How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Zeleban]

20 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

"Hey, this is not what we signed up for..."

This would fundamentally change the purpose of NATO. It would go from a general defensive alliance to being an anti-Russian alliance.

And why would countries sign up for full NATO membership if they knew they could end up getting automatically involved in wars to protect non-NATO countries?

Why would they sign up if they could stay "neutral" but just invite NATO to come protect them if they ever had the need?

There is a huge difference between fighting on your own territory or on someone else's. In the first case, the civilian population and infrastructure suffer, in the second case, not.

[Zeleban]

 

That is why it is sometimes important to strike a preemptive strike, and not wait for the enemy to attack your territory.

[chuckdyke]

Excellent place to exile an *sshole. The small island is US the big one Russia. If he attempts to escape there is enough ammo to stop him.

 

[Hister]

15 hours ago, Haiduk said:

Those, who don't look at T-55 name, but at what inside the tank, say this is perfect tank, especially its gun with full digital FCS and APFSDS rounds, which have better penetration, than 125 mm Mango. I think, theese tanks can be placed to some air-assault or marines brigade either as "line tanks" or like "infantry support tank"  

Thank you Haiduk and the rest who chimmed in.

Tanks are supposedly not of much use in our terrain full of valleys ie our country is a tank trap. 

May the gift serve you well. 

[Zeleban]

A tweet showing what kind of circus this referendum really is. Propaganda videos show that voters do not actually make any choice

[FancyCat]

 

Edited September 25, 2022 by FancyCat

[kraze]

23 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

Excellent place to exile an *sshole. The small island is US the big one Russia. If he attempts to escape there is enough ammo to stop him.

 

You all keep giving putin way way too much importance.

He doesn't matter. He really really doesn't matter at all.

[Offshoot]

7 minutes ago, Zeleban said:

A tweet showing what kind of circus this referendum really is. Propaganda videos show that voters do not actually make any choice

Oh, I'm sure they just didn't want to put ticks on papers for promotional videos because they didn't want to inadvertently affect anyone's choice

[Zeleban]

2 minutes ago, Offshoot said:

Oh, I'm sure they just didn't want to put ticks on papers for promotional videos because they didn't want to inadvertently affect anyone's choice

there is an opinion that the SBU throw pens with invisible ink

[Billy Ringo]

18 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

That's the thing.  In a Western country the middle might not want to get involved, but they are better informed about events and what they mean.  They are likely to get upset earlier in the process.  For all the horrors that the West has put upon 3rd world countries over the years, the threshold for outrage by the the middle portion of the populace is vastly lower than it is in Russia.  With Russia the middle portion is disengaged from morality and ethical responsibility for their nation's actions to a massive degree.  So much so that active support for genocide and mass destruction is widespread. 

Still, the middle of Russian society does have their limits and those limits are being tested now.  Putin wasn't afraid of mobilization without good reason.  As the old saying goes, you're not paranoid if they really are out to get you!

Steve

I brought this up hundreds of pages ago and it was quickly dismissed, but I'm both naive in the terms of warfare and pretty stubborn.  So I'll ask again.  If US/NATO can drop a large munition within a square meter from hundreds of miles away, why can't they overcome Russian censorship and broadcast directly into the larger Russian population centers?  Yes, Russian media would proclaim it as all false BS, but at some point with continued and persistent broadcasts/internet, it should eventually start having an effect.  At least make the "middle portion" of the Russian population question what's going on AND provide them with reasonable guidance of what they might do without being jailed or pushed out of a high window.  Information and knowledge are incredibly powerful tools---are they being used to their fullest potential?

12 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

 

Since the start of the war there's been discussions about if Putin is a rational actor or not.  So far the actions he has taken are rational, however they have often been counter productive.  Him f'n around with the Zaporizhzhia nuke plant is a prime example.  His actions not only put everybody at risk of a massive nuclear disaster, but it also made him look like a complete reckless madman in many people's eyes.  He gained NOTHING from this, despite the extremely high risks.  Yet he did it anyway.

 

Maybe I'm giving Putin way too much credit, but--there was no nuclear disaster.  If he wanted to take out that facility it would be gone.  Maybe he orchestrated the whole scenario just to keep the West on edge, maybe he is just crazy enough to push the nuke button.  That he's capable of doing anything whether he's actually willing to do it or not.  

