How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Shady_Side]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

Russia does not have an endless supply of small arms.  Every time a mobik unit gets slaughtered, there's a portion of those weapons that are permanently lost.  We've already seen Russia resorting to using WW2 weapons and helmets to fill gaps, so it is clear that their supplies and supply system isn't capable of keeping up with losses.

As for personal gear, for sure Russia is already requiring individuals to purchase such stuff because there's more of it available in the private sector than in the military supply chain.  Mobiks are not happy about this.  Ukrainians weren't happy to do this either, but they had motivation that Mobiks don't have.

Ammo is also a problem we've discussed before.  Mobiks aren't able to buy 152mm rounds online to bring with them to the front.

Then there's the bigger stuff, such as vehicles, heavy weapons, artillery, communications gear, etc.  That stuff is all finite and diminishing every day.  Often without doing anything positive before being lost.

The conclusion is that Russia is probably capable of fielding a better light infantry force in 2023 than it had in 2022, but that is all it will be... light infantry.  Poorly led light infantry tasked with things beyond its capabilities.  They can cause a lot of problems for Ukraine, but only through sheer numbers.

If we are talking about individual soldiers, that might be the case for many Russian units.  However, they still are deploying units that are even worse than prewar in that they don't have any military training.  Even the horrible Russian training before the war was better.

Steve

Hi guys. I have been reading this forum multiple times a day since the 25th of February last year. This is the first time I have posted anything on here though. What brings me out of the shadows after all this time is some growing questions I am beginning to have.

There are almost 1900 pages showing Russian incompetence and brutalities and of course Ukrainian bravery. Those pages along with 1 working eyeball, 1 working ear, a thimble full of common sense, and a Tic Tak sized amount of human decency should be enough for anybody to know the righteous side of this war and who we all should be doing something big or small to help them win.

Here is the thing though, Why have not they won?  As much as I have read on here that Ukraine won this war in the first week, they still ain't done it yet. Large parts of their country is still occupied. Their soldiers and civilians die and get maimed everyday. God only knows what their civilians currently occupied suffer everyday and their p.o.w.s that for whatever reason the Russians decided a long time ago were not going home.

I think that this talk of a building Russian offensive should not be so flippantly dismissed. As much as we like to poke fun at the draftees that got scooped off the street handed a bolt action rifle and sent to soak up Ukrainian lead and gunpowder and bog down their offensives. They accomplished that mission and got Ukraine back in the trenches  It is clear Ukraine is winning... but they ain't won nothing yet. When you look at it from the other side, sometimes when your losing, you need to slow down the process drag it out see if circumstances change. 

Has much has we poke fun at those draftees all of them where not used has lead sponges. Those guys are coming up on what 3 months of some form of training. And to me it is impossible to think that that training has not vastly improved over what it was a year ago. Simply pulling a few vets out of the trenches and telling them how to survive and how to fight and maybe not worrying so much about if they can march a straight line. And poking fun at all those T62s and T64s being pulled out of storage to be sent into the fight. They are still tanks and there is still a lot of them. 

While I am happy Ukraine is getting 50 Bradleys and a few other modern I.F.V.s.. still though that is a Bradley battalion. Maybe add a Marder battalion to it... maybe not..... guys its gonna take lots more than that.

Before I ramble on anymore let me just ask it simply. After years of overestimating Russia, are we now underestimating them? Is that a dangerous path that this small echo chamber, like the larger western ones to be leading public opinions and expectations down? The Ukrainians have proven themselves to be as tough and brave has any army and are fighting for a righteous cause. This ain't a movie though and the good guys don't always win

 

 

 

  

[Kinophile]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

That is not a strategy, it is wishing. The best definition of a strategy I have heard is “a theory of success”.  What you have there is an envisioned end-state, and not a very good one.  This war could end right now and in the long term it will cost more than Russia has gained.  Russia will be a pariah for years and living under sanctions for a generation.  It’s economy is going nowhere but down and towards out.  Russia invaded one of its best customers and alienated the rest of Europe.  What was the plan for that?  How is this going to make Putin’s position more secure with the elites?  Will the cling to the captain that ran the ship aground?

A good strategy cannot solve for part of the problem, it must solve for the whole thing.  A strategy provides a framework in which effort aligns with outcomes.  It provides a vision and a certainty to marshal collective will.  It solves the problems it creates before they happen.  It aligns position and power, Ends, Ways and Means, narrative and demonstration.  A strategy defines and delineates.  And finally a strategy is a sentient thing, it is self aware and adapts while still retaining its identity.

I mean if someone has some inside knowledge here please speak up.  Best I have heard was this entire war was aimed at avoiding a looming Russian identity crisis.  It is of course creating one. Beyond that I cannot see the game here, to the point I am convinced that those in power in Russia cannot either.  The failure of the initial plan is generating its own strategy - keep throwing things at the problem and hope.  And make sure that when the music stops it is somebody else’s fault.

Exactly,  a Strategy is not just the desired end state but also how to get there, and why in that particular manner. 

Russia is now chasing a moving target of an end state,  with a concomitant lack of strategic clarity or definition. 

