How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Haiduk]

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Oh goodie, another war with a begrudging and resentful partner we are supposed to arm to the teeth, be continuously told we suck and are doing it wrong, and then enjoy the post war sh#t show as we have to sink billions more into a resentful nation to keep it propped up.

Seriously man, we get the frustration but why not follow the lead from your political leadership and offer a simple “thank you” now and again?

We thank you but we never will infratiatingly dance in front of West, like this did former president. And we consider West does in part of our military supply much less than could be. 

Maybe you can't hear other side of true, that not only evil Putin led to this war.  Western elites with own "real politic" and "don't bozzer the bear" toward Russia led to this war too. So, we have a right not to ASK support, but to DEMAND. From you, guarantors of our sovereignty, who gave us toilet paper of Budapesht Memorandum in exchange on our disarming. 

We really can't understand why US piss off in Iraq hundreds of Abrams, Strikers, Humvees, which fell in the ISIS hands, but Ukraine have to beg each dozen of M113 or M777. We can't understand words of western politics during "Phase 1" that "Western weapon too complicated for Ukrainians, we should give them old Soviet systems". As if we some tumba-yumba tribe, which never seen more complicated weapon than a bow. We can't understand speed  of decisions making, when even about Gepards were more month of discussions. And only now we at last (after 7-8 months of war) we have been receiveing first modern AD complexes. And thanks God and US, Patriots in the way. Patriots, wich we beg since first days. What your politics wait theese months? Have been shaking and scaring of "escalation"? 

So, if I hear tunes "how dare theese unpleasant Ukies to demand more weapon? We can just stop it if you don't like something!" my reaction will be the same. Beacause there is imagination West already more afraid of Russian defeat, than Russian "escalation" and because of this supports us only to stop Russian advance and replenish our losses, but not to maintain our fast and decisive victory.     

 

Edited December 14, 2022 by Haiduk

[Haiduk]

51 minutes ago, Taranis said:

Note: the French do not wear belts above the jacket.

Belt-over-jacket was a often remnant in 2014, when new MM14 camo uniform became to substitute old "Dubok", which weared with belt by old Soviet tradition. But in this case I think the belt just for warming in order the cold wind doesn't blow under the jacket, which additionmally maybe has some bigger size, than it owner 

[_Morpheus_]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

Seriously? 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foreign_aid_to_Ukraine_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War

 And this does not even start to take into account training assistance or ISR support.  If NATO nations were not involved in this war Ukraine would be a annexed province in the Russian Federation and we would be supporting resistance where we could.  We are very involved in this war right now and if we do not stay involved in the post-war all this money and dying will be for nothing.

Haiduk provide really good answer, so I will stop debating.
 

Quote

If NATO nations were not involved in this war Ukraine would be a annexed province in the Russian Federation

this was a plan/hope for `some` NATO members at the beginning of the war.  

[dan/california]

3 hours ago, The_Capt said:

And peace and tranquillity has ruled the region to this day…

Then let me repeat something I said months ago, and it is still true, if Ukraine can't push Russia all the way out. Whatever Ukraine doesn't have boots on when when the shooting stops, they need to just let the bleep go. If Russia can hold the 2/24 borders then let Russia annex them, sever all ties and be done with it. Even the tiniest scrap of territory in some sort of limbo absolutely guarantees another war in a few years. When this is over every square meter need to have one permanent owner.

48 minutes ago, Zeleban said:

 

Hey, as far as I remember, the US, like Germany, has no legal obligations to Ukraine, right?

 

 

These groans of lamentations of Ukrainians are so tiring. I understand you and I'm very sorry that you have to listen to this from us. My condolences.

Perhaps Gaiduk is referring to Ukraine's nuclear arsenal in the 1990s, which we graciously destroyed in exchange for security assurances. What do you think, if Ukraine still had nuclear weapons, would we be witnesses of current events?

This is the question that anyone who wants to yell about the expense, hassle, or anything else has to answer. That and Germany blocking letting Ukraine in 2008. This would just not be happening if they hadn't done that, and it should be a black mark on Merkel's historical record that dwarfs any and everything else she did. Well, except allowing Germany to become almost totally dependent on Russian gas. Which incidentally paid for everything Russia is shooting at Ukraine.

Edited December 14, 2022 by dan/california

[Butschi]

39 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

So, if I hear tunes "how dare theese unpleasant Ukies to demand more weapon? We can just stop it if you don't like something!" my reaction will be the same.

