How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Butschi]

10 minutes ago, Zeleban said:

Germany's allies had already delivered tanks to Ukraine: Poland, Slovakia, even Spain wanted to supply tanks to Ukraine.

We were talking about legal obligations. Don't shift the goal posts.

Also Germany doesn't refuse to assist our allies. Germany doesn't even refuse to assist Ukraine. Germany is just not giving Ukraine everything you demand. Germany has no legal obligation to do that (not even a moral obligation) and no obligation to help our allies give Ukraine everything you demand.

10 minutes ago, Zeleban said:

How do you think Germany will look in the eyes of its allies by refusing such assistance?

See above.

Edited December 13, 2022 by Butschi

[Chibot Mk IX]

On 12/12/2022 at 8:16 AM, LongLeftFlank said:

https://ukrainevolunteer297689472.wordpress.com/2022/12/09/one-was-whining-about-his-face-being-numb/

(marshy woodlands south or west of Kreminna, this past week) 

 

"One thing I learned in Vietnam is how vulnerable feet are, both in cold and tropical climes."

Wait, how old is he? He must be in his 60s....

 

A while ago , I did alot of CMBS QB battles . Tiny to small force on a large map. dense forest. Infantry heavy scenarios with no more than 2 AFVs on both sides. It was like a green hell. Battles in forest are devastating.

On 12/12/2022 at 8:42 AM, LongLeftFlank said:

That's what I have been thinking, down at the CM Tiny battles end of the combat spectrum.  Forget the Big Push that bogs down and gets blasted by arty or air: it's five thousand ambushes or envelopments, all along the front, on average yielding a RU:UK casevac ratio of, say, 3:1.

The Russians have been hugely short of combat infantry throughout this war; that was by design (career soldiers were mainly specialists, to be augmented by mobik grunts). To me, that's the essence of why the BTG failed, hard.

They've clearly learned since April that screening and patrolling around your positions and vehicles is NOT optional.

But their VDV and spetsnaz have been worn away, and it looks like Wagner is going that way now.  Where are the cadres to train the new guys in fieldcraft and get them to survive the first bumps?

No infantry, no army.

 

I am wondering what it looks like if we port some of the CMRT scenarios into CMBS.

Dead of Night, The Woroblin Bridgehead,  Dawn Patrol,  AD Interlock OP. Oh yeah, don't forget "Garden of the Iron Cross". These are small scale scenarios focused on infantry actions on a rough terrain. They are fit into current war theme 

 

[kevinkin]

Has a central theme around ammo levels, but also a summary of recent events.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraine-situation-report-russia-relying-on-degraded-ammo-says-pentagon

The map of Bakhmut might be useful. No idea if the Russian attacks are as shown. 

The sector south of Opytne looks pretty straight forward to draw in BS from Google Maps. 

[Kinophile]

1 hour ago, Zeleban said:

I think Germany has certain obligations to NATO allies who are actively helping Ukraine.

This is not the desire or unwillingness of countries, this is the policy of the allies

Still not an obligation. There is no legal requirement for NATO country A to help NATO Country B/C/D etc that is voluntarily helping one side in a third-party war between non-NATO countries (and B has not itself been attacked). 

Social pressure sure,  but Germany is free and clear in terms of legality. It could stop everything supporting Ukr tomorrow,  not interact with RUS and it would be perfectly within its rights and also not in the Vatnik camp. 

Edited December 13, 2022 by Kinophile

[FancyCat]

As Butschi mentioned, many Germans are in favor of it, including many members and portions of the ruling coalition in the German government. The context of the Kubela's statement must be placed alongside the statement of the head of the German parliament defense committee, https://www.yahoo.com/now/u-supports-transfer-german-leopard-175300192.html

who reported that the U.S is ready to support Germany in supplying western tanks to Ukraine. When I refer to Putin betting on Western support for Ukraine waning, and Ukraine being left to deal with a stalemate and/or forced into unfavorable peace treaties, that belief is fuelled by western reluctance in supplying Ukraine.

