How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[NamEndedAllen]

23 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

It's mostly hindsight and calling for the obvious.

Which makes our similar opinions about the obvious much the same. More relevant to the general public is that for some understandable as well as some bizarre reasoning, the decision makers in the various capitols have struggled for months to reach such a conclusion. For example the recent painful lengthy public debates about Western tanks, despite the strong opinions *here* about whether they are actually the most pressing and effective need at present. Not to mention the NATO membership issue.

Edited January 30, 2023 by NamEndedAllen

[dan/california]

31 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

Old Boris feeling relevant again. It's mostly hindsight and calling for the obvious.

That is true, and I think Boris made some LARGE mistakes in other areas. But Britain's support for Ukraine in last month before the war started, and the first month of the fighting REALLY mattered. It mattered on the battlefield, it mattered in how Ukrainian politics reformed into implacable opposition to Russia, and it mattered in formation of the near consensus in the West that Ukraine was going to get real support. None of that was a given on 2/23/2022. Boris may that rare lucky leader who is, (Edit: well may be), remembered for the one thing he got exactly right. 

Edited January 30, 2023 by dan/california

[Kinophile]

34 minutes ago, Zeleban said:

The Russian propaganda machine is gaining momentum. There will be more videos like this in the future. Now America is invulnerable to Russian missiles because of the fear of retaliation. But propagandist "intercontinental missiles" will be launched regularly. I wonder how America will respond. In the 80s, I think Hollywood and pop music became one of the significant factors in the collapse of the USSR. Soviet people watched these films and they formed a positive perception of the West. Big beautiful houses, spectacular cars. They could compare their difficult gray life with life on the other side of the border. This greatly influenced the consciousness of these people. No wonder the KGB banned the distribution of such materials.

this video is ridiculous  -  no one watches a commercial past 60s! Silly Ivans. 

 

Edited January 30, 2023 by Kinophile

[Lethaface]

3 minutes ago, NamEndedAllen said:

Which makes our similar opinions about the obvious much the same. More relevant to the general public is that for some understandable as well as some bizarre reasoning, the decision makers in the various capitols have struggled for months to reach such a conclusion. For example the recent painful lengthy public debates about Western tanks, despite the strong opinions *here* about whether they are actually the most pressing and effective need at present. Not to mention the NATO membership issue.

Well NATO membership isn't going to happen *during* the war. We have actually seen how fast the process can go, *if* everyone agrees (see Sweden/Finland).

 

[Kinophile]

2 minutes ago, dan/california said:

That is true, and I think Boris made some LARGE mistakes in other areas. But Britain's support for Ukraine in last month before the war started, and the first month of the fighting REALLY mattered. It mattered on the battlefield, it mattered in how Ukrainian politics reformed into implacable opposition to Russia, and it mattered in formation of the near consensus in the West that Ukraine was going to get real support. None of that was a given on 2/23/2022. Boris may that rare lucky leader who is remembered for the one thing he got exactly right. 

That one, very lucky one thing.  But, he did. So, much as I despise him, I must admit he stepped up where so many did not, and stayed consistent. 

Fair ****s to him. 

[A Canadian Cat]

On 1/29/2023 at 2:19 PM, Battlefront.com said:

On 1/29/2023 at 8:40 AM, holoween said:

Ok so uranuim enrichment is now a military installation?

Of course it is.  The uranium is being enriched for military purposes, which means it is a valid target.

Yeah, it's all about how much enrichment is being done. There is a Canadian and a British nuclear reactor that can take natural uranium for fuel but most other reactor systems need around 3.5% enrichment. To make a nuclear weapon you need 90%. https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/conversion-enrichment-and-fabrication/uranium-enrichment.aspx

So, what the Iranians were / are doing is clearly heading for making weapons. They can claim all they want that they are not but it's clear they are.

[Bannon]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

Well in the first hit there is clearly explosive trauma.  A HEAT round is not designed for AP.  As the name suggests it is designed to penetrate armor and then once behind it, spray hot metal and bounce all over the insides of a vehicle.  So hitting a person or group of people with a HEAT round is both sub-optimal and overkill at the same time.

I know this is morbid but my curiosity is getter the better of me. Would a human body present enough resistance to cause a HEAT round to go off?

[Zeleban]

5 minutes ago, Bannon said:

I know this is morbid but my curiosity is getter the better of me. Would a human body present enough resistance to cause a HEAT round to go off?

Don't forget that body armor is worn on the human body

[NamEndedAllen]

Just now, Lethaface said:

Well NATO membership isn't going to happen *during* the war. We have actually seen how fast the process can go, *if* everyone agrees (see Sweden/Finland).

