How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[dan/california]

Russian morality is a contradiction in terms, based on observed behaviour. What Ukraine has to do is convince those mobiks that they are more likely to die getting on that train/bus to Ukraine than they are if they do whatever they have to do to AVOID getting on that bus. And, with a nod to The_Capt, as much as I hate to admit it the less threatened those mobiks think their own homes and families are the easier that will be to do.

[Haiduk]

6 hours ago, The_Capt said:

In retaking these regions Ukraine would have to navigate the slippery slope of reintegration of the regions which would likely come with resistance, possibly armed insurgency.  

Never. Because locals in Donbas and Crimea are not so big Russia-lovers, that to go to death for it, but just conformists. Most of them will flee to Russia, other... "resistance" of other will be mostly in their kitchen talks. Like in times of USSR and Ukraine. Of course, some fanatics can organize some sort of partisanship, but they will be quickly eliminatet.

There is an UKR movie "Atlantida", filmed in 2019, which describes possible life on liberated-in-future Donbas  

Edited December 13, 2022 by Haiduk

[Haiduk]

6 hours ago, Butschi said:

The ugly fact is that Germany has no legal obligation to give Ukraine anything.

The ugly fact that Germany long time explained own loyality and appeasment policy to Russia and business-as-usual with them despite growing imperial appetites by "moral obligations because Russian population losses during 1941-1945". But most affected former Soviet republics in WWII were Belarus and Ukraine. But Russia has a gas and oil and it has big market, so "obligations" were only before Russia, not before some "annoying minors". 

Merkel's vote for no NATO membership of Ukriane also was one of reasons of current war.

In 2014 Germany rejected to sold engines for our BTR-4, hypocrytically explaining this decision that "this will more escalate a conflict and will cause new deaths"

In 2015 Germany and France pressing of hesitating Poroshenko contributed Minsk-2 agreenemts, laying the slow bomb under Ukriane 

So, maybe Germany hasn't LEGAL obligations, but now it has MORAL. 

Yes, Germany give us many of financial support and took in a lot of refugees, but Germany does not enough in military aspect, looking back to previous policy toward Ukraine. Though... PzH2000 and IRIS-T are really good things. But there is imagination,. that Germany to this time scare to loss Russian market and get some political problems with Russia after the war if will give more heavy weapon to us. 

Edited December 13, 2022 by Haiduk

[Yet]

16 hours ago, Kinophile said:

I dont think his ego could allow it. For him to leave, to abandon a society that he has very literally bound to his personal presence through the re-tzarisation of Russia, would be a soul-crushing moment. He's a pyschopath, and he's a tough one. And it's a big country.

I'll take odds on this one

 

he will head on to Kamtjatska, Sachalin or some other outskirt of russia and rename it Putinia, ofcourse he will somehow get/buy/manage/force the blessing of the new leaders which will greatly help the new guys not to fall out of a window.

[Haiduk]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

We've talked about the strange motivation problems where guys are grabbed, dumped in crappy barracks, given poor equipment, and then sent to the front. 

This is usual for them, but this never was an obstacle to fight. Even their wives when write angry appeals to aithorities, don't demand to turn them back and stop the war. They demand equipment and good commanders for them. 

[Haiduk]

4 hours ago, FancyCat said:

 

 

Thanks to post this. For those, who lasy to open the thread I briefly tell about article

- First batch of Neptune missiles were taken from factory for several days before the war

- First usage of Neptune was not in April when "Moskva" has been sunk, but on 26th of Feb. Three missiles were launched at three large landing ships, which sailed toward Mykolaiv. Russians had intentions to make bridgehead near Mykolaiv or between Mykolaiv and Odesa. Missiles route have to be over Odesa, so for safety reasons their route was put on 120 m altitude instead 4-5 m. Russian detected missiles and probably intercepted all (or they missed). Also allegedly they mistakingly shot down own fighter jet, covering the convoy over the sea and hunting for the missiles too. But for Russians appearance of AS-missiles turned out total surprize, so convoy has broken the mission and returned back. 

- after first launches, battery commander was very dissapointed and ordered to check all missiles, why no one didn't hit a target. Turned out all missiles had defect with the same part, which wouldn't allow to activate warhead. Naval Command claimed this was factory sabotage, but representatives of DB "LUCH" rejected this and soon all parts were repaired

- UKR militaries, who were sources of this article, rejected any NATO assistance in Moskva attack. They tell UKR hasn't any problems with detection of so large target, all problems were only with targeting, because Neptune hadn't in that time own over-the-horizon radar (though missiles can be targeted by coordinates). 

- Bayraktar crews rejected to fly to Moskva, because there were low clouds through which TB2 can't work and to fly lower the clouds would be mean alsmost 100 % loss of valuable equipment.