Legality or no legality, in my opinion, the West, NATO, Europe has been given a lifeline via the Ukrainians and their resistance, in that the destruction of the Russian military is occurring in Ukraine, with absolutely no burden on any of NATO in terms of lives, something that every Western nation is keenly vulnerable to. (And I won't look a gift in the mouth, if we contemplate the scenario where Putin had successfully taken Ukraine, the chances of NATO vs Russia increase greatly down the line)(resistance by no means is forever, as the Ukrainian SSR represents, and you know, as a citizen of the U.S, I am grateful not to have to think of a future where Russia, empowered with Ukraine, challenges in the Baltics with hybrid warfare and internal discord in the West. Very grateful.)

But adversely, that means eastern Ukraine is turned into a devastated land, and the lives of Ukrainian civilians and military are killed every moment that goes by.

As the RUSI report alludes to, casualty rates for Ukrainian personnel are high. Manpower is essential, especially the trained and experienced personnel, anything that can preserve them best serves Ukraine and the West in successfully defeating Russia.

Western tanks represent a escalation, but also represent a challenge to Putin, who mind you, has chosen escalation, over and over again. If the goal of NATO support in Ukraine is to force the liberation of all Ukrainian lands, by any means possible, considering Putin has time and time indicated he feels that the West will be bored of supporting Ukraine, tired of missing cheap Russian energy, and fundamentally weak to sacrifice anything for Ukraine, it is essential for Putin to seriously consider the preservation of his military and relations repaired with the West via the withdrawal of all Russian forces back into Russia.

That Putin has doubled down, that he has annexed parts of Ukraine, represents that he continues to think western support will fade and he will succeed.

And yes, the goal of the west is not merely to restore borders to pre-invasion, but to force a loss territorially for Russia, who in invading, has targeted the entire international order, the west's dominance and ethical position. failure to punish, represents a death knell for any state deciding to side with the west in the future. (What about military dominance? Surely we can just bomb our competition? nope, if sovereign states can no longer be assured that they remain whole via the enforcement of the international order, the result will be nuclear proliferation and rearmament and instead of one or two nuclear armed states, we will have plenty more, with all the hellish implications it results in)(western influence is utterly falling apart worldwide, failure to uphold the rules of the international order via the restoration of the full wholeness of Ukraine will only signal the full extent of that weakness)

And, lives lost, equipment lost, surely Putin and co gives a damn? No, I don't think so. He thinks not in lives, but in money and land. Lives, only insofar as resources. As shown by Iran, he can get replacement equipment from friendly states. If we let him cause a stalemate in Ukraine, that will only enbolden the rest like China to start supporting Russia and openly challenge the West. That, in all measures, we need to avoid.

I think there's a lot of "Russia is defeated" going around, but I'm not so sure we can count Russia out. Clearly, Putin is determined to escalate due to western weakness. We must match him in order to illustrate our resolve. We need to make clear he should strongly consider the offers on the table right now. We are not doing that in my opinion.

[FancyCat]

People, Putin wants to return to the age of Peter the Great, where states waged war and carved out land and people like slices of beef for breakfast, lunch and dinner. No **** letting him annex or hold anything in Ukraine represents a defeat for the West, his entire goal of invading Ukraine was to signify worldwide that **** is back in vogue. So ya, he's gonna be daring the West with that big red button but the key is NOT to give in.

Otherwise, every state will run for their own big red button, including the ones in the West! And every piece of **** with dreams of glory and Peter the Great in every country is suddenly gonna start thinking of the same carving of land and people and then that's it, Pandora's box. No, the West, the world cannot let that happen. That is why support for Ukraine must be steadfast and with the full restoration of territorial integrity of Ukraine.

[Butschi]

58 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

As Butschi mentioned, many Germans are in favor of it, including many members and portions of the ruling coalition in the German government. The context of the Kubela's statement must be placed alongside the statement of the head of the German parliament defense committee, https://www.yahoo.com/now/u-supports-transfer-german-leopard-175300192.html

who reported that the U.S is ready to support Germany in supplying western tanks to Ukraine.

But "many" is not necessarily a majority (afaik German society is pretty evenly split on this), what the head of the defense committee thinks is in no way binding and it is also not up to the US government to decide. (The wording was also more like "we don't have any objections", support is a bit far fetched).

58 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

If the goal of NATO support in Ukraine is to force the liberation of all Ukrainian lands, by any means possible

It isn't.