 

Yes, very likely so, although those countries are not at risk of massive continuing destruction. As @The_Capt has asserted, NATO may change its rules at any time. However, look deeper. This was published in the USA. Where a political party that has just assumed control of the House in Congress with a tiny shred of a majority. And refuses to simply pay the bills the USA already incurred. That slim majority is composed of those who held out for an historically long time to even elect their Speaker. They include several pro Putin, anti Ukraine, and sudden budget hawks. In the arcane jockeying of the enormously partisan, divided USA politics, a statement by a right wing ish Brit former PM whose policies were embraced by many right wing USA politicians including their former President can be part of the effort to shore up support for Ukraine as the clashes over spending cuts  looms over the USA government. And the amount of support for Ukraine.

[Lethaface]

8 minutes ago, NamEndedAllen said:

Yes, very likely so, although those countries are not at risk of massive continuing destruction. As @The_Capt has asserted, NATO may change its rules at any time. However, look deeper. This was published in the USA. Where a political party that has just assumed control of the House in Congress with a tiny shred of a majority. And refuses to simply pay the bills the USA already incurred. That slim majority is composed of those who held out for an historically long time to even elect their Speaker. They include several pro Putin, anti Ukraine, and sudden budget hawks. In the arcane jockeying of the enormously partisan, divided USA politics, a statement by a right wing ish Brit former PM whose policies were embraced by many right wing USA politicians including their former President can be part of the effort to shore up support for Ukraine as the clashes over spending cuts  looms over the USA government. And the amount of support for Ukraine.

Any and all rules are subject to change and or at risk of becoming irrelevant. But for the foreseeable future I don't see the play happening that Ukraine joins NATO and Russia says 'oh I guess we'll move out then'. And if not that it's just paper plays with no current relevance on the ground. Although I don't want to rob anyone of their happy dreams ;-).

Anyway from your post I understand that for US internal politics this can be considered a worthwhile opinion piece. Outside of that context, well I didn't see the value lol.

Edited January 30, 2023 by Lethaface

[chuckdyke]

18 minutes ago, Bannon said:

I know this is morbid but my curiosity is getter the better of me. Would a human body present enough resistance to cause a HEAT round to go off?

People got hit by LAWs or don't you watch Clint Eastwood movies?

[Bannon]

15 minutes ago, Zeleban said:

Don't forget that body armor is worn on the human body

Good point! Thanks

[Bannon]

3 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

People got hit by LAWs or don't you watch Clint Eastwood movies?

I do enjoy a good Clint Eastwood movie

[The_Capt]

22 minutes ago, Bannon said:

I know this is morbid but my curiosity is getter the better of me. Would a human body present enough resistance to cause a HEAT round to go off?

Yep.  Most HEAT rounds have piezoelectric fuses in the warheads - which is fancy words for "explodes on contact". 

https://advanceandreview.wordpress.com/2017/04/27/history-ww2-heat-and-the-piezoelectric-fuze/

Once fired these things get pretty sensitive.  During UXO training we were told to avoid casting a shadow on an unexploded ATGM because the temperature differential could detonate some of these fuses.  So definitely hitting a human body - bones etc, wearing gear - armor, ammo etc is going to detonate the thing.  However, there are stories of RPG rounds buying themselves into people and not detonating, making surgery really interesting.   

Some ATGMs come with proximity fuses because they double them up as AD

 https://odin.tradoc.army.mil/mediawiki/index.php/9M120_Ataka_(AT-9_Spiral-2)_Russian_Anti-Tank_Guided_Missile_(ATGM)

 

[Bannon]

2 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

 During UXO training we were told to avoid casting a shadow on an unexploded ATGM because the temperature differential could detonate some of these fuses.

I would have never guessed that!

[JonS]

37 minutes ago, Bannon said:

Would a human body present enough resistance to cause a HEAT round to go off?

IIRC, one of the Blackhawk Down casualties rocked up to the media facility with an RPG warhead sticking out of his torso. So ... not necessarily?

[The_Capt]

1 minute ago, JonS said:

IIRC, one of the Blackhawk Down casualties rocked up to the media facility with an RPG warhead sticking out of his torso. So ... not necessarily?

Yup, read it in the book as well.  Human body is a weird bag of goo and can do strange things with flying metal.  Old story but back in the Dust, I had a security outer cordon guy take an AK round right center of mass, no body armor.  Apparently there is a bullet shaped empty void in the human body and the damn round when straight through missing everything by millimeters.  We figure the round must have also been at end of flight because the hydrostatic shock didn't kill the guy either.  Guy was up and showing everyone his new chest and back-holes a day later.  Two weeks later same guy steps on a landmine, loses leg, hand and eye....he decided it was time to go home after that.

Anyway, an RPG round is designed to go off on a deflection or glancing blow on just about anything, probably why they shoot them at people.     

[NamEndedAllen]

36 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

Anyway from your post I understand that for US internal politics this can be considered a worthwhile opinion piece. Outside of that context, well I didn't see the value lol.

Yes, I think you have the point, to influence the single largest provider of war fighting kit and also iirc financial support for Ukraine. Not insignificant whatsoever.  That’s why it is published in the USA, and at this moment in time. Politics here are not only a touchy topic online. They are incredibly volatile and changeable. What was once unthinkable changes over night, regardless of  how irrational. So please, do not underestimate such matters. 
 