Edited January 9, 2023 by Kinophile

[dan/california]

12 minutes ago, Shady_Side said:

Hi guys. I have been reading this forum multiple times a day since the 25th of February last year. This is the first time I have posted anything on here though. What brings me out of the shadows after all this time is some growing questions I am beginning to have.

There are almost 1900 pages showing Russian incompetence and brutalities and of course Ukrainian bravery. Those pages along with 1 working eyeball, 1 working ear, a thimble full of common sense, and a Tic Tak sized amount of human decency should be enough for anybody to know the righteous side of this war and who we all should be doing something big or small to help them win.

Here is the thing though, Why have not they won?  As much as I have read on here that Ukraine won this war in the first week, they still ain't done it yet. Large parts of their country is still occupied. Their soldiers and civilians die and get maimed everyday. God only knows what their civilians currently occupied suffer everyday and their p.o.w.s that for whatever reason the Russians decided a long time ago were not going home.

I think that this talk of a building Russian offensive should not be so flippantly dismissed. As much as we like to poke fun at the draftees that got scooped off the street handed a bolt action rifle and sent to soak up Ukrainian lead and gunpowder and bog down their offensives. They accomplished that mission and got Ukraine back in the trenches  It is clear Ukraine is winning... but they ain't won nothing yet. When you look at it from the other side, sometimes when your losing, you need to slow down the process drag it out see if circumstances change. 

Has much has we poke fun at those draftees all of them where not used has lead sponges. Those guys are coming up on what 3 months of some form of training. And to me it is impossible to think that that training has not vastly improved over what it was a year ago. Simply pulling a few vets out of the trenches and telling them how to survive and how to fight and maybe not worrying so much about if they can march a straight line. And poking fun at all those T62s and T64s being pulled out of storage to be sent into the fight. They are still tanks and there is still a lot of them. 

While I am happy Ukraine is getting 50 Bradleys and a few other modern I.F.V.s.. still though that is a Bradley battalion. Maybe add a Marder battalion to it... maybe not..... guys its gonna take lots more than that.

Before I ramble on anymore let me just ask it simply. After years of overestimating Russia, are we now underestimating them? Is that a dangerous path that this small echo chamber, like the larger western ones to be leading public opinions and expectations down? The Ukrainians have proven themselves to be as tough and brave has any army and are fighting for a righteous cause. This ain't a movie though and the good guys don't always win

 

 

 

  

i will take a quick swing at the question. Russian losses are running ~3000 KIA or badly wounded per WEEK to give a very round but I believe reasonable number. The support we are giving Ukraine is a lot in if you look at the dollar amount, but much less than ten percent of the U.S. defense budget. Absolutely all indicators are that the Russian economy is somewhere between sinking, and actual free fall. Mobilizing a half a million more men will only make it worse. If the front lines don't move an inch until one side collapses from exhaustion, who wins? My money is on Ukraine. Feel free to disagree, it is sort of what we do here.

Edited January 9, 2023 by dan/california

[Vet 0369]

2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

I had a lot of sympathy for the first month when the Russian soldiers had very little idea what was going on.  Many, way too many from Russia's perspective, refused to fight.  But now?  I have no sympathy at all.  These guys being mobilized have the information they need to decide if they are going to go to Ukraine and murder innocent people or take a different course of action.  They have a choice, even if they've convinced themselves they do not.

The other thing that has eroded my sympathy for Russian mobiks is all the videos and intercepted calls that are available to us.  They are not angry that they are going to Ukraine to commit warcrimes, they are angry they aren't getting the training they need to do them effectively.

The only way this war ends is with Russia defeated.  The only way to defeat Russia is to kill Russian soldiers.  The faster they are killed, the faster this war ends.  When I see a video of dead Russians I think "good, the war is a little closer to being over".

As for demeaning Russian soldiers... I have no problem with that either.  Russians who are for this war view themselves as Übermensch and Ukrainians as Untermensch.  They deserve to be mocked, because not only are they not superior to Ukrainians, their behavior shows them to be decidedly inferior by any Western standard.  It is good to remind everybody of this fact.

Steve

I must say that I feel extreme sympathy for any combatant in this war who is not actively participating in war crimes. I enlisted in the U.S.M.C. In 1969 in the middle of our conflict with North Viet Nam.  I can say for a fact that not everyone with whom I served supported the U.S. position, however, they still fought and some died. After I learned “both” sides of the conflict, I can understand why North Viet Nam invaded South Viet Nam, and can’t fault their reasoning (side note: the United States was the first country to recognize the sovereignty of North Viet Nam after it declared independence from France). All that said. We had a saying, “My Country, may She always be right. But, right or wrong, She’s my country!” I will never condemn, enblanc, the fighting men and women of an enemy just because they choose to remain loyal to their country regardless of how f’d up I think that country is.

Point of fact Steve, we live in an area where during one particular rebellion, one ninth of the population was in active rebellion (one third of the total population supported the rebellion). One third of the population actively opposed that rebellion and stayed true to their country, and we should condemn them because they stayed loyal to their country?