The question you should consider is: What is more important to you, your pride or western support? Because:

39 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

So, we have a right not to ASK support, but to DEMAND.

Of course you have. But this is not about what you may or may not do. True, if you only ask chances are you won't get it. But if you demand, chances are even higher you won't get it.

That's all the message I was trying to convey.

Edited December 14, 2022 by Butschi

[Kinophile]

I'm pretty sure Haiduk et al are more frustrated that the West ****ed them over in favour of Russia since 2014,  when properly arming them would have done so much to prevent or even just delay this war, never mind making the first few weeks even bloodier for Ivan. 

Obviously the pure, unrefined bull**** lines the West consistently trotted out were rationalised/excused by the general fear of Russia's war machine and Putin's sabre rattling. His schtick worked so Ukraine got crumbs and had to make do. 

But the frustration of how many lives could have been saved will take a long, long time to fade away, if ever. The failure to stand up to Russia,  which is perrenial, will forever be shameful stain on Western elites. 

But its not like they give a **** about that anyway,  so given half a chance they'll back out again. But not without 40 million Ukrainians shouting WTF very clearly and loudly...which might just work. 

Edited December 14, 2022 by Kinophile

[Kinophile]

Deleted 

Edited December 14, 2022 by Kinophile

[dan/california]

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/12/putin-russian-ukraine-war-global-peace/672385/

Good top level article. Short version, if Putin can portray this as a win, everything gets worse.

[FancyCat]

Recall in 2014 the failure of the West to stand up to Russia and support Ukraine, which extended to weapons and equipment support refusals beyond 2014 till very recently. In hindsight, had the West pushed back on Russia, this invasion, the deaths and suffering in this invasion, and the worldwide effects and instability caused by this war might have all been avoided.

In return for our accommodation with Russia we have literally gotten nothing. The west got literally nothing from treating Putin and Russia with silver gloves. In that time period from 2014 - 2022, Russia has only in every way poisoned and sought to defeat the West, subvert it, and this invasion, had it been successful, was just the next step for Russia to challenge NATO, the EU, and the U.S hegemony worldwide.

So...to sit back and grumble, and complain about having to help Ukraine defend itself, ignoring the entire reality that the international system that obliges states to defend the sovereignty of another (UN charter) is a construct of the West largely and for the West's benefit, and that Russia's goal was to knock it all down, well...tbh we are acting ungrateful to Ukraine for handing the EU, NATO, a chance to stop western decline.

To bring up a quote from the capt, bringing Russia back to the international order that he states is a goal of the West, ignores the suffering, instability, and the desire to overthrow the West and reassert Russia as a great power capable of contesting the West on every front.

In return for treating Russia with kid gloves, we only got a wolf that sought to annex Ukraine and reassert itself in Europe with violence and malaise.

Russia is our enemy. Russia is hostile to every aspect of the West, in the sense that it wants to regain influence and power that the West holds.

That Ukraine and the Ukrainian people want to join the West fully and be part of the U.S hegemony, should not be ignored nor treated with disdain especially in a world where Western cultural and social influence is under assault and in decline.

Again, Russia has shown no desire to do nothing more than stab a knife into the West. Ukraine has shown clear desire to join the West. Can we not act like stuck up people, who are giving alms to the poor and expect gratitude when we are partly responsible for them being poor in the first place?

Ukraine wants western tanks partly to kill Russians, partly to protect the lives of their servicemen cause surprise, western tanks are built to preserve the lives of the crew.

Have you seen Russia and how they treat their soldiers? We expect Ukraine to operate by the highest levels of western morals and treat Russian soldiers with compassion, without Western money, or equipment to protect their own.

Not to mention we give F-16s to Iraq, which actually is resentful to the West (with good reason), Saudi Arabia gets patriot batteries, F-16s, and stabs us regularly, and we just threw away so much in Afghanistan, and here we have a country and people united as never before, and seeking to turn a enemy of the West into a pancake and we are grossly acting with callousness.

It's one thing to be cautious about Russia. It's another thing to just treat Ukraine with disdain for daring to ask, to demand, to beg in the first place.

[holoween]

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

 Getting up to speed on how to fight and sustain M1s is not a job done in a long weekend. In fact if we had sent them on 25 Feb, I am not convinced they would be ready for prime time right now.  The FCS requirements alone are pretty intense. 

