How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Probus]

This is probably old news, but I thought I would post it just in case:

Illustrates why we need to be giving Ukraine Western tanks, don't you think?

[billbindc]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

Responses do not have to be immediate for them to be effective.  We also have seen NATO be very tight lipped about some things and then later we find out things were happening.

I don't know if MBTs or ATACMS are in the works or not, but NATO has not shown any signs of backing down to Russian escalation before so I think it is best to assume they aren't doing so now.

Steve

Biden just promised to defend "every inch of Ukraine with our NATO allies". Pretty much the opposite of standing down. Given the stakes, Washington is very unlikely to blink. 

Edited September 30, 2022 by billbindc

[akd]

Just now, billbindc said:

Biden just promised to defend "every inch of Ukraine with our NATO allies". Pretty much the opposite of standing down. Given the stakes, Washington is very unlikely to blink. 

No, he reiterated his promise that every inch of NATO will be defended.

[Haiduk]

6 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Japan was successful in expunging its imperial ambitions, which is clear evidence that a nation of people can reinvent itself.

The picture that you and others paint of Russia and all Russians make that impossible.  By the metric you are employing in your very detailed post Russians are irredeemable, all of them.  In fact that has been a central argument on this topic.  Now if you are arguing that Russians can change themselves over time, then we are now talking solutions and not revenge fantasies, which is excellent.

I would argue the best strategy is to pull Ukraine into collective defence and security mechanisms that Russia has never directly challenged.  Rebuild your nation.  Compress and contain Russia and its influence.  Leave sanctions and restrictions in place until Russia finds a leadership that is willing to cooperate in prosecution of war crimes and payment of reparations.  Then influence and encourage an internal Russian government that can conduct and support an effort to reduce the imperial impulse the nation has demonstrated - along with corruption, oppression and lack of democratic freedoms.

I think, you didn't understand me really. I never told that Russians are irredeemable. I just wrote about features, which composed "rashism". Even evil Madyars, which terrified Europe in 9th century after defeat and baptizing became similar to European nation. 

My statement about "collective guilt" isn't equal to "revange" and "let's they all die". In my opinion collective guilt is official and public recognizing of former ruling elites crimes and of course, reparations. And not as just transferring money from Russian budget to Ukrainian. This have to be separate tax, let even symbolical, but that every Russian, receiving own salary could see, that this part of his money could be belong to him, but due to aggressive politic and own support or indifference, this money will go to Ukraine. And some other, but let better concentrate on military aspects.

[billbindc]

2 minutes ago, akd said:

No, he reiterated his promise that every inch of NATO will be defended.

Ah...correct. 

This wasn't bad though: 

"Make no mistake: these actions have no legitimacy. The United States will always honor Ukraine's internationally recognized borders. We will continue to support Ukraine's efforts to regain control of its territory by strengthening its hand militarily and diplomatically."

 

Edited September 30, 2022 by billbindc

[Thomm]

11 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

Interesting video about a tank-supported infantry attack on RU position in Kharkiv region.  Battalion commander watch w drone and commanded using that info -- like he was playing CM 

 

 

There is a great video over in the general forum showing the military using CM for training purposes.

Thomm

 

[Thomm]

.

Edited September 30, 2022 by Thomm
Double post (mobile phone)

[Kinophile]

2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

I've found this very interesting.  Prewar there was much discussion about whether Putin would try for a land bridge as a primary goal, if at all.  Once the war started it was clear he was going for everything east of the Dnepr, at least to start with, therefore the land bridge came with that grander plan.  So the prewar theory about the importance of the land bridge was not put to the test as the invasion plan didn't specifically go after that objective.  Now, however, we're getting a real sense of how important the Kremlin perceives it to be.

Personally, I'm a bit surprised.  Putin's SMO rhetoric has been about the Donbas, Donbas, and... let me think about it... oh yes, the Donbas.  Logically he would have withdrawn forces from Kherson to tip the odds in his favor for taking the Donbas and holding it.  He did not.  Logically as options dwindled for the Donbas he would have pulled back, or at least risked, the south in favor of Donbas.  He did not.  He could have done a partial mobilization a couple of months ago to make it less likely that Ukraine could retake Luhansk.  He did not.  Now that Luhansk is up for grabs he still could move forces from the south to minimize the territorial loss.  He has not.

