own sausages. Wearing T-Shirt shorts and flip flops like the rest of us. 

[Beleg85]

17 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

Years ago, the prime minister visited a mining town where I was employed at the time and enjoyed a BBQ. He said my name is Bob and cooked his own sausages. Wearing T-Shirt shorts and flip flops like the rest of us. 

Oh, Putin do more or less the same, it just happens locals are made entirely of FSB apparatus.

[The_Capt]

1 hour ago, Huba said:

Another crack in the system:

 

I am not really sure why anyone believes that "mobilization" is some sort of magic spell that will solve this war for Russia....on either side of this equation.  We have covered this before but a review may be in order.

Key here is the term "peer-conflict".  That means a relative symmetry between military capability and architectures to the point that numbers start to matter in determining outcome.  In this situation theoretically the side with the higher force ratios will have a better chance of winning.  At this point this conflict is nowhere near a level of qualitative parity.

Beyond the morale issues, which are legion, a loose measure of military quality is DETO - Doctrine, Equipment, Training and Organization.  (Before anyone weighs in, yes there are about a half dozen national variations on this that take into account everything from policy to infrastructure, but lets keep it simple).

So, yes, Russia has a big scary population base - we are probably talking 30+ million fighting age males, assuming you could tap even 10 percent of that - excess and fit-ish - that is 3+ million troops Russia could throw at this war.  Assuming mass conscription doesn't trigger a major political upheaval; the first problem is you have to turn those 3+ million civilians into combat capable military formations - something the Russian have demonstrated problems with before the war. 

Second major problem is that one has to turn them into military fighting formations of the same or better quality than the UA.  And remember the UA is already force generating and will continue to do so long after this war is over...because Russia.  So Russia has to go from zero to hero faster than the UA are already doing.  Now before someone spouts of "mass has a quality all its own" - a truism which has died an ignoble death in this conflict - in modern warfare one still needs relative parity for quantity to matter.  I welcome any nation to try low quality human wave attacks on the modern battlefield.  In fact the UA is demonstrating the exact opposite right now - high quality empowered small is kicking dumb-large to death.  So now in order to mobilize Russia needs to meet a bar it did not have on 23 Feb, let alone in time to get out in front of things now.

Third major problem, Russia does not even have the essential skillsets to create a peer military.  And I am talking everywhere.  For example, in order to create an ISR architecture on par with the West they need an entire military ISR complex that does not exist anywhere near that level.  It took the US decades - dating back to AirLand Battle (hey go check out CMCW while you are at it!) - to construct the ISR architecture they are pumping into Ukraine right now.  Further Ukraine has a home grown system they 1) have training and technical support for from the west, 2) have a 6 month head start, and 3) are not living under crippling sanctions.  Some Iranian drones do not make an ISR architecture, it is what you plug those drones into.

So Russia can "mobilize" all it wants; however, it will be mobilizing a Cold War era military, one worse than it had before this war.  They will be nowhere near DETO parity with the UA for maybe a couple decades.  With their new drones they can watch all those columns of T55s, driven by conscripts with a months training, supported by a rickety logistics corp get hammered by HIMARs and next-gen drone swarms.  

I will give the Russians points for stubborn, they have that in spades.  This war is clearly at the "cut your losses" point.  The RA has left as much hardware on the battlefield as the Iraqi Army did in the Gulf War - when you are in that league, get out!  Mobilization will not save them, this is not 1941, it is 1905.

Edited September 13, 2022 by The_Capt

[Kinophile]

 

[Bulletpoint]

1 hour ago, chuckdyke said:

It is like making a cup of coffee. Not possible because the department store sells coffee machines. But the reason is some one likes a cup of coffee. They would win anyway in the long run now it goes a little quicker.

 

No coffee without beans. Especially the accurate beans with long range.

[Huba]

32 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I am not really sure why anyone believes that "mobilization" is some sort of magic spell that will solve this war for Russia....on either side of this equation.  We have covered this before but a review may be in order.

Key here is the term "peer-conflict".  That means a relative symmetry between military capability and architectures to the point that numbers start to matter in determining outcome.  In this situation theoretically the side with the higher force ratios will have a better chance of winning.  At this point this conflict is nowhere near a level of qualitative parity.

Beyond the morale issues, which are legion, a loose measure of military quality is DETO - Doctrine, Equipment, Training and Organization.  (Before anyone weighs in, yes there are about a half dozen national variations on this that take into account everything from policy to infrastructure, but lets keep it simple).

So, yes, Russia has a big scary population base - we are probably talking 30+ million fighting age males, assuming you could tap even 10 percent of that - excess and fit-ish - that is 3+ million troops Russia could throw at this war.  Assuming mass conscription doesn't trigger a major political upheaval; the first problem is you have to turn those 3+ million civilians into combat capable military formations - something the Russian have demonstrated problems with before the war. 

Second major problem is that one has to turn them into military fighting formations of the same or better quality than the UA.  And remember the UA is already force generating and will continue to do so long after this war is over...because Russia.  So Russia has to go from zero to hero faster than the UA are already doing.  Now before someone spouts of "mass has a quality all its own" - a truism which has died an ignoble death in this conflict - in modern warfare one still needs relative parity for quantity to matter - I welcome any nation to try low quality human wave attacks on the modern battlefield.  In fact the UA is demonstrating the exact opposite right now - high quality empowered small is kicking dumb-large to death.  So now in order to mobilize Russia needs to meet a bar it did not have on 23 Feb, let alone in time to get out in front of thing now.