Yea ill call bs on that.
At least on a Leo2 teaching a crew the essentials of using and maintaining the tank takes maybe a week.
And even if were talking full training were way below your mark. It takes 3 weeks to train a driver fully.
For gunner/loader it takes 6 weeks max. 
And for the tc getting proficient at their station shouldnt take more than a week with the overall training time just being determined by how much tactics they have to be tought.

Higher level maintenance obviously takes longer but that doesnt really matter much since you can simply do it like its currently done with western systems. ship them back and have proper repair shops outside ukraine.

[dan/california]

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/12/14/world/europe/russian-trench-fortifications-in-ukraine.html

The NYT is having an episode of doing its job. There are excellent hi res satellite shots of Russian defenses across the South. BFC should at least consider considering, to coin a phrase, buying some imagery of the most contested spots. It would make a lot of scenario making pretty much cut and paste.

[sburke]

1 hour ago, Haiduk said:

We really can't understand why US piss off in Iraq hundreds of Abrams, Strikers, Humvees, which fell in the ISIS hands, but Ukraine have to beg each dozen of M113 or M777.  

Honestly?  

1 I think it was cheaper in the long run than shipping them home

2 The border with Iran dictated we had to have an Iraqi military that could hold its own for at least a bit.

3 There was no border line conflict with a nuclear power we had to add into the equation

[Beleg85]

Sense of humour of Russian parlamentarians:

Mолодец.

[FancyCat]

And for anyone in the West, which is so cautious and adamant about the lives of their servicemen to roll their eyes at Ukraine and Ukrainians seeking the same protection, that is just a shameful attitude, lacking in compassion and regard for them.

Have you seen the videos of Ukrainians kneeling in front of funeral processions? You don't hear much complaining about Ukraine giving up Russian PoWs in 1 to 3 or other rationed swaps, just gratefulness for their return. The idea of keeping a pilot, a general or some other personnel who is useful/vital to the Russian war effort is less a concern than the return of their men and women.

8 minutes ago, sburke said:

Honestly?  

1 I think it was cheaper in the long run than shipping them home

2 The border with Iran dictated we had to have an Iraqi military that could hold its own for at least a bit.

3 There was no border line conflict with a nuclear power we had to add into the equation

Escalation hits both ways, goddamn, do you think Putin or Russians wanna die in nuclear fire? They complain so much about being locked out of Europe and their vacation homes and yachts. They love their luxuries as much as anyone else. Christ, the West needs to stop acting like Russia is some rabid bear, incapable of reasoning and motivation, only primal thought. It's just racism.

Edit: Putin sits at the end of a verry long table cause of COVID, what about that makes you think he is fine with nuclear death?

Edited December 14, 2022 by FancyCat

[dan/california]

3 minutes ago, sburke said:

3 There was no border line conflict with a nuclear power we had to add into the equation

There are coherent arguments that re-equipping Ukraine with Western tanks and IFVs in the middle of the war is just too hard. I disagree with those arguments, but they they are not irrational. To be even more even handed the people who say it is too hard are closer to the problem than I am. To worry that tanks and IFVs are going to cross some sort of red line, after shipping tens of thousands of ATGMs, and at least a million rounds of 155 is just not credible. None of the arguments about the risks of hitting air bases on the far side of Moscow even sort of apply. And just the statement of Western resolve it would imply is no small thing. 

[sburke]

16 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

Christ, the West needs to stop acting like Russia is some rabid bear, incapable of reasoning and motivation, only primal thought. It's just racism.

Edit: Putin sits at the end of a verry long table cause of COVID, what about that makes you think he is fine with nuclear death?

umm... when they are acting exactly like a rabid bear?

[Bulletpoint]

38 minutes ago, dan/california said:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/12/14/world/europe/russian-trench-fortifications-in-ukraine.html

The NYT is having an episode of doing its job. There are excellent hi res satellite shots of Russian defenses across the South. BFC should at least consider considering, to coin a phrase, buying some imagery of the most contested spots. It would make a lot of scenario making pretty much cut and paste.

Paywalled, unfortunately.