This seems to imply that the land bridge is a higher priority for Putin than the Donbas.  Which is definitely interesting.

Steve

It implies that the Crimea is the real red line for Putin.

Donetsk is only important as a flank guard for the land bridge. Luhansk is losable. Kherson is vital in this thinking as it directly threatens the land connection to Sebastapol, and is why he has filled it with good units and wont let them flee. His political persona and ego are inextricably tied to Crimea, possibly as it was his greatest geopolitical and domestic victory.

I noted this many moons and hundreds of pages ago, that Crimea has an emotional hook for Putin and many Russians. If there's any true red line for them then its UA ground units crossing the Kherson/Crimean border.

That doesnt mean UA can't kick the unholy crap out of Russian infrastructure on the peninsula, of course. But while Putler is alive I would be highly leery of deliberate ground assault by Ukrainian Army units south onto Crimea. SOF raids dont count.

 

[Haiduk]

3 hours ago, Grigb said:

They are pulling reserves from the South. 

I think this is mistake in identification.

[Lethaface]

2 hours ago, Butschi said:

Alright, let's assume Putin can somehow spin the loss of the Donbas, well, if not into a victory then at least into a defeat that can neglected or one that others can be blamed for. We already had the theory that Luhansk might be left undefended, because they are no real Russians and anyway kind of subhuman. If they can't defend even their own territory they aren't worth good Russian soldiers dying for them, blah, blah.

Let's further assume this wouldn't work for Crimea. After all Crimea always belonged to Russia, is by annexation Russian soil, is home to the Black Sea Fleet and all that.

So he can afford to lose Donbas but cannot afford to lose Crimea.

If we further assume that Putin is increasingly aware that he can't hold both Donbas and Crimea, and aware that it will be hard to hold Crimea if the Kerch bridge is dropped. Let's also assume that he is not totally insane yet and is either bluffing about tac nukes, is afraid to use them (if only because he might be deposed if he tried) or sees them only as last ditch weapon after everything else fails.

Then his only option is to do everything he can to ensure the land bridge is not lost.

Lots of assumptions, though.

EDIT: So it is either an exit strategy or some kind of damage mitigation?

Intuition would say that Putin/Russia is like a tilted poker player playing hand he knows is lost but for which he went so deep already that he knows he might as well go all in on last chance to do so, trying to bluff away the other players because he can't bear losing the hand.

But I'm not so scared about nukes, although I'm generally optimistic so that might help lol. Whatever would happen it would be a new ballpark compared where the war is now. Maybe for Crimea but let's first see Ukraine threaten Crimea before worrying too much about it.

On the post war subject which saw much discussion here, I think it's quite simple; Ukraine must get into NATO asap after hostilities end. That might be a bitch legislative and there might be Orbans around trying to delay, but there is plenty of will to get it done and I think that will matter most. Ukraine is basically already a military partner of most NATO countries. Following NATO hopefully the administration / economy will be implementing the necessary stuff for full EU-member in record speed, helped with reconstruction investments from around the world/'west', and will be the next world wonder ;-).

But the latter bit is in the 'could / should / nice to have', while the first is in the 'must have' category of requirements (at least according to the MoSCoW definition of prioritization in requirements).
What will happen in Russia is a Russian party, unless anyone wants to start a landwar in Russia and invade it and occupy it we don't have too much direct influence over it apart from sticks/carrots. 

Edited September 30, 2022 by Lethaface

[Battlefront.com]

8 minutes ago, Splinty said:

As an American I love our Canadian cousins. After all they gave the world Rush. Which to me is the greatest band to ever exist.

First concert I ever when to was Signals tour.  My dad took me and he enjoyed it.  Eons later he was the one that told me that Niel Peart died.  Greatest drummer of all time and Geddy Lee was the greatest ever guest on Bob and Doug's The Great White North show.

