How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[kevinkin]

7 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Go for as much of #1 as possible without getting #2 into the mix?  Ignore #3 for now and hope that it comes about eventually through collective international action over time?

Been thinking along those lines since the failure of Russia's Operation B&B aka Bumbling Blitzkrieg. So while we can use public info to get a handle on #1 (military) and use ISR and precise messaging to all parties to minimize #2, #3 (the brass ring) is hard for us to get a handle on because a lot may come about via cloak and dagger. Yet, we can witness a societal decline brought about by international actions like sanctions etc. unless Russia becomes a hermit nation. Would pay good money to sit in on CIA meetings re: all this.  

[LongLeftFlank]

1 minute ago, chuckdyke said:

40 years ago on November 11, 1975 Gough Whitlam’s Labor government was dismissed from office by the Queen’s representative the Governor General. At a stroke, the carefully nurtured image of the Crown’s ‘impartiality’ was blown away and the naked class bias of the parliamentary system was exposed. On the end of the day they have the power.

Augggggggghhhhhh!!!!!!!!

[Butschi]

Also, those ~300 are later models. I don't know what happened to the older variants. I think Germany gave away many but maybe some were mothballed?

[billbindc]

9 hours ago, Sojourner said:

Macgregor: there's been a lot of loose talk about the viability of waging a limited nuclear war against Russia, using the so-called tactical nuclear weapon…

 

eeewww, I feel dirty just pasting that, but WTF???

Who the hell is talking loosely about using nukes against Russia?

 

Absolutely nobody.

[akd]

@sburke @Kinophile

Might be an error, but this says that 27-year-old Senior Lt. Igor Boychuk was commander of the Engineer-Sapper Battalion of the 138th Separate Motorized Rifle Brigade when he was killed:

 

Edited September 23, 2022 by akd

[chuckdyke]

2 minutes ago, Butschi said:

Also, those ~300 are later models. I don't know what happened to the older variants. I think Germany gave away many but maybe some were mothballed?

Make a casemate upper structure with the new 130mm gun and you have a familiar vehicle. Nothing beats tradition.  

[keas66]

Just now, chuckdyke said:

40 years ago on November 11, 1975 Gough Whitlam’s Labor government was dismissed from office by the Queen’s representative the Governor General. At a stroke, the carefully nurtured image of the Crown’s ‘impartiality’ was blown away and the naked class bias of the parliamentary system was exposed. On the end of the day they have the power.

So argument by Exception rather than General rule ? Fine . That has happened once  in the last hundred years  in Australia and it happened with the co-operation of  many  interested parties in  Australia at the time - nothing at all to do with the Queen/Monarchy - and more to do with the Australian Senate   . No one has yet tried this in  NZ   - there was an incident in 1926  in Canada  which was controversial  but again   1 event in the last hundred years worthy of note .

[LongLeftFlank]

1 minute ago, keas66 said:

 

Give me, give me back my thread....

I prefer the Resolved: All Russians Are Orcs, Now And Forevermore do loop.

[chuckdyke]

6 minutes ago, keas66 said:

So argument by Exception rather than General rule ? Fine . That has happened once  in the last hundred years  in Australia and it happened with the co-operation of  many  interested parties in  Australia at the time - nothing at all to do with the Queen/Monarchy - and more to do with the Australian Senate   .

Nope it was the Queen's representative who did it. Sir John Kerr John Kerr (governor-general) - Wikipedia Queen Elizabeth was wise I am afraid her pedantic son is not. On the end of the day the governor general can dismiss parliament. Time for my sweet dreams. 

Edited September 23, 2022 by chuckdyke

[DesertFox]

13 minutes ago, Butschi said:

Also, those ~300 are later models. I don't know what happened to the older variants. I think Germany gave away many but maybe some were mothballed?

As I understand things there are no mothballed ones. Already for the decision to increase to 328 pieces in 2015 100 tanks had to be bought back from the industry. And yes, the aim is to upgrade all of them to A7V standard.

Source: Panzertruppe (Bundeswehr) – Wikipedia

Edited September 23, 2022 by DesertFox

[Lethaface]

7 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Go for as much of #1 as possible without getting #2 into the mix?  Ignore #3 for now and hope that it comes about eventually through collective international action over time?

I'd expect something along those lines, it's what I'd opt for anyway. Ukraine has the ability to somewhat negotiate/feel around #2 but #3 is mainly a Russian party. Although of course what happens in #1 and #2 will have some indirect influence on #3.

[LongLeftFlank]

S'more for the @sburke meat wagon.

Glossu ('Beast') Rabban, is that you?