[Zeleban]

15 minutes ago, Billy Ringo said:

I brought this up hundreds of pages ago and it was quickly dismissed, but I'm both naive in the terms of warfare and pretty stubborn.  So I'll ask again.  If US/NATO can drop a large munition within a square meter from hundreds of miles away, why can't they overcome Russian censorship and broadcast directly into the larger Russian population centers?  Yes, Russian media would proclaim it as all false BS, but at some point with continued and persistent broadcasts/internet, it should eventually start having an effect.  At least make the "middle portion" of the Russian population question what's going on AND provide them with reasonable guidance of what they might do without being jailed or pushed out of a high window.  Information and knowledge are incredibly powerful tools---are they being used to their fullest potential?

Maybe I'm giving Putin way too much credit, but--there was no nuclear disaster.  If he wanted to take out that facility it would be gone.  Maybe he orchestrated the whole scenario just to keep the West on edge, maybe he is just crazy enough to push the nuke button.  That he's capable of doing anything whether he's actually willing to do it or not.  

Russians already have access to the Internet and can receive any information. They just believe what they want to believe.

[Haiduk]

6 hours ago, Calamine Waffles said:

That's honestly surprising, means Nizh would not protect against something like Kornet or RPG-29 and would be worse than Kontakt-5.

Kontakt-5 also doesn't protect against tandems as well as against "canon ball", but Nizh can degrade latter. So, this is approx equal ERAs, but Nizh slightly better and more modern.  

[Offshoot]

37 minutes ago, Zeleban said:

there is an opinion that the SBU throw pens with invisible ink

This sounds like a complicated and not very efficient way to rig a referendum. Definitely possible then.

[Zeleban]

 

interesting footage of the assault on the outskirts of Balakleya. It is noticeable that the Russians simply withdrew from the surroundings, leaving their positions

[Zeleban]

2 minutes ago, Offshoot said:

This sounds like a complicated and not very efficient way to rig a referendum. Definitely possible then.

It's a joke

[Centurian52]

I've fallen about 60 pages behind, so I'm not sure if this has already come up. But ISW has on several occasions mentioned that the Russians will try to forcfully mobilize Ukrianians in occupied parts of Ukraine. This seems...risky. Admittedly I am not Ukrainian, nor has my home been occupied by a foreign army for the last six months. But I have tried my best to put myself in the mindset of a Ukrainian being forcefully mobilized by the Russians (oppressive regime occupies my home and commits warcrimes for six months, and then gives me a gun), and that scenario always ends with me killing my Russian officers at the first opportunity and defecting the the Ukrainian army. Wouldn't any unit raised for the Russian army from forcefully mobilized Ukrainians end up mutinying, killing their Russian officers, and donating themselves and all of their equipment to the Ukrainian army? At the very least the Russians would have to dedicate a significant amount of manpower towards providing security to make sure such units do not immediately defect. And even then firefights between disgruntled soldiers and FSB should only skyrocket once there are thousands of soldiers that not only don't want to fight for the Russians, but would actively rather be on the other side.

Have I missed something? Do the Russians have some master plan to prevent forcefully mobilized Ukrainians from immeadiately fighting back? Perhaps by putting them in rear-services positions where it may not be necessary to give them guns? Or are people just far less likely to fight back, given ample means, motive, and opportunity, than I've assumed?

[Haiduk]

14 hours ago, Zeleban said:

Do not confuse the concepts of guidance and homing

Well, maybe I confused guidance and homing, but it's just discussion about terms. I just meant Strela-10 has opportunity to fight low thermal signature UAVs, using photocontrast/optical channel 

[BletchleyGeek]

2 hours ago, Grigb said:

Small update - in latest Rybar English speaking post (cannot post link right now) he says at Ridkodub UKR advancing toward Borove-Svatove highway reached operational space means UKR broke through RU defenses completely and now have freedom of maneuver. 

 

Nighttime in Australia and looks like tomorrow I will be waking up to very big news. It is shaping up as a pretty solid encirclement for the Russian forces in Lyman. 

[Grigb]

 While I am away here is a map with highlighted roads RU most likely use to supply Lyman area (blue sort of circles are most probable UKR objectives).

 

[JonS]

2 hours ago, Zeleban said:

In the first case, the civilian population and infrastructure suffer, in the second case, not.

I don't believe that to be true.

Civilians and infrastructure suffer either way.