58 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

And yes, the goal of the west is not merely to restore borders to pre-invasion, but to force a loss territorially for Russia

No. That is just your opinion. The West so far is not even committed to getting back all Ukrainian territory.

 

58 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

I think there's a lot of "Russia is defeated" going around, but I'm not so sure we can count Russia out.

Well, Putin certainly can still make us all lose.

Edited December 13, 2022 by Butschi

[Butschi]

14 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

Otherwise, every state will run for their own big red button, including the ones in the West!

That has already been the case for a long time. Every tyrant in the world has seen what happened to Saddam Hussein and what hasn't happened to the the Kims. The fact that not everyone has nukes is due to some not needing them (because they get protection from others) and others can't afford them. Nukes make you untouchable, fact of life.

[Grigb]

38 minutes ago, kevinkin said:

The map of Bakhmut might be useful. No idea if the Russian attacks are as shown. 

I have an idea where RU is active:

1. Yakovlika (confirmed by both RU and UKR sources). All available information indicates that RU controls main part of the settlement with the possibility UKR defenders are still present at remote Western part. 
2. Podhorne (discussed by RU sources but we do have indirect confirmation from UKR DeepState map - they do get updates from the front lines). All available information indicates that RU captured some outposts but did not enter settlement itself.
3. Industrial Zone and two neiborhoods of Private sector (confirmed by RU as well as UKR sources - see Haiduk post about Bakhmut)
4. At City dump attacking Private sector (it is from Mashovets - it is reliable UKR source)

RU are supposed to be active from the direction of Opytne as well. But I see a lack of information from there - usually means there is pause there. Most likely Opytne and South Bakhmut are tough nuts to crack compared to Private sector hence the shift of attack directions. 

 

38 minutes ago, kevinkin said:

The sector south of Opytne looks pretty straight forward to draw in BS from Google Maps. 

I'm not sure what you mean. The red arrows on the Klishiivka-Kurdyumivka-Ivanivka map do not represent current RU assaults because you cannot advance directly over Klishiivka, which is controlled by UKR soldiers. This is the RU' current intention.

I didn't include the recent RU advance out of Kurdyumivka since I need good evidence that it's not a typical recon patrol.

[FancyCat]

29 minutes ago, Butschi said:

No. That is just your opinion. The West so far is not even committed to getting back all Ukrainian territory.

 

Well, Putin certainly can still make us all lose.

It should be. (Tho with the way much of the west's statements are supporting the restoration of full territorial integrity of Ukraine. I quibble that it is not committed, it is promised, but who knows if the promise is kept down the line)

It is in Putin's interest to act like that. Whether is earnest or not. It is a essential part of his strategy to act like escalation can go up to the worldwide apocalypse. It's blackmail. You don't give in to a blackmailer. You certainly don't give in to a blackmailer who on the eve of the invasion, tossed all prior justification for intervention in Ukraine to assert a worldview legitimating naked aggression for the seizure of territory of another sovereign state. You don't give in to a blackmailer who is supposed to be a guarantor of the international order, who basically flipped the table at the UN and started the invasion of Ukraine right in the middle of a UN Security Council meeting, with a demand to the end of Western dominance and the international order where naked aggression is punished.

20 minutes ago, Butschi said:

That has already been the case for a long time. Every tyrant in the world has seen what happened to Saddam Hussein and what hasn't happened to the the Kims. The fact that not everyone has nukes is due to some not needing them (because they get protection from others) and others can't afford them. Nukes make you untouchable, fact of life.

If the West's major powers cannot support Ukraine in this near complete black and white conflict for the  restoration of it's territorial integrity than why should any state rely on them to provide protection in the future? Why should Japan not rearm with nukes? Vietnam? Taiwan? If Ukraine is failed to be supported, why should the rest of the eastern flank states feel secure? Finland, the Baltics, Poland? The population and size of the Baltics make it quite attractive for a Russian seizure. But NATO? If NATO can't be bothered to face up with Russia over Ukraine, due to nuclear blackmail, than it makes it exceedingly more likely it can't over the Baltics.