Also, one need not make predictions about what is often so inscrutable. HoweverI do personally agree with you about the present likelihood of any movement at all for NATO membership. But this war is turning out to be longer than most ever imagined. We simply don’t know that twists and turns ahead. And when such more dramatic ones may come into play. Perhaps after the spring offensives take place, the results could inspire one side to agree to rational negotiations. Depending on how well as, Ukraine does, NATO membership could conceivably be part of a larger settlement that could guarantee Ukraine’s future safety from further Russian invasions. Would Ukraine accept that as a condition for some in between status of Crimea? The Donbas? I sure don’t know. But we do know that a-leading Russia in past years turned out exceedingly poorly.

[Battlefront.com]

5 hours ago, JonS said:

Oh, that's murky. But extra-judicial, extra-territorial murders aren't.

Murder?  Sure, I'll go along with that being pretty clear cut.  Putin going around the world "Trotskying" everybody he has a grudge against absolutely is illegal.

The murky part is that international laws, and most national laws I presume, have not been updated to take into account wars that are not declared wars.  Especially regarding stateless actors operating in the sovereign territory of an established state.  Under current laws it illegal for someone acting in Pakistan to kill American civilians.  Dealing with it, unfortunately, is murky.  I suppose the US could just go declaring war on countries like Pakistan and then legally conducting strikes, but is that really the best way forward?  Clearly Pakistan doesn't think so, since they didn't object too much when Bin Laden was killed.

Murky.

Steve

[NamEndedAllen]

18 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Clearly Pakistan doesn't think so, since they didn't object too much when Bin Laden was killed.

Their pants were down and the light was on. 
 

PS Agree about your reasons for murk. And hardly anyone declares war any more. Anyone? So murk remains a fixture, perhaps out of the flexibility and uncertainty it offers? Re the USA, pretty sure most countries understand the Bush doctrine that harboring non-state terrorist actors that have harmed the USA makes you complicit, and vulnerable to…Operation Depantsification. 

[JonS]

1 hour ago, NamEndedAllen said:

That’s why it is published in the USA, and at this moment in time

I think you may be ascribing far too much intentionality here. There is exactly one person Johnson cares about, and the only outcome he's interested in is further enriching that person. Publishing this now is good for Johnson because it keeps his name in the public conscious, endorsing an already popular COA.

This column might /also/ contribute to the outcomes you describe, but that would be entirely coincidental.

Edited January 30, 2023 by JonS

[Beleg85]

Bradleys starting its journey to Ukraine:

https://www.dvidshub.net/news/437455/ustranscom-sends-more-than-60-bradley-fighting-vehicles-ukraine

3 hours ago, Zeleban said:

The Russian propaganda machine is gaining momentum. There will be more videos like this in the future. Now America is invulnerable to Russian missiles because of the fear of retaliation. But propagandist "intercontinental missiles" will be launched regularly. I wonder how America will respond. In the 80s, I think Hollywood and pop music became one of the significant factors in the collapse of the USSR. Soviet people watched these films and they formed a positive perception of the West. Big beautiful houses, spectacular cars. They could compare their difficult gray life with life on the other side of the border. This greatly influenced the consciousness of these people. No wonder the KGB banned the distribution of such materials.

Yup, one of main drawback of Russia as state actor is they have almost zero soft power; very small amount they inherited from USSR (which was also dramatically short of it except far leftist circles) was exchanged very fast during this year. Probably nobody normal outside Russians believe now in Russkiy mir, which was ad hoc idea anyway.

 

[NamEndedAllen]

47 minutes ago, JonS said:

Publishing this now is good for Johnson because it keeps his name in the public conscious, endorsing an already popular COA.

This column might /also/ contribute to the outcomes you describe, but that would be entirely coincidental.

Possibly so! But recognize that it is not at all clear why the Wash Post, not known for an inclination to boost the fortunes of overseas right wing politicians, would invite him to do so. I suggest stepping back from the messenger and simply observing the message, the audience (not us) and the context. The timing is just a couple days before the Speaker’s first meeting with the President the day after tomorrow. The topic, paying the nation’s bills instead of defaulting. Speaker demanding spending cuts. So messages have a strength and effect all their own. In any case, it is another data point in the ongoing debates and controversies in the West about what and how much to do about Ukraine and Russia. 

Edited January 31, 2023 by NamEndedAllen

[Lethaface]

1 hour ago, JonS said:

I think you may be ascribing far too much intentionality here. There is exactly one person Johnson cares about, and the only outcome he's interested in is further enriching that person. Publishing this now is good for Johnson because it keeps his name in the public conscious, endorsing an already popular COA.

This column might /also/ contribute to the outcomes you describe, but that would be entirely coincidental.

Boris being Boris he could accidentally find himself a job as a Ukraine(/whatever) lobbyist. Perhaps lobbying to convey a message to certain individuals is at least something he's sort of competent at. The man can fabricate a story after all

[JonS]

9 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

The man can fabricate a story after all

I see what you did there, and I approve.