[dan/california]

5 minutes ago, Vet 0369 said:

I must say that I feel extreme sympathy for any combatant in this war who is not actively participating in war crimes. I enlisted in the U.S.M.C. In 1969 in the middle of our conflict with North Viet Nam.  I can say for a fact that not everyone with whom I served supported the U.S. position, however, they still fought and some died. After I learned “both” sides of the conflict, I can understand why North Viet Nam invaded South Viet Nam, and can’t fault their reasoning (side note: the United States was the first country to recognize the sovereignty of North Viet Nam after it declared independence from France). All that said. We had a saying, “My Country, may She always be right. But, right or wrong, She’s my country!” I will never condemn, enblanc, the fighting men and women of an enemy just because they choose to remain loyal to their country regardless of how f’d up I think that country is.

Point of fact Steve, we live in an area where during one particular rebellion, one ninth of the population was in active rebellion (one third of the total population supported the rebellion). One third of the population actively opposed that rebellion and stayed true to their country, and we should condemn them because they stayed loyal to their country?

A viewpoint I will give a full and fair hearing about a week after the last Russian soldier leaves Ukraine. Until then...

[FancyCat]

5 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

 

The average Russian soldier has no say on whether to use incendiary ammunition against a city or not.

Hundreds of thousands of them were literally rounded up and forced to fight. This war is a tragedy to them and their families too.

Russia needs to lose this war, and that unfortunately means there has to be thousands of Russian casualties, but I don't want to start celebrating that they die or suffer.

In fact I find it concerning that people are now speaking of "mobiks" as if they are somehow subhuman and that it's funny they get massacred.

Especially when it comes to Ukrainian propaganda videos where they add clown music to gruesome videos of Russians getting blown to pieces.

Every time I watch a video like that, I find myself thinking "Are these really the people we are supporting? Maybe we should just let leave them to enjoy this war that they seem to find so funny".

The movement of hundreds of thousands of Russians to flee mobilization denies the idea of being rounded up and forced to fight.

Your last comment, please recall the immeasurable war crimes committed by Russia, with both top down and bottom up participation, and the acts of ethnic cleansing bordering on genocide being committed on occupied Ukrainian soil.

sometimes I wonder if people just resent that Ukraine is succeeding in not getting turned into a complete failure of humanity and horror show. It just boggles my mind people are acting like Ukrainians (most music is added by the original creators) are bloodthirsty and inhumane meanwhile, cities near the frontlines smolder, hallowed out of life by Russian artillery, and the rest of Ukraine sits perilously close to freezing to death by Russian missiles. 

[JonS]

20 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

the rest of Ukraine sits perilously close to freezing to death by Russian missiles

Nah, it's fine. We've been assured that the strike campaign isn't effective

[chrisl]

22 minutes ago, Shady_Side said:

Hi guys. I have been reading this forum multiple times a day since the 25th of February last year. This is the first time I have posted anything on here though. What brings me out of the shadows after all this time is some growing questions I am beginning to have.

There are almost 1900 pages showing Russian incompetence and brutalities and of course Ukrainian bravery. Those pages along with 1 working eyeball, 1 working ear, a thimble full of common sense, and a Tic Tak sized amount of human decency should be enough for anybody to know the righteous side of this war and who we all should be doing something big or small to help them win.

Here is the thing though, Why have not they won?  As much as I have read on here that Ukraine won this war in the first week, they still ain't done it yet. Large parts of their country is still occupied. Their soldiers and civilians die and get maimed everyday. God only knows what their civilians currently occupied suffer everyday and their p.o.w.s that for whatever reason the Russians decided a long time ago were not going home.

I think that this talk of a building Russian offensive should not be so flippantly dismissed. As much as we like to poke fun at the draftees that got scooped off the street handed a bolt action rifle and sent to soak up Ukrainian lead and gunpowder and bog down their offensives. They accomplished that mission and got Ukraine back in the trenches  It is clear Ukraine is winning... but they ain't won nothing yet. When you look at it from the other side, sometimes when your losing, you need to slow down the process drag it out see if circumstances change. 

Has much has we poke fun at those draftees all of them where not used has lead sponges. Those guys are coming up on what 3 months of some form of training. And to me it is impossible to think that that training has not vastly improved over what it was a year ago. Simply pulling a few vets out of the trenches and telling them how to survive and how to fight and maybe not worrying so much about if they can march a straight line. And poking fun at all those T62s and T64s being pulled out of storage to be sent into the fight. They are still tanks and there is still a lot of them. 

While I am happy Ukraine is getting 50 Bradleys and a few other modern I.F.V.s.. still though that is a Bradley battalion. Maybe add a Marder battalion to it... maybe not..... guys its gonna take lots more than that.

Before I ramble on anymore let me just ask it simply. After years of overestimating Russia, are we now underestimating them? Is that a dangerous path that this small echo chamber, like the larger western ones to be leading public opinions and expectations down? The Ukrainians have proven themselves to be as tough and brave has any army and are fighting for a righteous cause. This ain't a movie though and the good guys don't always win

 

 

 

  

I'll add a little to what @dan/california said.