Russia's goal, from Putin's words, is to demolish the rules based international order, reorganize the world and to legitimize naked aggression and Russian imperial aims. If you can't understand why this needs to be opposed and punished for, then whatever, there isn't any point in continuing this discussion.

Edited December 13, 2022 by FancyCat

[dan/california]

6 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

Of all the ways Russia can lose the war, I don't think running out of conscripts is one of them.

I think the ideal trick is for them to run out of conscripts willing to obey orders. Which to oversimplify massively is what happened in 1917. The enlisted men simply said no more, and the whole deal changed. This really could Happen in Ukraine. Ever more of the Russian forces there are mobiks with little or no training. This makes the Russian force as whole far more brittle. Can Ukraine crack it like an egg? 

[Bulletpoint]

4 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

If Ukraine is failed to be supported, why should the rest of the eastern flank states feel secure? Finland, the Baltics, Poland?

Because the rest of the states are either in NATO or will soon be.

[FancyCat]

19 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Because the rest of the states are either in NATO or will soon be.

If Russia gets the West to back down over Ukraine, why wouldn't Putin or his successor keep pushing? What stops nuclear blackmail? The threat of being backed into the wall? What is the wall for the West? We like to think it's NATO territory. Putin may decide it isn't.

My point is why risk it getting to that red line? Why legitimatize Russia in Ukraine? Why not contest Russia in Ukraine? Where we don't have red lines. I personally don't want to think of having to fight for NATO. (I am also unsure if the U.S will always have NATO's back) We have a prime opportunity in Ukraine to ensure NATO is never at risk without risking any NATO lives.

Russia will always rely on nuclear deterrence and threats of nuclear use. Certainly under Putin we cannot be assured it won't continue should it succeed in Ukraine. Let the risk of it be over Ukraine rather than the Baltics. 

(What about Russia's red line? I circle back to Russia declaring red lines in Crimes and Donbas, combine it with their desire to throw off the international order, clearly Russia wants to keep Crimea and Donbas, to take chunks of Ukraine as I already pointed out, legitimating it will have far reaching consequences worldwide)

These discussions are nice but I've laid out my words, and I'm keen not to derail the thread further from the battlefield so im going to be quiet on this.

Edited December 13, 2022 by FancyCat

[Ultradave]

2 hours ago, Chibot Mk IX said:

Wait, how old is he? He must be in his 60s....

I'm in my 60s and I missed Vietnam by years. Any Vietnam vets these days are 70 at least, most are older. A 70 year old would have just made it before the withdrawal.

Dave

[Butschi]

32 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

It is in Putin's interest to act like that. Whether is earnest or not. It is a essential part of his strategy to act like escalation can go up to the worldwide apocalypse. It's blackmail. You don't give in to a blackmailer. You certainly don't give in to a blackmailer who on the eve of the invasion, tossed all prior justification for intervention in Ukraine to assert a worldview legitimating naked aggression for the seizure of territory of another sovereign state. You don't give in to a blackmailer who is supposed to be a guarantor of the international order, who basically flipped the table at the UN and started the invasion of Ukraine right in the middle of a UN Security Council meeting, with a demand to the end of Western dominance and the international order where naked aggression is punished.

Of course you give in to a blackmailer. Despite all the tough talk it happens all the time. If someone puts a gun against your head you give him your money because it would be stupid to die for it.

And with the UNSC you are actually making my point for me. The permanent members with veto powers are there solely for one reason: Not because they are peaceful or take responsibility. No. They were given that power (or took it) because they had nukes.

Edited December 13, 2022 by Butschi

[FancyCat]

 

 

[dan/california]

41 minutes ago, Butschi said:

Of course you give in to a blackmailer. Despite all the tough talk it happens all the time. If someone puts a gun against your head you give him your money because it would be stupid to die for it.

And with the UNSC you are actually making my point for me. The permanent members with veto powers are there solely for one reason: Not because they are peaceful or take responsibility. No. They were given that power (or took it) because they had nukes.

And their we have the German position in a nutshell. Unless I read it wrong it says "of course we won't REALLY fight for Poland". And that is why everyone else is mad at them.

 

Edited December 13, 2022 by dan/california

[kevinkin]

40 minutes ago, Grigb said:

I'm not sure what you mean.

