How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[kevinkin]

Maybe you missed this yesterday like I did:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/this-is-what-m1-abrams-tanks-will-bring-to-the-fight-in-ukraine

Goes into M1 logistics mostly. But warns that NATO's MBT shipments are for now symbolic. (We sort of know that.)

But this is interesting: perhaps NATO will put new AFVs through trials to select the best combinations for the combat in Ukraine .g. establish new TOEs for new mech formations. Only then will operationally significant numbers ship. And by that time, training will become faster as Ukraine will have dedicated facilities and troops for that. Again, "time" keeps coming up. 

[DesertFox]

26 minutes ago, Seminole said:

How was it taken out of context?

It may well be undiplomatic, ill-considered, and fraught with implications, but it isn't out of context.

One doesn't need to love the Kremlin to observe that arming and training belligerents gets you closer and closer to being a belligerent.

If someone observes the USS Greer operating the Black Sea we can get really concerned.

We are at war once NATO troops start killing Orcs or Article 5 get declared. Not earlier, not later. Doesn´t matter what the Kremlin numbnuts think or say. Until then we help the Ukraine to cleanse their soil from this vermin. Whatever it takes.

[Twisk]

Speaking of artillery I wonder to what extent a lack of Ukrainian major action is actually linked to lack of artillery rounds (or sources). Broadening it a bit this is what I see
 

1. Weather is poor for offensive combat
2. Russian troops are relatively more dense than previously (Kherson, mobik dividends)
3. Russia is refusing to stop offering up men and machines on seemingly desperate attacks.
4. Possible artillery shortage for Ukraine
5. Ukraine will be getting more and better equipment over the winter and into summer
6. Ukraine has more men than it has capability to train/equip.

 

So Ukraine (and Capt mentioned this earlier) continues to corrode Russian forces through precision attacks while Russia continues to offer men and machines up on a plate. At the same time Ukraine is able to economy of force on the actual frontlines and train up new forces and stockpile consumable material. This is going to pay off in the summer where Ukraine will be facing a ever more weakened Russian force (although more dug-in) with more material available and larger and more advanced combat formations than before.

[danfrodo]

Just now, DesertFox said:

We are at war once NATO troops start killing Orcs or Article 5 get declared. Not earlier, not later. Doesn´t matter what the Kremlin numbnuts think or say. Until then we help the Ukraine to cleanse their soil from this vermin. Whatever it takes.

Hopefully this is just yet another tempest in a teapot.  Someone says something foolish, it creates media excitement and RU propaganda has fun w it.  This is the same RU propaganda that has already reported hundreds of completely false things way worse than what was said by German foreign minister.  Wait a couple days and it will probably be completely forgotten.

[danfrodo]

2 minutes ago, Twisk said:

Speaking of artillery I wonder to what extent a lack of Ukrainian major action is actually linked to lack of artillery rounds (or sources). Broadening it a bit this is what I see
 

1. Weather is poor for offensive combat
2. Russian troops are relatively more dense than previously (Kherson, mobik dividends)
3. Russia is refusing to stop offering up men and machines on seemingly desperate attacks.
4. Possible artillery shortage for Ukraine
5. Ukraine will be getting more and better equipment over the winter and into summer
6. Ukraine has more men than it has capability to train/equip.

 

So Ukraine (and Capt mentioned this earlier) continues to corrode Russian forces through precision attacks while Russia continues to offer men and machines up on a plate. At the same time Ukraine is able to economy of force on the actual frontlines and train up new forces and stockpile consumable material. This is going to pay off in the summer where Ukraine will be facing a ever more weakened Russian force (although more dug-in) with more material available and larger and more advanced combat formations than before.

now that is a good post.  Good solid points presenting clearly and succinctly.  Well done.  

[DesertFox]

Just now, danfrodo said:

 Wait a couple days and it will probably be completely forgotten.

It surely will be. The next weeks they will be busy to fanzasize how many Leopards and Abrams they have destroyed and how they will nuke Berlin, Paris and London. We already know their nonsense.

[JonS]

19 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Russia just can't help pooping all over the LOAC that I am not so sure it would be a real issue.

Yeah, but you know that LOAC isnt a competitive sport.

Ukrainians don't get to rape grannies because Russians are eating babies, just like I'm not allowed to partake in a little light shoplifting because you got a parking ticket.

[Bulletpoint]

10 minutes ago, kevinkin said:

Goes into M1 logistics mostly. But warns that NATO's MBT shipments are for now symbolic. (We sort of know that.)

I think it's not so much symbolic as just not revealing the true amount.

The West has an interest in sending as many tanks as possible, but being as quiet about it as possible too, to avoid the shock effect. The thing the west is interested in is the actual effect they will have on the battlefield.

It would be a propaganda win for Putin if the West came out and said "Right, so we are sending 400 tanks to Ukraine tomorrow". Great for the narrative to the Russian people that it's a war against Nato aggression.

At the same time, much of the western public is not interested in a big dramatic escalation, either. 400 tanks to Ukraine to fight Russia? That sounds a lot like WW3. But sending a few tanks is ok...