The history of wars of aggression by "superpowers" in the post WW II era has not been all that favorable for the superpowers if the defenders were motivated and had outside supplies.  So I'd say it's more that Russia lost when they rolled over the border.  Ukraine really loses even if they win - they've had their country devastated by an unprovoked hostile war initiated by an army that doesn't seem to think committing war crimes is a problem.  I thought it would take much longer than it has for Russia to get schooled - I hadn't been following closely since 2014 and believed the claims about the RU military (though from the pre-invasion satellite pics I had doubts about the number of men relative to equipment, which seem to have been borne out).

Why is it not over?  When a bunch of drunks roll into a country with ~150K troops (followed by another 200K or so) carrying guns and driving in armored things with big guns it's still an awfully dangerous thing to go about kicking them out.  Just because they're strategically incompetent and tactically very limited doesn't mean they can't spew a bunch of HE out of tubes 15 km away and make your life miserable while you go about kicking them out.  Or shoot bullets at you when you go to evict them up close.  Or launch HE at you from over their border using planes outside the range of your air defense so you have to go about picking off individual missiles and drones out of the sky.  

Russia really doesn't have the resources to keep it up, and doesn't have the resources to improve on the technical side of their capabilities.  Their position stagnated months ago and is in decline - they're not gaining anywhere and aren't likely too.  Can they make some gains by throwing 500K untrained men into the line?  Sure - as mentioned a thousand or so pages ago they can literally drown the Ukrainians in the blood of Russian soldiers for a while.  But that's not something they can maintain, or that the soldiers are likely to continue to play along forever with as they clamber over piles of bodies of their comrades.  What do they have to gain by dying for Putin?

Ukraine is well supplied with arms from sources that are untouchable by the RA.  And those suppliers have apparently been taking large groups of Ukrainians out of Ukraine to train them in environments that are also untouchable by the RA.  

So yes, Russia can keep things miserable in Ukraine for a while, but as already noted, it's having a serious impact on the future of Russia as a country.  

[FancyCat]

39 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

Obviously what he's doing is causing generational (multi generational?) damage to his country, so it's certainly not being waged for the benefit of Russia. 

On one hand, we must not fall victim to ideas that denote Russians as different than the west or be prejudiced. On the other hand, we must recognize that any other country in the west, would have long since gone insane over the current state of the toll of this war. Therefore, we must walk away from Western views of suffering and damage caused by war and invasions and violence incurred by other parties on its armed forces, as Russia clearly isn’t operating along the same parameters.

[Kinophile]

37 minutes ago, Vet 0369 said:

I must say that I feel extreme sympathy for any combatant in this war who is not actively participating in war crimes. I enlisted in the U.S.M.C. In 1969 in the middle of our conflict with North Viet Nam.  I can say for a fact that not everyone with whom I served supported the U.S. position, however, they still fought and some died. After I learned “both” sides of the conflict, I can understand why North Viet Nam invaded South Viet Nam, and can’t fault their reasoning (side note: the United States was the first country to recognize the sovereignty of North Viet Nam after it declared independence from France). All that said. We had a saying, “My Country, may She always be right. But, right or wrong, She’s my country!” I will never condemn, enblanc, the fighting men and women of an enemy just because they choose to remain loyal to their country regardless of how f’d up I think that country is.

Point of fact Steve, we live in an area where during one particular rebellion, one ninth of the population was in active rebellion (one third of the total population supported the rebellion). One third of the population actively opposed that rebellion and stayed true to their country, and we should condemn them because they stayed loyal to their country?

He's not condemning their loyalty, but their  behaviour. One is a political position, the other is an ethical one. My personal view is that you're conflating and equivalizing the two.

They can certainly be bound together - Democratic societies  (ie a political construct built on equality of freedom) almost always demand an equivalent ethical equality of actions from their citizens. 

By contrast a fascist or authoritarian society insist on the direct opposite, the deliberate disconnect of political from ethical - minority freedom (ie the ruling elite) maintained by force and with no ethical equivalence, as everything is delineated by who has control over force within the society writ large.

The rejection of over-riding ethical principles as even equivalent to the political priorities (control) is explicit and overt,  a publicly stated and glorif definition of Fascism  and its ilk. 

With the Russian Mobiks I *believe* Steve is pointing out that their behavior implies their agreement with their right to use violence against Ukrainians. I'm not Monsieur Steve so don't take that as writ. 

But It's the agreement with the objective that is so odious -  they're not accepting something unpalatable or distasteful,  they're all for it. They want better training and weapons to kill more Ukrainians because killing Ukrainians is why they are there -  and they're completely OK with that.

There's not a hint, not a single goddamn hint of doubt in any of those videos that the invasion is 1) Unjustified or 2) Immoral. 

Let them die in droves. Good ****ing riddance.  It's their simplistic,  cruel, childish, selfish, apocalyptic, fascist ideology or the Ukrainian drive for democratic freedom. 

One is a political lie denying any ethical grounds, the other is an ethical standpoint as the basis for free &  fair society, and those are not compatible. 