Edited September 25, 2022 by JonS

[Haiduk]

13 minutes ago, Centurian52 said:

I've fallen about 60 pages behind, so I'm not sure if this has already come up. But ISW has on several occasions mentioned that the Russians will try to forcfully mobilize Ukrianians in occupied parts of Ukraine.

First of all this applies to those, who got Russian passport. Until you are not citizen of Russia, you can not be registered in enlistment office. Of course, they can just give passports by force, theating to fire from work or even to take by force without Russian citizenship, but I suppose they will adhere to some bereaucratic routines.   

But in present time in Melitopol', for example, Russians are forming "volunteer battalion after name of Sudoplatov" from local collaborators (Sudoplatov was NKVD foreign intelligence officer, which was born in Melitopol and fought with Ukrainian national movement, personally assasinated Yevhen Konovalets - leader of OUN) 

More concerning rumors about they can mobilzize UKR POWs, which already "voted" in Olenivka for TV cameras 

[Haiduk]

According to Mashovets information, Russians are throwing in counter-attacks in Ridkodub - Drobysheve - Lyman area remains of two BTGs of 144th MRD of 20th CAA and additionally moved there two regiments of LPR mobiks.  

Edited September 25, 2022 by Haiduk

[poesel]

Another sudden death...

https://www.thedailybeast.com/vladimir-nikolayevich-sungorkin-ally-of-vladimir-putin-dies-of-apparent-stroke-on-business-trip

He was the editor of Komsomolskaya Pravda

[The_Capt]

59 minutes ago, Billy Ringo said:

I brought this up hundreds of pages ago and it was quickly dismissed, but I'm both naive in the terms of warfare and pretty stubborn.  So I'll ask again.  If US/NATO can drop a large munition within a square meter from hundreds of miles away, why can't they overcome Russian censorship and broadcast directly into the larger Russian population centers?

Well you should not have been dismissed, and if I was part of that dismissal I owe you a Coke.  

The potential of information warfare is - and has been - definitive in this war.  We have been largely playing defence and Ukraine has been weaponizing truth brilliantly.  However, this is one area of warfare we in the West are coming from behind compared to Russia - or at least were.

For example, during 2014 in Crimea the Russian had hacked the telecommunications system and were able to send individual texts to protestors against the annexation - while they were protesting.

Mis and Dis information are one area that the Russians excelled at prior to this war, right up until they started throwing up all over themselves.  You can still see it in some circles but neither the information warfare acumen, nor cyber-Geddon seems to be doing much for the Russians.  We know they are out there and up to stuff but not at the levels we were expecting.  It kind of looks like they have divorced the methods of subversive warfare and conventional - which is another sign we overestimated their sophistication.

So why are we not doing the same:

- Policy.  We have very limited policy authority for these actions.  Mainly based on political risk aversion and lack of legal frameworks.  For example, is it legal to use disinformation to attack the RA logistical system when it may cause civilian suffering?  How much?  The LOAC does not account for some of the 2nd and 3rd order effects, so the lawyers have largely avoided then issue.  We can get a lot of people killed with information and subversive warfare and right now in the West we have yet to rationalize that with the rules based order - Russia, and China, do not have so much trouble.

- Tactics and doctrine.  The expertise to do this work exists but it is not concentrated within the military.  Hell, we are grappling with how to recruit cyber and information operators - these guys can make seven figures in private industry out of college and we offer them a rank of private and a lot of being yelled at.  Then there is the corporate knowledge base.  Try briefing a 50 year old general on what information warfare targeting and see why you get - a serious lack of knowledge and experience as it is something we let public affairs deal with.  Finally offensive information warfare is really an area we get icky with because it is basically lying to hurt, which is very unsportsmanlike and not something we have spent a lot of time studying.

- Human Terrain expertise.  We have specialists and experts but nowhere near the capacity and density we had back during the Cold War.  This means we could come off sounding like Tokyo Rose if we tried your massive info warfare plan - “Russian gangsters, your Putin is sub-optimal leader and your borscht is getting cold”.  Building that to a competitive point is going to take time.

So should we get in this game - definitely, about ten years ago.  Are we there yet, nope.  

[photon]

23 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Finally offensive information warfare is really an area we get icky with because it is basically lying to hurt, which is very unsportsmanlike and not something we have spent a lot of time studying.

I wonder whether our staff colleges teach the Odyssey, which is all about informational warfare?