The rest of this thread is quite some reading.... wailing and gnashing of teeth in Russia, 'extinction' of all non-Russian minorities, etc.

*****

DO NOT MISS THIS ONE.  EPIC RETRO TROLLING

 

But is there a Vlasov Army in the making here?  Why let the 'LendLease' end with just captured Russian vehicles?  Bring over every enemy soldier (especially minorities!) who will defect.  That could well become a serious possibility by winter, as the 'boots wear out'.

 

 

Edited September 23, 2022 by LongLeftFlank

[Aragorn2002]

25 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Give me, give me back my thread....

I prefer the Resolved: All Russians Are Orcs, Now And Forevermore do loop.

All Russians are Orcs. There you go and no, don't mention it, it was a pleasure.

 

Edited September 23, 2022 by Aragorn2002

[LongLeftFlank]

41 minutes ago, Aragorn2002 said:

All Russians are Orcs. There you go and no, don't mention it, it was a pleasure.

 

Yeah, pretty hard to find much nice to say about Russians these days, innit?

"I am going to war without being loved back"

The Society Coming Unglued Will Be Televised!

Edited September 23, 2022 by LongLeftFlank

[Lethaface]

5 hours ago, Butschi said:

Ok, I kind of disagree with #1. I said so earlier but let me elaborate.

We, or Ukraine for that matter, should consider the "why?". My point may be academic because I can't look into the heads of those who decide and the net result is the same, anyway.

So, going back to 1991, meaning retaking Crimea and the Donbas.

Is it, as you put it, about returning to 1991 borders, i.e. taking a map from that time and saying "look here, those lines belong here instead of there"? I deliberately make it sound a trivial matter because lines on maps are just an abstract concept. I am very happy that in this day and age we are far less inclined to go to war just in order to shift lines on maps. Hell, nations are a somewhat abstract concept for that matter. If it is only about that, no I don't agree with that goal.

Now, if it means liberating Ukrainians having to live under Russias yoke, that is a different and very legitimate matter. But. We've had a good number of pages now filled with discussions about whether the majority of people in the Donbas or on Crimea actually want to be liberated. I won't speculate on that because I simply lack the knowledge. I'll say that we should try to avoid double standards here and grant regions the right to secede from countries we don't like (Taiwan and China anyone?) and don't when it is from country we are more aligned with.

Goes into the same direction: Preventing Russian war crimes. Yes, of course!

Preventing Russia from blocking Ukrainian access the black sea. Also fine.

Retaking the lost territory just to discourage Russia (or other imperialists out there) from trying to invade other countries - a good reason too.

So, there, IMO, there are good, bad and somewhat mixed reasons and I can't agree with all of them. As I said my thinking here may be academic. Probably the reason for wanting to go back to 1991 borders is a mix of some or all of the above points.

Of course the goal is to take back all territory, the question is how far one will go in order to get there. The main question in that is how much Ukrainian lives will it cost and how much they are willing to sacrifice. Of course support is also something Ukraine needs to 'manage' for. 

But like namendedAllen posted a few pages ago, the battlefield has a say first.

So far Ukrainian leadership has been rather sensible and competent so I'm not expecting they're planning to wage an 80-year war to retake all last km2 of their territory. Should they converge on such a path, there will be less support compared to today.

[kevinkin]

46 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Give me, give me back my thread....

B52s ... saw them at a club when they just started. 

Saw these guys at their peak several times. 

 

[RandomCommenter]

 

 

[mosuri]

1 hour ago, DesertFox said:

 upgrade all of them to A7V standard.

I had to read this a couple of times

[Offshoot]

1 hour ago, keas66 said:

The Monarchy has no power at all - its there for the Tourists.

Not true, the Queen/King has the right to vet any law that affect's the crown's interests (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/08/royals-vetted-more-than-1000-laws-via-queens-consent)

"The investigation uncovered evidence suggesting that she used the procedure to persuade government ministers to change a 1970s transparency law in order to conceal her private wealth from the public.

The documents also show that on other occasions the monarch’s advisers demanded exclusions from proposed laws relating to road safety and land policy that appeared to affect her estates, and pressed for government policy on historic sites to be altered."

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, Butschi said:

I do. It is still a line on a map, be it 8 or 31 years old. It is no less abstract.

Your basic point about not being so hung up on where a line is drawn is something I'm in full agreement with.  This is exactly why Ukraine needs to think long and hard about pursuing goals purely based on pride and historical precedence instead of pragmatic thinking.  The cost of taking, rebuilding, and administering these areas needs to be part of Ukraine's thinking, not just "this is where the line was, that's all that matters".

