How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[kraze]

20 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I wonder what Petraeus - a former commander of US Central Command - thinks the Russians will do in response to the US launching a massive attack to completely destroy their army and airforce.

if russians are already firing nukes at that point - it doesn't really matter. If US acts - they fire nukes at US, if US does not act - everybody with nukes start using nukes to steal territories from other countries and... eventually fire nukes at US because while that can of worm is closed for everyone - even US-hating crazies keep their nuclear boners in check.

[Huba]

There's a new Rybar map of northern Kherson, and oh boy it does not look good. Note that he practically erased the whole Davidyv Brid bridhead, which as far as we can tell is not true. Looks like Ukrainians managed to push on a rather wide front, and RU positions along Inhulets are greatly exposed:

Edited October 3, 2022 by Huba

[Thomm]

2 minutes ago, Holien said:

Interested to hear what you would do?

Level 1:

• Enforce no-fly zone over Ukraine.
• Provide as many advanced ground-based air and missile defense assets as possible.

Level 2:

• Air campaign against Russian ground forces in Ukraine

Level 3:

• Air campaign against Russian aviation and navy.

[The_MonkeyKing]

21 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I wonder what Petraeus - a former commander of US Central Command - thinks the Russians will do in response to the US launching a massive attack to completely destroy their army and airforce.

Russians themselves should think of that before starting waging war with nukes and with the knowledge of what will happen.

Very little else would be enough of a deterrent of Russian nuclear use. You must take away what they aim to achieve with the nuclear use. This is taking away victory from Russia in Ukraine totally.

• Limited cruise missile strike like in Syria after chemical weapons? -> Just a propaganda tool for the Ruskies. Otherwise ignored. 
• More sanctions -> Russia has already accepted maximalist economic consequences and doesn't "think far enough" at this moment. 
• More aid to Ukraine? -> Russia has already accepted Ukraine will get everything it needs from the west. Also there is a maximum effective amount of aid that might not be enough above the current level.

[Holien]

5 minutes ago, Thomm said:

Level 1:

• Enforce no-fly zone over Ukraine.
• Provide as many advanced ground-based air and missile defense assets as possible.

Level 2:

• Air campaign against Russian ground forces in Ukraine

Level 3:

• Air campaign against Russian aviation and navy.

Ok so what triggers each level of response?

BTW Level 3 and 2 is just what he said so you agree with him on that?

I would suspect that the US and NATO response would just focus on units involved in Ukraine and as that pretty much is everything the Russians have it will be enough to destroy the Russian military, what's left of it as Ukraine take a lot of credit for doing most of the work....

[FancyCat]

 

 

[Tenses]

If there is anyone with any degree of sanity in Russia left, then only warhead Putler will see is going to start 20cm from his forehead and will travel at supersonic speed through his brain.

Otherwise there is nothing what we can do apart from responding with full force to any nuclear escalation. There should be no discussion such as stepping back as this would mean the end of the World for 100%. If we fight back the chances are still high for this but there is some hope for happy ending.

[Zeleban]

According to Russian propagandists. Ukraine successfully uses the tactics of small mobile groups in jeeps to operate behind Russian lines

[Tenses]

The rest of Kharkiv region should be liberated till the end of the week.

[Huba]

Village 10 km east of Borova reportedly liberated. There are reports of Borowa itself is cleared - no confirmation for now, but there's no way RU would hold on to it. It will open another crossing through Oskil, it should be really ease to put the pontoon bridge there.

Edit: ha, as per  @Tenses post above, Borova is free to. Situation is developing faster than we manage to write our posts here

And this map is perhaps the most up-to-date depiction of situation west of Svatovo:

 

Edited October 3, 2022 by Huba

[JonS]

8 minutes ago, Tenses said:

Otherwise there is nothing what we can do apart from responding with full force t

So, to be clear, you are advocating emptying all the silos and all the boomers into Russia?

Jeepers, this is "we had to burn the village to save it" taken to a whole new level.

[Grigb]

Looks like RU is preparing for another regrouping in Kherson

Quote

Kherson region.

People are waiting for an answer to the question of why tanks are leaving, and special forces with ATGMs are standing to the death against enemy armored vehicles.

 

 

 

[Tenses]

On 9/26/2022 at 5:09 PM, Tenses said:

Well I certainly haven't taken much activity in the forums but I follow this topic from the start and consider it the best info out there thanks to it's "background diversity" and outstanding military knowledge of your's guys.