- The weather helped us. Clouds were so low, that usual radar signal, reflecting from the clouds and water, rerached Moskva in 120 km from the shore and showed the thick mark on display. After seconds of hesitation, commander ordered salvo. The lauch was also from Odesa oblast area. 

- "Moskva" almost didn't activate own AD equipment, because possibly commander was sure in such terrible weather no one jet oe TB2 will not fly to attack them (also here already was posted a document of technical conditions revsion of "Moscva" for January 2022, where many critical radar and AD systems had many malfunctions or were even not in working conditions). 

- The ship could be rescued, but the evening and night storm didn't allow other vessels to approach. When on next morning the sea was already calm, there was too late.

The photo of the same historical launch

   

Edited December 13, 2022 by Haiduk

[NamEndedAllen]

16 hours ago, The_Capt said:

we are talking about a Russian withdrawal, Putin gone and some sort of re-normalization effort with a new regime - which will need to include reparations and warcrimes prosecution - while Russia manages to keep it together. Ukraine in NATO and EU, reconstruction in full swing to try and pay everyone off.  

AND more recently:

“Russia needs to leave, that we can agree upon, but I would hand them over to the international community to manage for a decade or so”

Thanks for your in-depth reply. My comment was part of a response to your earlier thoughts and insights on your vision of the best end state for the war. I do recall your analysis from way back. The sticky part has always been in lining up events between now, “Russia needs to leave”, and your international (peace-keeping?) oversight of occupied oblasts freed of Russian troops who assumed to have all returned to Russia. And an accompanying vision of a new Russia. My questions:

1. Is your scenario built on Russians fully vacating the Oblasts *without* being militarily defeated in detail, each Oblast? If so what are the other assumptions about Russia that bringing this about? Ukraine is already fighting *within* several of them as we speak and will be pushing farther through the winter.

2. Do you foresee Ukraine deciding that after greater successes on the ground, freeing more territory, the USA and Allies will force Ukraine to stop and accept terms? And Russia will, as well?

3. AND after difficult negotiations, the Russians will agree to fully retreat, everywhere? And agree to the rest of your terms - reparations, war crimes trials? Why? What do they get out of this? 

4. If the Russian concessions are predicated on Putin’s downfall and a new friendlier government, would this really happen *before* decisive defeat in Ukraine? Wouldn’t the government fall *after* utter defeat and humiliating concessions? Is the assumption that during the coming warfare phase, Putin’s government will fall first, and the friendlier government would emerge? This seems shaky.

5. But If Ukraine has militarily defeated the Russians on the ground in each Oblast, I think it is an open question whether Ukraine would accept giving over some sort of international jurisdiction of them. You state reasons  *why* that would be wise from an international perspective. But Ukraine and likely some of its close allies may not agree. So - a good scenario but Devil in the details.

6. NATO membership - How?  I asked earlier about the requirement for a nation to be fully in control of its borders in order to apply for membership. Your scenario would complicate or derail that. Or do you know ways around it?

7. But if everything fell into place and your post war vision took place, my pessimism about Russia and the current state of governments everywhere leads me to wonder how the imposition of meaningful - meaning massive -reparations, and coughing up national and military leadership for war crimes shown worldwide…how all that would or could be enforced. Isn’t it likely that any conceivable future Russia would renege on various parts of such an agreement? All the allied nations party to such an agreement would have to agree on how to handle various violations by Russia, and get international corporations to buy in on starting and likely stopping specific aspects of trade. And are we relying on Ukraine or NATO or the UN or ?? to enforce banned activities within the four liberated  Oblasts?? Who polices them? 

To be clear, your vision has much to commend it! But it raises questions about the two warring parties perceptions and whether either or both would agree. And then of course, all the devils in the enormous amount of details. So it may be the Best Outcome. But is it the Best Likely Outcome.

[Zeleban]

6 hours ago, Butschi said:

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

Oh, I would be grateful if you would voice the legal obligations of the supply of armored vehicles by Poland, Slovakia and others for Ukraine. After all, based on your logic, they are? After all, NATO countries cannot just help a country that is not a member of NATO?

[Zeleban]

6 hours ago, Butschi said:

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.

See above.

Let's make your task easier and just tell me why the above countries should supply armored vehicles to Ukraine, and Germany should not

[JonS]

Because different countries have different contexts.

Do PzH2000 suck? What about those Gepards - are they worthless? Or the other 12B euros that Germany has provided? None of it is good enough until you get the specific toy you have a temporary hardon for?

Why arent you moaning that the US hasn't given you a Nimitz, or a satellite, or a wing of B-52s?

Edited December 13, 2022 by JonS

[NamEndedAllen]

7 hours ago, Butschi said:

The ugly fact is that Germany has no legal obligation to give Ukraine anything.