Edited January 9, 2023 by Kinophile

[sburke]

44 minutes ago, Vet 0369 said:

I must say that I feel extreme sympathy for any combatant in this war who is not actively participating in war crimes. I enlisted in the U.S.M.C. In 1969 in the middle of our conflict with North Viet Nam.  I can say for a fact that not everyone with whom I served supported the U.S. position, however, they still fought and some died. After I learned “both” sides of the conflict, I can understand why North Viet Nam invaded South Viet Nam, and can’t fault their reasoning (side note: the United States was the first country to recognize the sovereignty of North Viet Nam after it declared independence from France). All that said. We had a saying, “My Country, may She always be right. But, right or wrong, She’s my country!” I will never condemn, enblanc, the fighting men and women of an enemy just because they choose to remain loyal to their country regardless of how f’d up I think that country is.

point taken but let's do a worst case scenario for the US experience- My Lai.  Not unique but one of the worst documented atrocities committed by US forces.  In the midst of that horror

Quote

 

Warrant Officer Hugh Thompson Jr., a helicopter pilot from Company B (Aero-Scouts), 123rd Aviation Battalion, Americal Division, saw dead and wounded civilians as he was flying over the village of Sơn Mỹ, providing close-air support for ground forces. The crew made several attempts to radio for help for the wounded. They landed their helicopter by a ditch, which they noted was full of bodies and in which they could discern movement by survivors. Thompson asked a sergeant he encountered there (David Mitchell of 1st Platoon) if he could help get the people out of the ditch; the sergeant replied that he would "help them out of their misery". Thompson, shocked and confused, then spoke with 2LT Calley, who claimed to be "just following orders". As the helicopter took off, Thompson saw Mitchell firing into the ditch.

Thompson and his crew witnessed an unarmed woman being kicked and shot at point-blank range by Medina, who later claimed that he thought she had a hand grenade. Thompson then saw a group of civilians at a bunker being approached by ground personnel. Thompson landed, and told his crew that if the soldiers shot at the villagers while he was trying to get them out of the bunker, then they were to open fire on the soldiers.

 

you have the above.  At the point we see some aspect of the Russian side opposing the wanton brutality rather than calling for even more then maybe I'll change my perspective.

 

[sburke]

45 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

perilously close to freezing to death by Russian missiles. 

situation is bad but I think that is a bit of an overstatement.

[danfrodo]

27 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

On one hand, we must not fall victim to ideas that denote Russians as different than the west or be prejudiced. On the other hand, we must recognize that any other country in the west, would have long since gone insane over the current state of the toll of this war. Therefore, we must walk away from Western views of suffering and damage caused by war and invasions and violence incurred by other parties on its armed forces, as Russia clearly isn’t operating along the same parameters.

I think you might be misunderstanding what I meant.  I was just saying this war is about one man; he can stop this at any time.  If it were about what's good for Russia, he would stop the war because it is clearly ruinous.  Therefore, he is putting his person above his country.  That's all I meant. 

[Vanir Ausf B]

4 hours ago, The_Capt said:

 My point is that if the bar is low for the Russians than it is clearly also low for mainstream experts.  Saying something like "the latest Russian strategic missile campaign is ONE OF THE most effective and dangerous" is weasel wording and essentially useless in assessment of the progress of the war. 

Since this particular statement attributed to  Michael Kofman has for some reason become controversial it should be pointed out that he never actually said it. That was @The_MonkeyKing paraphrasing the host of the podcast, Ryan Evans, who in turn was paraphrasing comments Kofman wrote in an article two weeks ago.

_____

The Russian strike campaign, targeting Ukrainian critical infrastructure, is part and parcel of this strategy. Timed to coincide with onset of cold weather, Russian strikes are steadily degrading Ukraine’s electricity, and water management infrastructure. This campaign could grow in significance, and is one of the better organized Russian efforts since the strikes conducted in the first days of the war. An additional effect is draining Ukrainian air defense of ammunition, which could result in Ukraine having to choose between covering the front line, and defending its cities. Acquiring Western air defense, and a stable supply of air defense missiles, is therefore a near term priority for Ukraine.

Fortunately, the Russian military exhausted a large percentage of its long-range precision guided weapons over the course of the spring and summer. There is growing evidence that Russia is using recently made missiles, and much older missile types with dummy warheads to stimulate air defenses, which could suggest dwindling stocks. What this means in practice is that eventually waves of Russian missile strikes may diminish to the amount that its industry can produce monthly. Consequently, Russia is also growing in dependence on imports of Iranian strike drones to supplement its missile inventory.

________

https://ridl.io/the-russo-ukrainian-war-ten-months-in-taking-stock/

[kevinkin]

42 minutes ago, Vet 0369 said:

we live in an area where during one particular rebellion, one ninth of the population was in active rebellion (one third of the total population supported the rebellion). One third of the population actively opposed that rebellion and stayed true to their country, and we should condemn them because they stayed loyal to their country?

Same thing existed in my state. In fact, a civil war of sorts went on for years after Yorktown. One of the oldest roads in America is a mile away and called "Kings Highway". In the case of the Russian call-ups. I bet many are just fearful of the consequences of not reporting to training camp. They likely spend most their free time scheming to get away and just hide the war out. It would be nice if they collectively turned on their officers and marched on Moscow. Even if small rebellions sprang up outside major population centers, the effect in total might help defeat Putin and his henchmen. But I doubt Russian men have that in them. I can't imagine the brainwashing they receive as part of their boot camp. But I don't pity them, Russia had plenty of time before the war to right the stinking ship.  