[womble]

The "reluctance" about which I remain the most puzzled is the continued prohibition of the sale of Rheinmetall corporate assets (Marder) to an export customer (Ukraine). Setting aside whether it's an effective employment of Ukrainian foreign currency reserves, the day has long passed (it passed, I'd ballpark, when the first PzH2000 crossed the border into Ukraine) where this would be at all escalatory, so if the UKR government wants to buy them, why stand in the way of Rheinmetall making a buck off some "pre-loved" equipment sales to an ally whose goals and objectives align more strongly with NATO's than almost all their other allies, and even better with Germany's than some of NATO's members agendas do? 

[FancyCat]

4 minutes ago, sburke said:

umm... when they are acting exactly like a rabid bear?

As dan/California stated, why is a PzH 2000 fine but not a Leopard to Russia?

[womble]

19 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

Edit: Putin sits at the end of a verry long table cause of COVID, what about that makes you think he is fine with nuclear death?

I think Putin is fine with nuclear death for nearly everybody else. He's old. He may be terminally ill. I don't know what his personal peccadilloes are, but I'd bet money that there's a bunker under the Urals, or even under Moscow, just stuffed to the blast-resistant doors with them, waiting for Armageddon. Two years underground with all the distractions his billions and absolute power can procure for him? Think he reckons he can probably stand it. If he's suffering from late stage cancer, two years is optimistic.

[Bulletpoint]

3 minutes ago, womble said:

Two years underground with all the distractions his billions and absolute power can procure for him? Think he reckons he can probably stand it.

And then what? He emerges, 73 years old, to a nuclear wasteland?

[womble]

2 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

As dan/California stated, why is a PzH 2000 fine but not a Leopard to Russia?

I'd guess it's because, in the minds of those who make these decisions, tanks lead major offensives (that can drive deep into Russia) whereas artillery just blows things up, and can't create the conditions for sweeping movements. Or, at least, they think that's how the enemy will see them. I mean, all the evidence so far is that tanks aren't necessary, and certainly aren't the point of the spear for, sweeping offensives (that's those bois on quad bikes with Javelins and point-and-click "summon 155mm death" systems), and that mobile artillery is no longer just King, but Emperor of the battlefield. But hey, it's going to take the military a long time to come to grips with the changes, and 10 times that long for the politicos to catch up.

[FancyCat]

3 minutes ago, womble said:

I think Putin is fine with nuclear death for nearly everybody else. He's old. He may be terminally ill. I don't know what his personal peccadilloes are, but I'd bet money that there's a bunker under the Urals, or even under Moscow, just stuffed to the blast-resistant doors with them, waiting for Armageddon. Two years underground with all the distractions his billions and absolute power can procure for him? Think he reckons he can probably stand it. If he's suffering from late stage cancer, two years is optimistic.

If his goal was merely to live, he wouldn't be doubling down in a war where the longer it goes on, the chances of him not surviving it's end increases. He wants a restored a Russian Empire, not him overseeing the ruins of a country.

[womble]

1 minute ago, Bulletpoint said:

And then what? He emerges, 73 years old, to a nuclear wasteland?

No. He dies in his bed surrounded by [pecadilloes] before he's 73. Old. Dying. Those are the important bits. Nothing to lose that he can't bear to see the back of. Which is where he'll be if his regime is crumbling.

Sure, his bodyguards/concubines in the bunker might murder him when they realise he burnt the world down for his own funeral and wasn't ever planning even to be there, but hey, he's going to swing from a lamp post if he doesn't, so why not push the button out of spite?

[womble]

1 minute ago, FancyCat said:

If his goal was merely to live, he wouldn't be doubling down in a war where the longer it goes on, the chances of him not surviving it's end increases. He wants a restored a Russian Empire, not him overseeing the ruins of a country.

It's not "merely" to live. At least not now. Right now, he reckons that there's a chance (who knows whether he thinks it's 50-50 or one in a million?) that Western resolve will fade, leaving Ukraine all vulnerable to Russia, before he gets to the point of hiding away and before he carks it from non-lead-poisoning/gravity mishap causes. As it sinks in that his desired result is never going to happen, he's going to look for an exit strategy.

Maybe he'll run off to Venezuela/Qatar/Saudi/PRC or whoever will have him (and trust to their assurances that they won't cash in the political capital of turning over the C21st's greatest mass-murderer so far to justice), or maybe he will head for his bunker from where he knows he'll never face the ignominy of trial, because the ICC will be a smoking radioactive ruin and everyone will have other things on their mind than finding his bolt-hole and digging him out before his cancer catches up with him.