So we will start seeing western tanks begin to pop up in videos from Ukraine, but there might be more of them out there than the official shipments would suggest. And it's difficult for the average person to sit and count tanks on youtube videos.

[chrisl]

6 minutes ago, Twisk said:

Speaking of artillery I wonder to what extent a lack of Ukrainian major action is actually linked to lack of artillery rounds (or sources). Broadening it a bit this is what I see
 

1. Weather is poor for offensive combat
2. Russian troops are relatively more dense than previously (Kherson, mobik dividends)
3. Russia is refusing to stop offering up men and machines on seemingly desperate attacks.
4. Possible artillery shortage for Ukraine
5. Ukraine will be getting more and better equipment over the winter and into summer
6. Ukraine has more men than it has capability to train/equip.

 

So Ukraine (and Capt mentioned this earlier) continues to corrode Russian forces through precision attacks while Russia continues to offer men and machines up on a plate. At the same time Ukraine is able to economy of force on the actual frontlines and train up new forces and stockpile consumable material. This is going to pay off in the summer where Ukraine will be facing a ever more weakened Russian force (although more dug-in) with more material available and larger and more advanced combat formations than before.

I suspect #1 and #3 might be the leading causes, since Russia seems to be corroding itself at a time of year when it's least favorable to be on attack.  If Ukraine is offensively corroding Russian forces elsewhere, it's probably shaping things for when the weather improves. Even if a lot of the Russians being sacrificed are Wagner prisoner troops, they still consume Russian resources to put them in the line of fire.

[The_Capt]

8 minutes ago, JonS said:

Yeah, but you know that LOAC isnt a competitive sport.

Ukrainians don't get to rape grannies because Russians are eating babies, just like I'm not allowed to partake in a little light shoplifting because you got a parking ticket.

Absolutely true but we are not talking about Ukrainian violations of the LOACs wrt DPICM.  We are talking about Ukraine employing a weapon system that got a lot of heat and light behind it when Israel decided that dumping heaps of old rounds into South Lebanon was a good idea.  A large portion of the international community said "nope, we are not going to use them" and put pressure on others; however, none of that is anywhere near LOAC.

What is and what is not within LOAC is pretty clearly defined by the CCW in Geneva:

https://www.un.org/disarmament/the-convention-on-certain-conventional-weapons/

I got stuck in one of these a few years back and while the diplo guys were jerking each other around (note I said "around", because this is a family friendly channel), I actually read the whole thing.  This defines what is illegal and legal, and although the anti-AP mine and cluster munitions advocates made some really strong cases, neither of these weapons are in fact banned by international law.  They are restricted in use, much like all weapons of war; however, you are not going to wind up in front of The Hague if you employ them iaw CCW regulations.  In Canada, I will wind up in front of a Canadian court because we declared them off limits.

So in the grand calculus of "well we really don't like them" vs "hey look the RA just blew up another apartment full of children" this is a manageable space, in my opinion.  Or in more fancy sounding formal terms, Ukraine is not a signatory of the cluster munitions protocol and neither is the US, so their lawful employment of these weapon systems in defending themselves in an existential war against an egregiously illegal invader is not likely to be a deal breaker at this point. 

[Harmon Rabb]

1 hour ago, DesertFox said:

It surely will be. The next weeks they will be busy to fanzasize how many Leopards and Abrams they have destroyed and how they will nuke Berlin, Paris and London. We already know their nonsense.

This. Let me borrow an illustration from a former U.S. Air Force Nuclear and Missile Operations Officer  Jake Broe, describing the three stages of the Russian response to the West sending weapons to Ukraine.

 

Edited January 27, 2023 by Harmon Rabb

[Maciej Zwolinski]

1 hour ago, Bulletpoint said:

Moral arguments aside, I am not sure they are really that useful in a modern setting with precision artillery and where drones can drop grenades directly into foxholes and trenches.

They certainly are more effective for area targets and much cheaper. Think counterbattery - wherever a drone finds a MSTA gun, there are likely 5 more. Fire DPICM all around it and you are likely to bag more than the one spotted. Or just shoot around the place where the CB radar shows outgoing fire without giving them time to relocate.

Or for moving targets. GPS-guided rounds are not particularly reliable hitters against those. But shoot a some DPICM with overlapping sheafs all around the moving column and wait for Oryx to cry in frustration.

GMLRS with DPICM used to be called "Grid square removers", not without reason.

[danfrodo]

5 minutes ago, Harmon Rabb said:

This. Let me borrow an illustration from the former U.S. Air Force Nuclear and Missile Operations Officer Jake Broe on the three stages of the Russian response to the West sending weapons to Ukraine.

 

He messed up on the last bit, it should say:  Lie and say you are so good at destroying western weapons that you destroyed twice as many as exist.  Then when new tanks arrive we already pre-destroyed them in last destroying operation and so they don't actually arrive.