Nobody outside Ukraine has a legal obligation to militarily aid Ukraine, AFAIK. Yet most of Western Civilization is doing so, and in a massive way. Because we see Russia’s actions as critical threats against our own national best interests, and against the basis of Western democracies and the civilization built upon them. Nothing since WWII’s existential threat resembles this war. Realistically, the massive support for Ukraine isn’t due to universal love of Ukraine itself. Besides the sheer humanitarian outrage and morally required response, it is the recognition of a looming widespread existential threat.

While not existentially threatening the USA, that nation’s foreign policy in Europe since WWII has always been at root, to ensure that no single nation again dominates the European continent, subjugating Europe to its will. 

[_Morpheus_]

 

Quote

Let's make your task easier and just tell me why the above countries should supply armored vehicles to Ukraine, and Germany should not

Because all this countries are understand that if Ukraine will fall, they will have russians at their borders, but Germany will not have this problem  
(and most of this countries still remember bad experience from the past century)

[Zeleban]

1 minute ago, NamEndedAllen said:

Nobody outside Ukraine has a legal obligation to militarily aid Ukraine, AFAIK. Yet most of Western Civilization is doing so, and in a massive way. Because we see Russia’s actions as critical threats against our own national best interests, and against the basis of Western democracies and the civilization built upon them. Nothing since WWII’s existential threat resembles this war. Realistically, the massive support for Ukraine isn’t due to universal love of Ukraine itself. Besides the sheer humanitarian outrage and morally required response, it is the recognition of a looming widespread existential threat.

While not existentially threatening the USA, that nation’s foreign policy in Europe since WWII has always been at root, to ensure that no single nation again dominates the European continent, subjugating Europe to its will. 

 

4 minutes ago, NamEndedAllen said:

Nobody outside Ukraine has a legal obligation to militarily aid Ukraine, AFAIK. Yet most of Western Civilization is doing so, and in a massive way. Because we see Russia’s actions as critical threats against our own national best interests, and against the basis of Western democracies and the civilization built upon them. Nothing since WWII’s existential threat resembles this war. Realistically, the massive support for Ukraine isn’t due to universal love of Ukraine itself. Besides the sheer humanitarian outrage and morally required response, it is the recognition of a looming widespread existential threat.

While not existentially threatening the USA, that nation’s foreign policy in Europe since WWII has always been at root, to ensure that no single nation again dominates the European continent, subjugating Europe to its will. 

Yes, but based on the words of Butschi and JonS, Germany should not resist undermining the foundations of the existence of Western democracies, there are no legal obligations for this.

Poland, Slovakia and others have reason to do so, but Germany does not

[Zeleban]

5 minutes ago, _Morpheus_ said:

but Germany will not have this problem 

Are you sure about it?

[JonS]

1 minute ago, Zeleban said:

Yes, but based on the words of Butschi and JonS, Germany should not resist undermining the foundations of the existence of Western democracies, there are no legal obligations for this.

Aaand 'ignore'

[Haiduk]

Royal Marines deployed on ‘high-risk covert operations’ in Ukraine

Emmm... What? 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/royal-marines-deployed-on-high-risk-covert-operations-in-ukraine-r7b50gv3p

Maybe if this is true, Royal Marines were as "vacationers" in Foreign Legion?

 

[_Morpheus_]

Quote

Are you sure about it?

Zeleban, it was an `irony` from my side
 

[Zeleban]

2 minutes ago, JonS said:

Aaand 'ignore'

Of course, what a trifle - Foundations of Western Democracies

[Haiduk]

38 minutes ago, JonS said:

Do PzH2000 suck?

Mmmm...  Good thing, but has weak autoloader. Germany should be pleased we tested this toy in REAL conditions, not in "low-ntensivity warfare". Now engineers can make some changes.

SAR-sattelite we also already have

About "B-52" wing - thank to US and other Westrern countries, which forced is to scrap our Tu-22M3 and hand over to Russian all Tu-160 and Kh-555 cruise missiles, which they now fire at us. And for this we signed useless Budapest memorandum about "guaranties". 

You in 90th didn't want to see new strong military force in Europe? So, now time to pay for this mistake. But you pay with money, and we with our blood.

Edited December 13, 2022 by Haiduk

[Zeleban]

6 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

Mmmm...  Good thing, but has week autoloader. Germany should be pleased we tested this toy in REAL conditions, not in "low-ntensivity warfare". Now engineers can make some changes.

SAR-sattelite we also already have

I'm not talking about hardware.But about the motivation of our confrontation. Abrams, leopards, hymars. It's all nonsense. Fundamental are the reasons and motivations why our warriors fight. In my understanding, we are fighting to be part of Western democratic civilization.