[danfrodo]

1 hour ago, Shady_Side said:

After years of overestimating Russia, are we now underestimating them? Is that a dangerous path that this small echo chamber

Thanks for joining in the conversation, excellent post!

This is a great point (above), and one that I think most folks on this forum think about a lot.  We seem like an echo chamber right now but we are an evidence-based echo chamber.  And the evidence keeps piling up to support the general belief here that RU is a flippin' mess.  Still dangerous, but a mess.  When RU puts together a new offensive I'll be happy to re-think my estimation or RU strength.  They are strong enough to hold trenches when there's horrific mud to stop UKR.  That's all we know about RU capabilities right now.

And I'd say UKR has won some very very important things:  first, they have not become a vassal state of RU -- they have won their sovereignty & freedom which they could've lost had Putin won.  They've won back a huge bunch of territory:  Kyiv area, Kharkiv area, Kherson. 

Keep your thoughts coming.  I hadn't thought about your point that any mobiks who've survived so far are getting better at soldiering (the hard way).

 

[kevinkin]

Ambassador Vadym Prystaiko—formerly the foreign affairs minister, head of Ukraine's mission to NATO and the ambassador to Canada—told Newsweek in an interview at Ukraine's Embassy in London that ...

"We've been in the war for almost a year now," Prystaiko said. "We're losing people left and right. We're not advertising how many of those lost are military or civilians, but you can imagine that numbers are huge, indigestible. And the cities, some of them are totally destroyed."

"The West now has a unique chance," Prystaiko said. "There are not many nations in the world who would allow themselves to sacrifice so many lives, territories and decades of development for the purpose of defeating the archenemy."

He continued: "I understand the problem of Russia's nuclear arsenal, that in the end they can push the button and destroy the whole planet. I even understand what Elon Musk is saying and worrying about. But that's what we face now or later. They're not becoming better"

"This is what I mean: All hands on deck, every single thing we can spare to help Ukraine win," he said.

- Newsweek (Jan 7, 2023) 

[Vet 0369]

18 minutes ago, kevinkin said:

Same thing existed in my state. In fact, a civil war of sorts went on for years after Yorktown. One of the oldest roads in America is a mile away and called "Kings Highway". In the case of the Russian call-ups. I bet many are just fearful of the consequences of not reporting to training camp. They likely spend most their free time scheming to get away and just hide the war out. It would be nice if they collectively turned on their officers and marched on Moscow. Even if small rebellions sprang up outside major population centers, the effect in total might help defeat Putin and his henchmen. But I doubt Russian men have that in them. I can't imagine the brainwashing they receive as part of their boot camp. But I don't pity them, Russia had plenty of time before the war to right the stinking ship.  

This is exactly my point. After the Mai Lai was investigated and all of the Officers (mostly West Point graduates) were found not guilty (one of the Officers on that board of inquiry was Colin Powell), the USMC required that all Marines participate in classes known as "Human Relations" where we found that we were, in fact, distantly related to humans. Basically, the classes didin't go into combat at all. They concentrated on the populations. That basically, all people just want a shelter, to be able to raise their families in peace in the same culture in which they were raised, and their next bowl of rice. In other words, to lose empathy for the for those who suffer through no fault of their own, is to demonize them during which they become the objects of prejudices. 

We actually had a name for removing someone from command in the field who was unnecessarily getting men killed or wounded. It was called "Fragging." And, I can guarantee that it is occurring in the Russian Army in Ukraine also.

 

 

Edited January 9, 2023 by Vet 0369
Addition

[dan/california]

I REALLY like the idea of Ukraine getting a new Battalion of Bradley's every month until the Russians quit and go home.

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, Vet 0369 said:

I must say that I feel extreme sympathy for any combatant in this war who is not actively participating in war crimes.

Trust me, I hear you.  War is complicated and so are the circumstances of the men who fight in that war.  There were plenty of Germans who fought in WW2 that committed no atrocities, there were plenty of Allied soldiers who were every bit as bad as the worst the Germans had to offer (torture, murder, rape, etc).  Yet if I were the same person I am now and were back in 1944, I would cheer for every fallen German soldier.  I would also ridicule them for their belief system.

The thing is, I hate war.  I wish we could live in a world that either had no war at all (ideal) or only minor dust ups every so often.  But that ideal isn't to be.  Russia just proved that.  So the next best thing is to get this war ended as quickly as possible, and as I said above that means killing a lot more Russians.

43 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

With the Russian Mobiks I *believe* Steve is pointing out that their behavior implies their agreement with their right to use violence against Ukrainians. I'm not Monsieur Steve so don't take that as writ. 

But It's the agreement with the objective that is so odious -  they're not accepting something unpalatable or distasteful,  they're all for it. They want better training and weapons to kill more Ukrainians because killing Ukrainians is why they are there -  and they're completely OK with that.