[kevinkin]

42 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

At the same time, much of the western public is not interested in a big dramatic escalation, either. 400 tanks to Ukraine to fight Russia? That sounds a lot like WW3. But sending a few tanks is ok...

Well maybe we can look at the transfers as symbolic to the public while we know that NATO is readying for the day when larger numbers are needed to have a meaningful effect on operations. I guess the process forced Europe to think things through. Why this didn't take place long ago is another question. 

[JonS]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

.  A large portion of the international community said "nope, we are not going to use them" and put pressure on others; however, none of that is anywhere near LOAC.

Yeah, I know that. But the convention *is* part of that international rules based order we're all supposedly in favour of.^

And I get that the US and Ukr aren't signatories, so yay them. Although I suspect that at least in the US' case that might be due to the South Korea clause (c.f. their resistance to ditching A-pers mines), rather than a generalised fervour for DPICM.

If Ukr chooses to use them, fine, I guess. I think it's a dumb idea given the other toys they have available, but whatever. However that doesn't create ANY obligation on other nations to turn their backs on commitments they've made.

Edit: also, weren't we all gung-ho in favour of precision, just yesterday? What happened to that?

 

^ offer void when a little bit inconvenient?

Edited January 27, 2023 by JonS

[MikeyD]

About Germany accidentally saying they're 'at war'. Recently Putin did something similar. After spending much of the year claiming they weren't at war with Ukraine but instead were in a 'special military operation', Putin recently misspoke and used the 'W' word during an address. Heck, I'm not sure of the US has been in a properly declared war since WWII! 'Use of force' authorization is not exactly a constitutionally mandated congressional declaration of war.

[riptides]

1 hour ago, DesertFox said:

We are at war once NATO troops start killing Orcs or Article 5 get declared. Not earlier, not later. Doesn´t matter what the Kremlin numbnuts think or say. Until then we help the Ukraine to cleanse their soil from this vermin. Whatever it takes.

If the Kremlin thinks Germany is at war with them, let them fire the first shot at Germany.

[DesertFox]

5 minutes ago, riptides said:

If the Kremlin thinks Germany is at war with them, let them fire the first shot at Germany.

Exactly!

[The_MonkeyKing]

2 hours ago, DesertFox said:

If true, I´m interested to learn how long the Orcs can sustain that. About 9/2022 was the date when the Mobiks were starting to show up, if I´m not mistaken.

 

Russia's losses in Ukraine - official data (minfin.com.ua)

I would love to see photo verified manpower losses

[Zeleban]

Guys, I remember in the spring in this thread there was a discussion of the sinking of the Moskva cruiser and someone mentioned a strategic naval battle simulator in which you can test various types of aircraft weapons against air defense systems, both ground and naval. Can someone remind me the name of this game?

[DesertFox]

Next Ramstein. Very high likelihood.

 

 

[Grossman]

1 hour ago, Twisk said:

Speaking of artillery I wonder to what extent a lack of Ukrainian major action is actually linked to lack of artillery rounds (or sources). Broadening it a bit this is what I see
 

1. Weather is poor for offensive combat
2. Russian troops are relatively more dense than previously (Kherson, mobik dividends)
3. Russia is refusing to stop offering up men and machines on seemingly desperate attacks.
4. Possible artillery shortage for Ukraine
5. Ukraine will be getting more and better equipment over the winter and into summer
6. Ukraine has more men than it has capability to train/equip.

 

So Ukraine (and Capt mentioned this earlier) continues to corrode Russian forces through precision attacks while Russia continues to offer men and machines up on a plate. At the same time Ukraine is able to economy of force on the actual frontlines and train up new forces and stockpile consumable material. This is going to pay off in the summer where Ukraine will be facing a ever more weakened Russian force (although more dug-in) with more material available and larger and more advanced combat formations than before.

There have been plenty of examples in warfare where the aggrieved held back, replenished its arms, waiting for the decisive stroke. Montgomery in North Africa and later in Normandy, Zhukov at Stalingrad and Kursk. The best fighters of the Soviet armies in WW2 were the Ukrainians, and much of the war was fought in their country. Ukraine is being re-equiped, albeit slowly. The URK will reap havoc on the Russians, given time, western hardware, training, tech, and logistics. The Russians stepped on a tiger's tail. This is a war western society cannot afford to lose.

[Sojourner]

8 minutes ago, Zeleban said:

Guys, I remember in the spring in this thread there was a discussion of the sinking of the Moskva cruiser and someone mentioned a strategic naval battle simulator in which you can test various types of aircraft weapons against air defense systems, both ground and naval. Can someone remind me the name of this game?

Probably "Command: Modern Operations"

[Zeleban]

1 minute ago, Sojourner said:

Probably "Command: Modern Operations"

Exactly. Thanks a lot

[Kraft]

2 minutes ago, Sojourner said:

Probably "Command: Modern Operations"

I think I saw a video of someone trying to remake the sinking in either that or DCS and failing horribly because it was modeled after its paper statistics, not the bulk head rusted through kind of characteristics you see in the actual Russian navy