Third major problem, Russia does not even have the essential skillsets to create a peer military.  And I am talking everywhere.  In order to create an ISR architecture on par with the West they need an entire military ISR complex that does not exist anywhere near that level.  It took the US decades - dating back to AirLand Battle (hey go check out CMCW while you are at it!) - to construct the ISR architecture they are pumping into Ukraine right now.  Further Ukraine has a home grown system they 1) have training and technical support for from the west, 2) have a 6 month head start, and 3) are not living under crippling sanctions.  Some Iranian drones do not make an ISR architecture, it is what you plug those drones into.

So Russia can "mobilize" all it wants; however, it will be mobilizing a Cold War era military, one worse that it had before this war.  With their new drones they can watch all those columns of T55s, driven by conscripts with a months training, supported by a rickety logistics corp get hammered by HIMARs and next-gen drone swarms.  

I will give the Russians points for stubborn, they have that in spades.  This war is clearly at the "cut your losses" point.  The RA has left as much hardware on the battlefield as the Iraqi Army did in the Gulf War - when you are in that league get out!  Mobilization will not save them, this is not 1941, it is 1905.

It's only getting more true with every passing day. Doesn't mean they understand it and won't do it. Facing total collapse they might at least want to show that they tried. I personally think that they will just collapse before they manage to even start that.
I hinted more at Zyuganov openly calling the SMO a war, which theoretically should land him in jail, right? It probably won't, and it is a pure insubordination. Either Kremlin can't control various NATs anymore, or it is just preparing the ground for actually declaring mobilization

[Grossman]

 

[chuckdyke]

50 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

No coffee without beans. Especially the accurate beans with long range.

You just don't get it. Without the human element which wants something things just don't happen. putin wants a greater Russian empire his soldiers in the field just don't give a sh*t. They fight for their salary.

[akd]

Ukrainians using a captured modernized BMP-3 against former owners:

 

[akd]

@sburke @Kinophile

Lt. Col. Pavel Krivov, battalion commander, 137th Guards Airborne Regiment, 106th Guards Airborne Division, killed in an ambush near Izium on Sept. 9th:

 

Edited September 13, 2022 by akd

[kevinkin]

https://worldpopulationreview.com/countries

Not to beat a dead horse 

Assuming the military age distribution is the same, Russia holds a 3.6 to 1 population advantage over Ukraine. This is not nearly enough given all the reasons cited above. It might be too low even for a near peer victory over an inferior force. But that's a closer call. Given the tech advantages Ukraine now holds, Russia would have to be pretty deep into a double digit advantage to undertake another invasion. "According to a decree signed this week by President Vladimir Putin, the title will be awarded to those who “birth and raise” 10 Russian citizens, with a lump sum of 1 million Russian rubles ($16,645) received when the 10th child turns one." We can breath easy for a while anyway. 

What's left in the deck? Nukes. Energy. Other adversaries of the West. Leaving Nukes off the table since they are such a discontinuity, Russia is boxed in and the world can wait and see what happens internally. Would be fascinating to know how the intel world is trying to understand and shape the palace intrigue. 

In other news, Ukraine in a squabble with Germany: 

 https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/13/russia-ukraine-war-updates.html

And a short list of "what the heck" options:

https://www.19fortyfive.com/2022/09/ukraines-victory-in-ukraine-all-of-the-tough-questions-that-must-be-asked/

"Clearly, it is U.S. and Western arms, past and present training, and intelligence that is helping Ukraine not only go toe to toe –  but now actually beat the mighty (?) Russian Army. How long will Washington have the stomach for such a high level of involvement? What happens if Putin escalates and launches a strike on NATO supply hubs in, say, Poland or if a missile accidentally hits NATO territory from Russia by mistake? What then? "

What if thinking is not very healthy and solves nothing. 

Edited September 13, 2022 by kevinkin

[Zeleban]

In St. Petersburg, they are experiencing the defeat from Ukraine in their own way

[Grigb]

5 hours ago, Offshoot said:

His message seems inconsistent. He is saying that the government are conducting the "SMO" badly and things need to change, and if they don't change, terrible things will happen. But then he says that people within the administration who are trying to change things are being treasonous and attempting a coup.

Is this because the people he thinks are attempting the coup are not the right people (not the real Russian patriots)? 

These people are wrong because they are attempting to do the worst RU sin - change Tsar. Maidan - nickname of UKR change of government is swearing for RU Nats. In their mind it is the worst thing that could happen. This is the major inconsistency in their thinking - Government which is puppet of Tsar is handling SMO badly, but thou must not attempt to remove the Tsar. Basically, they are doing it wrong because instead of advising the Tsar to do the right thing they are attempting to do the worst thing aka removing the Tsar. 

 

5 hours ago, Offshoot said:

 Who or what faction is he pointing the finger at?

He is pointing to two factions (Pro-Putin Liberals and Pro-Putin RU Nats aka Guardians). These two factions have at this period one common objective - keep the damage of war localized for the sake of stability. So, they probably act together for the time being. 

 

[Grigb]

Just my usual reminder not to underestimate RU Nat Volunteers. They are learning and improving. And not just their volunteer units but RU regular units as well. 

Quote

In our immediate plans:
1. A radical increase in our training on the use of UAVs. Formation of a significant corps of instructors [to be used by RU regulars as well].
2. Concentration and dissemination of combat experience by publishing books and guidelines [unofficially to regular units as well].
3. Mass deliveries of digital communications to the troops [only to L-DPR units]. Unfortunately, a lot of equipment that has been ordered by us a long time ago stuck at Customs.
4. Testing various new equipment and learning how to use it.

 

[billbindc]

11 minutes ago, Grigb said:

Just my usual reminder not to underestimate RU Nat Volunteers. They are learning and improving. And not just their volunteer units but RU regular units as well. 

 

"stuck at Customs" is going to take a significant toll on them but I'd go with the idea that L-DPR units will likely be the best there is left in Russia's army by the end of the year.