And just to remain on topic a little bit, the genuine relationships that we nations in the West have with each other is our greatest strength.  We squabble all the time, and there are genuine sore spots, but for the most part we value our connections more than we don't.  Russia, on the other hand, has no genuine relationships with anybody.  They might be feared, they might be sucked up to for favors, but Russia neighbors would undoubtedly universally choose a different neighbor if they could.

We're seeing that come around in this war in some surprising ways.  Kazakhstan, in particular, has really blown me away by its actions.  Even though Russia had just intervened to put down a large scale domestic problem, they immediately made it known that they weren't siding with Russian in its war with Ukraine.  In fact, their early actions were stronger and more resolute than Georgia's!  Which was another surprise.

Even Belarus has been interesting to watch.  Lukashenko has somehow managed to hold onto power with Russia's help, yet not give Putin full military cooperation.  Lukashenko might not be a friend of Ukraine and the West, but it's pretty clear he's no friend of Putin's either.

As I said earlier, I feel very lucky to have Canada along my border.  Not just because of Poutine, Unibroue, Rush, and Corner Gas (shout out to Letterkenny too), but because they're just nice people.  The great exchange rate for Americans isn't a bad thing either

Steve

[Huba]

5 minutes ago, billbindc said:

Ah...correct. 

This wasn't bad though: 

"Make no mistake: these actions have no legitimacy. The United States will always honor Ukraine's internationally recognized borders. We will continue to support Ukraine's efforts to regain control of its territory by strengthening its hand militarily and diplomatically."

 

He also enumerated all these territories, including Crimea. 

Joke time:

It looks like soon both Ukraine and Russia will be fighting with US lend-lease weapons

[Splinty]

2 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

First concert I ever when to was Signals tour.  My dad took me and he enjoyed it.  Eons later he was the one that told me that Niel Peart died.  Greatest drummer of all time and Geddy Lee was the greatest ever guest on Bob and Doug's The Great White North show.

And just to remain on topic a little bit, the genuine relationships that we nations in the West have with each other is our greatest strength.  We squabble all the time, and there are genuine sore spots, but for the most part we value our connections more than we don't.  Russia, on the other hand, has no genuine relationships with anybody.  They might be feared, they might be sucked up to for favors, but Russia neighbors would undoubtedly universally choose a different neighbor if they could.

We're seeing that come around in this war in some surprising ways.  Kazakhstan, in particular, has really blown me away by its actions.  Even though Russia had just intervened to put down a large scale domestic problem, they immediately made it known that they weren't siding with Russian in its war with Ukraine.  In fact, their early actions were stronger and more resolute than Georgia's!  Which was another surprise.

Even Belarus has been interesting to watch.  Lukashenko has somehow managed to hold onto power with Russia's help, yet not give Putin full military cooperation.  Lukashenko might not be a friend of Ukraine and the West, but it's pretty clear he's no friend of Putin's either.

As I said earlier, I feel very lucky to have Canada along my border.  Not just because of Poutine, Unibroue, Rush, and Corner Gas (shout out to Letterkenny too), but because they're just nice people.  The great exchange rate for Americans isn't a bad thing either

Steve

Once again since I can't give you a like directly,

[Artkin]

Interesting video once you cut to the chase:

TLDW: 700 or so tanks alone removed from the 7 or 8 largest Russian storage sites in the past year or so.

Edited September 30, 2022 by Artkin

[Battlefront.com]

9 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

It implies that the Crimea is the real red line for Putin.

Yup.  This has been my take on things since the war clearly was going in Ukraine's direction.  It's why I've been consistently cautioning people's desire and expectations of Ukraine retaking Crimea need to be tempered.  Any attempts to invade Crimea needs to be extremely well thought out, then thought upon again, and then considered some more.

I'm not saying there isn't a way to get Crimea back militarily (aside from waiting for collapse), I'm just saying it has to be recognized that it isn't the same thing as retaking villages in Luhansk's hinterland.

Steve

[Probus]

28 minutes ago, Splinty said:

As an American I love our Canadian cousins. After all they gave the world Rush. Which to me is the greatest band to ever exist.

My brother from another mother! 