Edited December 13, 2022 by Zeleban

[Butschi]

11 minutes ago, Zeleban said:

After all, based on your logic, they are? After all, NATO countries cannot just help a country that is not a member of NATO?

No, when and where did I say that? Don't twist my words or else this whole discussion is pointless.

 

10 minutes ago, Zeleban said:

Let's make your task easier and just tell me why the above countries should supply armored vehicles to Ukraine, and Germany should not

I didn't say they should and I didn't say we shouldn't. Again, when and where did I say that?

I said we are not legally obliged to supply you with anything. Because we are not. Of course that doesn't have to prevent us from supplying you. It doesn't. We supply you. I said, we don't have to and so you have no lever on us to make demands. You can of course still demand whatever you want. Be my guest, I can deal with it. But go back and read what I actually tried to tell you: It hurts your cause. Yours. Not mine. So all this ranting at me is pointless. I was actually trying to help you understand why it hurts your cause. I was trying to explain to you how Germans tick and why I think your government makes a mistake in handling Germans the way they do if they are actually interested in getting what they want instead of just venting their frustration.

If you are not interested in that kind of insight and just want to do Germany Bashing, fine, have it your way, I hope it makes you feel better. As I said earlier, today is Germany Bashing Day, have fun.

[Zeleban]

4 minutes ago, Butschi said:

I was trying to explain to you how Germans tick

Well, if there is nothing about the legal obligations of Poland and Slovakia to Ukraine, I will be glad to hear about the current difficulties of the Germans.

[Haiduk]

Last night something big made BOOM on territory of Russian military base (488th MRR of 144th MRD) in Klintsy, Briansk oblast (45 km in nearest point to UKR border)

Looks like Bulgaria handed over Tochka-U for us.

Edited December 13, 2022 by Haiduk

[womble]

43 minutes ago, NamEndedAllen said:

3. AND after difficult negotiations, the Russians will agree to fully retreat, everywhere? And agree to the rest of your terms - reparations, war crimes trials? Why? What do they get out of this? 

They get the (eventual, once they're fully in compliance) removal of national sanctions, and the beginning of being readmitted to the "Community of Nations". I guess.

44 minutes ago, NamEndedAllen said:

7. But if everything fell into place and your post war vision took place, my pessimism about Russia and the current state of governments everywhere leads me to wonder how the imposition of meaningful - meaning massive -reparations, and coughing up national and military leadership for war crimes shown worldwide…how all that would or could be enforced.

Again, sanctions. It's all that's left after the shouting and running about is over. Some of the "sanctions" that lift won't be so much official "thou shalt not"s being withdrawn as much as renormalisation of trading relationships. Being able to sell petrochem to the West at a market price, for example.

Of course, all this relies on Russia not just crawling into its shell and telling everyone to bugger off, like the North Koreans have.

[poesel]

1 hour ago, Haiduk said:

The ugly fact that Germany long time explained own loyality and appeasment policy to Russia and business-as-usual with them despite growing imperial appetites by "moral obligations because Russian population losses during 1941-1945". But most affected former Soviet republics in WWII were Belarus and Ukraine.

You are very right here. I was always wondering why your ambassadors weren't playing that card.
In public use, the 'Soviets' were always 'Russians'. So Russia has inherited all the guilt we have from WWII, but neither has Belarus nor Ukraine. That is a piece of history that is not well known here.
A little bit of reframing would have gone a long way to gain more public support. A missed chance, IMHO.

1 hour ago, Haiduk said:

But Russia has a gas and oil and it has big market, so "obligations" were only before Russia, not before some "annoying minors". 

Russia had 2.3% of our foreign trade in '21 and the number was already declining. So not a big market, but neither unimportant.
Being so dependent on Russian oil & gas was a mixture of stupidity and greed. It could have been avoided, and now we pay for it.

The neglect of Ukraine goes together with the general neglect of Germany towards eastern European countries, nothing special, unfortunately. That stems from the time of the reunification. Eastern Germany was well integrated in the East, but was more or less disposed of. Western Germany was always looking West, and that attitude survived until now.

1 hour ago, Haiduk said:

But there is imagination,. that Germany to this time scare to loss Russian market and get some political problems with Russia after the war if will give more heavy weapon to us. 

No, that's not it. The Russian market is dead for the foreseeable future.
The real reason is purely domestic policy. There are still a lot of people who think that delivering weapons is always a bad thing and will lead to more suffering (not my opinion). Unfortunately, this feeling is especially strong in the supporters of the chancellors party. He cannot risk the support of those people.

There will be no delivery of tanks from Germany unless there is a strong push from other European/NATO countries to deliver them together. And Germany will be the last to jump on that train, and only if it is unavoidable.
If you want German tanks, get some from the French, the UK, the USA first. Sorry, but that is how it is.