Nevertheless I wanted to throw my two cents into more heated recent discussion. What I consider will happen if Russia is going to go nuclear depends on it's exact usage and this is confirmed by a couple of Western decision makers out there, that exact response "depends". I would bet on three scenarios in this regard:

1) Russia uses tactical warhead on some military gathering to stop offensive or get upper hand elsewhere. West(mainly US to be honest) responds with cruise missile/air force action on Ukriane territory, effectively deleting any stronger Russian presence there. This would be in line of previous actions, which were meant to even out odds or place Ukraine at slight adventage in comparison to Russia.

2) Russia uses strategic warhead on some big city(not really an option IMHO). Response is the same as before but on the entire Russian territory. Main targets are all nuclear capable military vehicles/structures. This might look like escalation but really, if you see a crazy guy killig a child just before your own eyes you don't think like "hey it's not my child, I don't even know it's parents", but instead you just beat the s**t out of him no matter what. This is what people do with crazy elements to keep the rest of society reasonably healthy.

3) Russia attacks nuclear any NATO member. Response to this is a mix of 2) with addition of own nuclear wherever necessary.

I understand that even considering this kind of events is very disturbing but we must admit that we were never that close to this situation. Not even Cuban crisis was that close. Preventing all of this is very easy - we need to be crystal clear in commitment to support Ukraine with whatever force is necessary. All the power Russia has is from "fear terror" and as long as it has any chance that it can do s**t without serious repercussions, it will not stop. 

Russia understands strenght. Period.

 

3 minutes ago, JonS said:

So, to be clear, you are advocating emptying all the silos and all the boomers into Russia?

Jeepers, this is "we had to burn the village to save it" taken to a whole new level.

I see it this way. At least point 1) seems to be confirmed by Petraeus, not that he has anything to say in this matter anymore.

[Grigb]

Looks like another assault on Dudchany is in progress

[Grigb]

Interesting videos with survived LDP Mobiks from Drobishevo. Still listening but 3rd video from 1:30 one Mobik says RU command ordered general retreat of RU units but explicitly ordered RU local commanders not to tell it to LDP Mobiks. Mobiks were lucky that some RU commanders secretly told them that everybody was leaving. 

[UPDATE] 4th video explicitly shows that conversation is with RU subtitles.

Edited October 3, 2022 by Grigb

[Hister]

Nice to see Kherson front slowly collapsing and N-E part going well for Ukies.

Can someone please explain to me why Navalny would be a bad choice for a Russian president? I remember reading you in the know guys had many criticisms about him. He was a hardline nationalist, imperialist in the beginning and then like a chameleon changed his tune to be more in line with the Western expectations or something? What is his deal? Thank you.

 

Edited October 3, 2022 by Hister

[kevinkin]

1 hour ago, Thomm said:

Level 1:

• Enforce no-fly zone over Ukraine.
• Provide as many advanced ground-based air and missile defense assets as possible.

C-RAM is too new for its practical battlefield assessment, but it could be installed given enough time as a show of some kind of force. Additionally, perhaps the road networks around tac nuke storage facilities could be targeted. In either case, with enough will, they can be thwarted in the long term. C-RAM is Counter - rocket, artillery, and mortar. 

[chuckdyke]

1 minute ago, Hister said:

Nice to see Kherson front slowly collapsing and N-E part going well for Ukies.

Can someone please explain to me why Navalny would be a bad choice for a Russian president? I remember reading you in the know guys had many criticisms about him. He was a hardline nationalist, imperialist in the bwginning and then like a chameleon chenged his tune to be more in line with tbe Western expectations? What is his deal? Thank you.

 

You know what they say about brooms? A new one sweeps clean. Exactly what Russia needs now. 

[Offshoot]

4 minutes ago, Hister said:

Can someone please explain to me why Navalny would be a bad choice for a Russian president? I remember reading you in the know guys had many criticisms about him. He was a hardline nationalist, imperialist in the beginning and then like a chameleon changed his tune to be more in line with the Western expectations or something? What is his deal? Thank you.

I don't know about before, but if his latest thinking is not just words, Navalny doesn't want Russia to have a president (someone posted this link here earlier - https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/09/30/alexei-navalny-parliamentary-republic-russia-ukraine/ )

[Bulletpoint]

2 hours ago, Holien said:

I guess I hope we never find out...

At some stage you just have to call their bluff because if it works this time they will use it again.

Do you have a better proposal on a measure to take when (if) Russia uses a Nuke in Ukraine?