[Grigb]

30 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

Interesting video about a tank-supported infantry attack on RU position in Kharkiv region.  Battalion commander watch w drone and commanded using that info -- like he was playing CM 

 

 

Yes, this is how it is done when there are enough drones. It is near future of warfare. Though I believe the commander will move back to tank but with the drone.

[Grigb]

21 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

I think this is mistake in identification.

Real possibility as well. Will have to wait and see.

[sburke]

10 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Yup.  This has been my take on things since the war clearly was going in Ukraine's direction.  It's why I've been consistently cautioning people's desire and expectations of Ukraine retaking Crimea need to be tempered.  Any attempts to invade Crimea needs to be extremely well thought out, then thought upon again, and then considered some more.

I'm not saying there isn't a way to get Crimea back militarily (aside from waiting for collapse), I'm just saying it has to be recognized that it isn't the same thing as retaking villages in Luhansk's hinterland.

Steve

Note in the NATO response they did confirm NATO position - Crimea is Ukraine.  No telling when or how, but I expect eventually Ukraine sovereignty over Crimea will be restored.  What remains of the Russian federation remains to be seen.

[akd]

12 minutes ago, Artkin said:

Interesting video once you cut to the chase:

TLDW: 700 or so tanks alone removed from the 7 or 8 largest Russian storage sites in the past year or so.

Not sure I agree with his claim to be able to tell which tanks are repairable via satellite imagery. I get that some are obvious junk (rusted hulls without running gear or turrets), but wasn’t there a report that something like only 20% of 1st Guards Tank Army tanks in storage were suitable for bringing back into service?

[Kinophile]

https://twitter.com/kms_d4k/status/1575776705347997696?t=79c466Edtp54jXJMDzvLbg&s=19

[Artkin]

Just now, akd said:

Not sure I agree with his claim to be able to tell which tanks are repairable via satellite imagery. I get that some are obvious junk (rusted hulls without running gear or turrets), but wasn’t there a report that something like only 20% of 1st Guards Tank Army tanks in storage were suitable for bringing back into service?

That's true, even if the image quality was great I don't think you would be able to tell which vehicles are usable. I didn't know that about 1st Guards Tank Army nor where they store their equipment. I guess one of the numbered "military bases"? If that report comes up I'd be interested in reading it, since I missed it.

[Battlefront.com]

1 minute ago, Grigb said:

Yes, this is how it is done when there are enough drones. It is near future of warfare. Though I believe the commander will move back to tank but with the drone.

I agree.  It's already in the works.

However, we're also going to see UGVs with drones very soon.  This is a prototype from 3 years ago.  It has 4 drones standard.  Dismounts would need to recover them, but I've seen at least one design that has a recovery system included.

 

[Battlefront.com]

5 minutes ago, akd said:

Not sure I agree with his claim to be able to tell which tanks are repairable via satellite imagery. I get that some are obvious junk (rusted hulls without running gear or turrets), but wasn’t there a report that something like only 20% of 1st Guards Tank Army tanks in storage were suitable for bringing back into service?

I don't remember the number, but early on there was a flurry of OSINT that indicated readiness levels were really low.  Corruption was discussed as the primary common factor.

However, we certainly are seeing a lot of vehicles entering Ukraine that were probably dragged out of very long term storage.  T-62s being the poster child for this.  Which means Russia probably had fewer vehicles ready than predicted, but they also likely had more from the bone yards that could be made serviceable than we maybe thought.

Steve

[FancyCat]

Note, any future plans for the annexation of further Ukrainian territory, you need Kherson at least to push into Mykolaiv and Odesa. You can afford to lose the northern part of Luhansk oblast, and even whatever of Donetsk oblast, as a retreat to the prewar lines is fine as a military measure. (Especially as you have the Russian-Ukrainian land border to place forces all along to attack. 

Ukraine has lost the Sea of Azov, the opening of the Dnipro River to the Black Sea, and Russia can still hope to prevent economic recovery of Ukraine thru its control of the Black Sea pending another day when Ukraine is vulnerable to invasion again. 

Edited September 30, 2022 by FancyCat