Oh, there is a map from a twitter insert in the War Zone link that shows a red arrow heading to Opytne. Maybe it's just hypothetical. Or as you say - difficult ground. I was thinking of drawing a map of that area. 

[Billy Ringo]

Random thoughts and opinions:

• Germany has no legal obligation to support Ukraine.  Nor even a legal obligation to significantly invest in their own defense. But....based on what I've read over the past 10 months they've neglected their military and NATO military obligations for years.  Self interest and what could be described as free-loading off the protection of the US and other NATO countries won't be easily forgotten.   If and when the **** hits the fan, that protection may not be quickly forthcoming and they might very well find themselves scrambling.  Or having to learn a new language.
• When trying to discern public opinion within Russia, would it be totally off the mark to consider that Moscow and surrounding more progressive areas have a significantly different view on the war than the rest of the more rural areas/territories?   When trying to figure out how to deal with Russia--would it be reasonable to have one general approach for Moscow and another approach for the rest of the country?

As always, appreciate the experience, input and opinions from everyone on this forum.  That means everyone, even if I disagree and find them to be boring, inarticulate, tedious, self-absorbed, obtuse, ill-advised and talk with a funny accent.

Merry Christmas to all.

 

[Bulletpoint]

1 minute ago, Billy Ringo said:

As always, appreciate the experience, input and opinions from everyone on this forum.  That means everyone, even if I disagree and find them to be boring, inarticulate, tedious, self-absorbed, obtuse, ill-advised and talk with a funny accent.

Ah, the Americans are not that bad

[sburke]

China Deals Hammer Blow to Russia's War Effort (msn.com)

Quote

 

Russian manufacturers had been testing Chinese-made processors to replace those produced by companies like Intel, which had suspended deliveries, the Russian business newspaper Kommersant reported.

But a source from Russia's ministry of digital development told the outlet that the Chinese government had banned the sale and export of the processors due to their strategic importance for China's own military.

While Russian companies "were not very dependent on Chinese processors" they had "hoped to switch to Loongson solutions," the source told the newspaper.

Another source told the paper that the Chinese government had banned the export of Loongson processors to all countries, including Russia. "The best chipsets in China are used in the military-industrial complex, which is the main reason why they are not available for foreign markets," they said.

 

 

[Beleg85]

Just out of curiosity: G.Sachs appered in Solovyov show. Disgusting even to hard-neoliberals standards. Probably some good soul told him that Solovyov is "just someone like Russian Joe Rogan".

Conditions on the ground:

 

[Bulletpoint]

3 minutes ago, sburke said:

China Deals Hammer Blow to Russia's War Effort (msn.com)

 

I doubt the Russians need cutting edge chips if the goal is just to produce more stuff like Kalibr cruise missiles, which were designed before 1994?

[Butschi]

Just now, dan/california said:

And their we have the German position in a nutshell. Unless I read it wrong it says "of course we won't REALLY fight for Poland". And that is why everyone else is mad them.

You read it wrong.

And it has nothing to do with the German position. I just called BS on this "you don't give in to a blackmailer". Of course you do. I didn't say you do it all the time. The question is whether it is worth risking whatever the blackmailer is threatening to do versus what giving him what he wants costs you. If you say you rather die than handing someone your money... well, I actually don't believe you. If you say, you rather die than handing someone your child I do believe you.

Ukraine... Well, that certainly isn't that easy to answer. The thing is, there is a much stronger case for defending Poland (and I am certain Germany would do that) because if we didn't, NATO is dead and every little country is on its own. Sorry guys but you are making a straw man here, it can't really be that hard to get the difference between Poland and Ukraine in that regard.

 

[kevinkin]

18 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

What stops nuclear blackmail?

Really nothing once WMD are in "enemy" hands. This is why preventing nuclear proliferation has been a grand strategic objective since the end of WW2. This is especially true for those who believe they are heading for 72 virgins after Armageddon.  But in the hands of Russia, who can't compete conventionally and still have delusions of grandeur, blackmail is all they have. So it becomes a stare down to see if one side blinks or hits the red button. So we have to ask, is Ukraine the West's red line for this stare down? If not where? Poland, Germany etc..? At some point the stare down has to take place since (again) all Russia has is nuclear blackmail.