However, the GOAL of returning all of its territory should not be disputed.  Russia redrew those lines through force and that should never be condoned.  If Ukraine wants to take back every square meter of its territory, they have every right to do so.  I fully support that right because anything other than that rewards nations using force.  Whether it is smart for Ukraine to seek back every meter of territory is a SEPARATE question to ask.

Steve

[RandomCommenter]

Maybe someone on here with Russian can confirm this but apparently this video shows two comedians calling up Nikolei Peskov (Dmitry Peskov's son) pretending to draft him. And he drops the "do you know who my father is" within 10 seconds. So looks like the Russian elite don't want to send their boys off to Ukraine.

 

And I had to share this insight into the quality of troops being rounded up by the Russians.

 

 

[Calamine Waffles]

@Grigb this is the paper I mentioned I am writing on comparing the T-64BV 2017 and T-72B3M (2016): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DBBz-3MkZUoBLnvRX8qyFtMZmn8rKslAsgG4-8_Y1SM/edit
 

I need to update it to add more information about tank combat in Ukraine that has occurred since the Kyiv withdrawal in April (such as the information from Shawshank Redemption's channel and the interview with Roman Bahaiev etc.), but I'd welcome your feedback (and that of anyone else knowledgeable about Ukrainian and Russian armour).

Edited September 23, 2022 by Calamine Waffles

[LongLeftFlank]

13 minutes ago, Offshoot said:

Not true, the Queen/King has the right to vet any law that affect's the crown's interests

I hear, much support for the Monarchy....

(and yes, I'm passive-aggressively threadbombing you massively OT folks, killing you softly with my song. Until I'm told to stop)

Edited September 23, 2022 by LongLeftFlank

[Battlefront.com]

2 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Apologies if this outstanding (and highly CM relevant!) thread has been posted before. This thread adds pages so quickly now, it's hard to keep up. (And some  keeps posting OT videos).  This has got my mapmaking / scenario designing fingers itching.... if only I had time!

Option 2: After a breakthrough in the Barvinok - Bohorodychne area, the main group should break through in a straight line towards Dar'ivka.

 

There are two difficulties here:

1. the AFU prefers to advance on roads, and there are fields here. But as long as it's dry, this shouldn't be an obstacle. There are about 24 km to cover, it can be done in a day. There is bocage (mixed woodland and pasture) in the area, which will help with concealment.

2. The second problem is possible Russian Army strongholds in settlements and villages that would have to be bypassed. This means that forces must be allocated to attack them.

The route avoids large population centres. The Russians usually defend them, neglecting the smaller ones.....

....in both cases the key will be a breakthrough of the first line of Russian defence, but I think the AFU can pull it off. They have already done it, only they did not develop the offensive further. Now they should concentrate on one powerful strike and then everything will work out. Especially since there is time to move important units, such as reconnaissance or assault units from Izyum.

 

Great thread!  Thanks for posting it.

I think the goals for Ukraine's ground offensive in Kherson have been pretty obvious from the start... cut up the defenders into 2-3 pieces using the Dnepr as a non-negotiable "pincer".  Because of the poor road network in the area Russia occupies, physically cutting through to the Dnepr is not necessary (though definitely desirable).  Russia's positions northeast of Kherson can not be sustained after the loss of the one good road out of Kherson.

The point that ChrisO makes about distances being rather short is good, as are his points about the difficulties of the most direct (optimal) path to slicing through to river.  If the rains are unfavorable, the path is going to be pretty tough.  But January?  Should be easy.  Maybe even easier than today because the treelines will be defoliated and whatever remaining crops no longer providing concealment.

Steve

[cyrano01]

1 hour ago, keas66 said:

 

You seem to have some misunderstandings as to how Elected Governments in the West work ?

The Monarchy has no power at all - its there for the Tourists  . The Prime Minister is always elected by members of his/her own party - works the same in all English based Parliamentary systems around the planet - You get to elect the party - not decide who is in  cabinet . The House of Lords is really  only a historical anomaly in the UK - and we commonwealth citizens generally  like our History . This particular part of the British system has not really been copied  over to  AUS/NZ/CAN  and elsewhere  - but we do get our Honors lists - and people like them .

Governments once elected are free to pursue whatever policies they like - but they do need to keep the electorates happy to some degree - since they are up for re-election again 3-4-5 years  . A Elected Government which chooses to follow unpopular policies won't be in Government for long .

 

Good summary response. FWIW I would only add that you don't actually elect the party, you elect the individual representative of your constituency. Once elected they can, and do, change parties without being re-elected. Similarly, if that MP dies/resigns then there has to be a bye-election for a replacement, the party doesn't get to swap a replacement straight in.

 

Now back to our normal programmes more relevant to the situation in Ukraine!