You hit the nail on the head.  For sure there's guys fighting for Russia right now that would rather be sitting at home.  I don't doubt it.  There would be even more of them if Russia wasn't such a f'd up society that thinks it has the right to wage war on neighbors because it has an inferiority complex.  Brainwashing is a problem for sure, but it's not Ukraine's or the world's problem.  It is Russia's. 

When I see an image of 60 dead Russians mobiks, I think a big chunk of them are actively supportive of Putin and his war of aggression from a nationalist standpoint.  Another big chunk of them are fine with going to Ukraine because they are earning money and have a chance of getting a washing machine.  Only a handful are probably against the war and are just too cowardly to find a way out of it.

I have sympathy for none of them.  If they die on the battlefield, "fair and square" according to the rules of warfare, that is a better fate than they deserve. 

Having said that, many of you have seen me argue strenuously MANY times about viewing Russians as hopeless psychopaths that will never change.  I think that's wrong.  Russia has the capacity to be better and I sincerely hope they take every chance they get to improve.  Until then, the more Russians that Ukraine kills the better because that's the only way this war ends.

Steve

[Vet 0369]

8 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Trust me, I hear you.  War is complicated and so are the circumstances of the men who fight in that war.  There were plenty of Germans who fought in WW2 that committed no atrocities, there were plenty of Allied soldiers who were every bit as bad as the worst the Germans had to offer (torture, murder, rape, etc).  Yet if I were the same person I am now and were back in 1944, I would cheer for every fallen German soldier.  I would also ridicule them for their belief system.

The thing is, I hate war.  I wish we could live in a world that either had no war at all (ideal) or only minor dust ups every so often.  But that ideal isn't to be.  Russia just proved that.  So the next best thing is to get this war ended as quickly as possible, and as I said above that means killing a lot more Russians.

You hit the nail on the head.  For sure there's guys fighting for Russia right now that would rather be sitting at home.  I don't doubt it.  There would be even more of them if Russia wasn't such a f'd up society that thinks it has the right to wage war on neighbors because it has an inferiority complex.  Brainwashing is a problem for sure, but it's not Ukraine's or the world's problem.  It is Russia's. 

When I see an image of 60 dead Russians mobiks, I think a big chunk of them are actively supportive of Putin and his war of aggression from a nationalist standpoint.  Another big chunk of them are fine with going to Ukraine because they are earning money and have a chance of getting a washing machine.  Only a handful are probably against the war and are just too cowardly to find a way out of it.

I have sympathy for none of them.  If they die on the battlefield, "fair and square" according to the rules of warfare, that is a better fate than they deserve. 

Having said that, many of you have seen me argue strenuously MANY times about viewing Russians as hopeless psychopaths that will never change.  I think that's wrong.  Russia has the capacity to be better and I sincerely hope they take every chance they get to improve.  Until then, the more Russians that Ukraine kills the better because that's the only way this war ends.

Steve

Please, don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about combatants who die on the battlefield or by an artillery or air strike, or by partisan action. If I was fighting on on the battlefield, ran out of ammo, lost my rifle. pistol, knife, entrenching tool, etc, I'd be trying to rip out his or her throat with my teeth! It wouldn't even bother me at the time. What I'm saying is that having been in the cold, wet, hungry, exhausted states, I can relate to ANY combatant suffering. I believe that to do less makes me a little less human than I want to be.

[Vet 0369]

2 hours ago, Shady_Side said:

Before I ramble on anymore let me just ask it simply. After years of overestimating Russia, are we now underestimating them? Is that a dangerous path that this small echo chamber, like the larger western ones to be leading public opinions and expectations down? The Ukrainians have proven themselves to be as tough and brave has any army and are fighting for a righteous cause. This ain't a movie though and the good guys don't always win

 

 

 

 

Welcome aboard Shady_Side! This is a really great Forum, and we don't normally ever beat up anyone too much over a comment:-)

In my experience, it's usually better, and less dangerous, to overestimate an opponent. If you always expect them to have more and better than you, you'll never be surprised. The history of the world is rife with the consequences of underestimating an opponent. The usually clean your clock.

Follow the forum. Many of the members are very experienced gamers, combat veterans, academics, serving military officers and enlisted, and even a few very highly placed folks with jobs that make the kinds of things we post here seem trivial by comparison, even a few blow hards:-) Well, maybe more than a few, myself not exempted.

 

[Battlefront.com]

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

That is not a strategy,

It is a strategy, but by Western standards it is a really bad one.  A bad plan still counts as a plan.

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

...it is wishing. The best definition of a strategy I have heard is “a theory of success”.

Then what I just described counts as "a theory of success", therefore it counts as a strategy.  We can be as critical and dismissive of how good a strategy it is, but that doesn't mean it isn't a strategy.

What Russia is doing now is a form of strategy that it has employed for (probably) hundreds of years.  Certainly it was the central way that Russia has operated since the early days of the Soviet Union.  It is best summed up as this:

Devote time and resources into creating diverse and (if possible) novel ways of causing trouble in a particular sphere (military, political, social, economic, whatever).  Identify a goal to aim for, start with a loose strategy for achieving it, throw as much crap at the situation as possible, see what sticks, reinforce success, keep pressing until resistance makes it wise to stop.  The strategy exists, but only in a loose and flexible form.