Interested to hear what you would do?

 

 

Since you're genuinely interested...

I would invoke the UN Responsibility to Protect with the aim of ending the war and protect Ukraine against further Russian aggression.

Russia would of course veto this decision. I would then (as the USA) seek to ally with enough other nations to kick out Russia permanently from the UN Security Council, where they have only done harm for so many years. Very few countries would object to that decision, especially if nuclear weapons had been used.

Since the UN Charter doesn't allow for excluding permanent members, it would legally be tantamount to the end of the UN in its current form and to the beginning of a new, reformed organisation in its place. But that would be a discussion for another day.

I would then order airstrikes on Russian forces within Ukraine and possibly also on the Black Sea Fleet. But not an all-out attack on the entire Russian army inside Russia.

What happens next is anyone's guess. It might still escalate. But at least the Western response would be somewhat proportional and still with a chance of de-escalation.

And I'm guessing this kind of response is what the US has already warned Russia about, behind the scenes.

[Holien]

Has anyone seen a good resource on what Russia can field tactically and what skill level is required for it's use?

I am wondering

1. If they have the right skill level currently available as they seem to have sent any tom dick or harry to the front line and those troops might no longer be available.
    
2. How old is the tech and has it been maintained and how easy it is to keep it viable?
    
3. The vehicles needed are they specialist ones and would we note it on the battlefield?
    
4. What sort of ranges for the tac stuff?

Edited October 3, 2022 by Holien

[Holien]

3 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Since you're genuinely interested...

I would invoke the UN Responsibility to Protect with the aim of ending the war and protect Ukraine against further Russian aggression.

Russia would of course veto this decision. I would then (as the USA) seek to ally with enough other nations to kick out Russia permanently from the UN Security Council, where they have only done harm for so many years. Very few countries would object to that decision, especially if nuclear weapons had been used.

Since the UN Charter doesn't allow for excluding permanent members, it would legally be tantamount to the end of the UN in its current form and to the beginning of a new, reformed organisation in its place. But that would be a discussion for another day.

I would then order airstrikes on Russian forces within Ukraine and possibly also on the Black Sea Fleet. But not an all-out attack on the entire Russian army inside Russia.

What happens next is anyone's guess. It might still escalate. But at least the Western response would be somewhat proportional and still with a chance of de-escalation.

And I'm guessing this kind of response is what the US has already warned Russia about, behind the scenes.

Fair enough and maybe they have an agreement in place with folk at the Un if this happens, ultimately it ends up the same place destroying everything we can that belongs to Russia within Ukraine.

Which is the kinda of message America is giving, of course they might not wait for the UN but maybe that is worth doing if possible...

I don't know how China  would vote but it will be a test of their true position.

[chuckdyke]

2 minutes ago, Holien said:

I don't know how China  would vote but it will be a test of their true position.

The Soviet Union never vetoed the United Nation forces in the Korean War. Asian people have a long memory. 

[kevinkin]

1 hour ago, Bulletpoint said:

UN Responsibility

Is that an oxymoron? The 5 permanent members with veto power are at odds and the way it's all set-up can't really agree on a solution to a situation of this magnitude. Kicking Russia off the Security Council won't impress Putin. He will just take his little nukes and go home. 

Edited October 3, 2022 by kevinkin

[kraze]

42 minutes ago, Hister said:

Can someone please explain to me why Navalny would be a bad choice for a Russian president? I remember reading you in the know guys had many criticisms about him. He was a hardline nationalist, imperialist in the beginning and then like a chameleon changed his tune to be more in line with the Western expectations or something? What is his deal? Thank you.

Because Navalny fully supported actions of Russia when he was playing the role of the "controlled opposition" (the imaginary state-allowed opposition so that the West wouldn't be complaining too much since Russia pretends to be "democratic" and all). He made really derogatory comments about Georgians and about Ukrainians, he was supportive of the war in 2008 and of Crimea annexation - while everything was going well for him and Russia faced zero consequences.

However after russian invasion of Donbass and ever increasing sanctions - at some point he had a major falling out with putin and was sent to prison. So of course now that he is in a bad position - he realizes his only chance of improving it is to pretend he's all "truly" liberal and pro-Western so he has at least some "allies" of worth.

His real position was pre-prison and it was imperialistic one. Everything he says now is only to save his sorry ***. Even then there's still a question you got to ask yourself - in Russia people "walked out of the window" for much less in the past 7 months. Why is Navalny still fine?

Edited October 3, 2022 by kraze