This sort of concept of strategy has served Russia very well over the past couple of decades, despite all sorts of missteps and near disasters.  It has allowed Russia to incrementally work towards larger goals quite successfully over the decades, including winding up with chunks of Ukraine in 2014 even though the desire was for MUCH more. 

The reason why this war hasn't worked for Putin this time is because he violated the two most important principles of Soviet/Russian strategic planning... always have multiple paths to achieving the desired goal AND be prepared to accept less than what was wished for.

Putin put all his bets on one and only one plan (violation #1) and ignored the very high probability that if it failed he'd be worse off than if he had done nothing (violation #2).  If that wasn't bad enough, according to traditional Russian approach to strategy, the fact that the West was well prepared for it and promised retaliation beyond what Russia could afford to absorb SHOULD have been enough to have the strategy switched up to something else (e.g. limited war in Donbas).  That is what traditional Russian strategizing would dictate.

We've discussed the many possible reasons why he gambled like this, but at the moment it is only speculation.  But to say he went into this war without a strategy is simply untrue.  To say he went to war with a really BAD strategy would be far more correct.

 

As for what is going on now, it is also a strategy.  Russia's sense of time and resource investment is very different than what we in the West have.  Throwing away 100,000 men's lives this year to buy time to see if something else might develop that can leverage a better outcome isn't such a bad option for a regime that has no realistic alternatives other than surrendering.  Given that surrendering means death or exile for Putin, it's pretty clear why he's keeping the war going.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

35 minutes ago, Vet 0369 said:

Please, don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about combatants who die on the battlefield or by an artillery or air strike, or by partisan action. If I was fighting on on the battlefield, ran out of ammo, lost my rifle. pistol, knife, entrenching tool, etc, I'd be trying to rip out his or her throat with my teeth! It wouldn't even bother me at the time. What I'm saying is that having been in the cold, wet, hungry, exhausted states, I can relate to ANY combatant suffering. I believe that to do less makes me a little less human than I want to be.

That's what I meant about being against war.  It's a horrible thing to be put into a situation where it is kill or be killed.  I feel privileged that I am able to relate to this sort of suffering through learning from people who have been there (as you have been) how horrible it is.  I In that sense, I do have sympathy for the Russians fighting in this war because ultimately it was Putin who decided to send them there to suffer.  However, Russia is fighting a war of extermination against Ukraine and that is what I keep in mind when I see the bodies of the men who are waging that war.  Especially because it is likely most of the 60 thought it was a fine idea.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

3 hours ago, Shady_Side said:

Hi guys. I have been reading this forum multiple times a day since the 25th of February last year. This is the first time I have posted anything on here though. What brings me out of the shadows after all this time is some growing questions I am beginning to have.

First off... an official welcome!  Nothing wrong with lurking, but it is always good to have a new opinion thrown into the ring.

3 hours ago, Shady_Side said:

BAfter years of overestimating Russia, are we now underestimating them? Is that a dangerous path that this small echo chamber, like the larger western ones to be leading public opinions and expectations down?

It is a fair point, but I will remind you that people like me did not overestimate Russia's capabilities before this war by much.  I thought they would lose the war and lose badly, but I do admit I didn't think they would lose as badly as they already have.  I didn't come to those conclusions by accident or by buying into some sort of echo chamber (mostly because that echo chamber didn't exist).  I came to those conclusions by scrutinizing what was known about Russia's capabilities and trying to assess them realistically.  I feel I am still doing that.

3 hours ago, Shady_Side said:

The Ukrainians have proven themselves to be as tough and brave has any army and are fighting for a righteous cause. This ain't a movie though and the good guys don't always win 

For sure that's true.  Ukraine could be far weaker than we might think and/or Russia able to fight better in 2023 than it did in 2022.  The ability for Ukraine to keep fighting is, admittedly, somewhat "faith based", though I think a legitimate faith to keep.  The ability for Russia to *meaningfully* fight better in 2023, however, is not something I think is supported by the facts in front of us.  There is nothing Russia will have in 2023 that isn't significantly degraded from what it had in 2022, and we all know how 2022 turned out for it.

At the beginning of this war Kaufman said he spent years trying to convince people that Russia wasn't "12 feet tall", and now he was going to have to convince them they aren't "4 feet tall".  What followed was Kaufman spending several months arguing that Russia wasn't "4 feet tall" and he was pretty consistently proven wrong.  Ironically, he was right about one thing... Russia wasn't 4 feet tall, it was more like 2 feet tall

That said, it is best to plan for Russia being better in 2023 than it was in 2022.  That's why I support getting Ukraine as much aid as possible as quickly as possible.  Advanced hardware, training, ammo, etc... err on the side that Russia finally manages to pull it's act together.  All good.  But I don't see why we shouldn't continue to analyze the situation for what it is and let the chips fall where they fall.  In my view, Russia is going to suck at war as bad in 2023 as it did in 2022.

Steve