How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Zeleban]

1 minute ago, CHEqTRO said:

There are more latin-american countries other than Mexico, you know right?

 

No, remind me if it's not hard for you

[Maciej Zwolinski]

1 minute ago, Butschi said:

We have to learn to be a united entity and I think that will only work if we see ourselves as Europeans first and German, Dutch, Polish, you name it, second.

Look at the Ukrainian war from that perspective. Poland, the Baltics, the Czech Republic - we moved immediately to help the Ukraine and against Russia because our individual national history and perspective made it an obvious choice. Should we wait until all EU countries come to the same conclusion? With the strongest country and at that time considered the leader of all things European expressing the opinion that Kiev will fall in 3 days and until this date putting up a show of resistance because that is what German voters expect? When would that pan-Eu action have started rollling, in May 2022?

That European identity thing is not likely to happen. We have just too diverging interests and worldviews. E.g.  when I hear that Spain does not have any tanks to spare because it needs tanks facing Morocco that is just an Arabian Nights Tale for me. I suppose the Spanish and Portuguese have a similar immediate reaction to the news from the Ukraine. When they hear Galicia, they think south Spain, and we think Lviv/Lwów/Lemberg.

[CHEqTRO]

3 minutes ago, Zeleban said:

 

No, remind me if it's not hard for you

No need I think, you surely have access to google, only I would ask you to have in mind that there is more to the modern story of latin america than just drug cartels.

Edited February 10, 2023 by CHEqTRO

[Ales Dvorak]

18 minutes ago, Zeleban said:

If it’s not difficult for you, bring similar operations carried out by the US intelligence services?

Why?

[Bulletpoint]

14 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

2. I trust they will also leave behind an endless nightmare of lethal mines, traps and motion sensors aimed as much at Russia's diminishing number of trained sappers as at the cannon fodder.  Civilians must be compelled to leave, and stray animals shot. Free Fire Zone 2023 style, 20km deep. Enjoy your new conquered 'Russian lands', b*tch*z.

I doubt that, since it would be a small military win and a big political/diplomatic loss to crash out of the AP mine convention like that.

Ukraine's (so far very effective) diplomatic narrative is that it's part of the "western" rules based order, respecting conventions and international agreements, while Russia is basically a rogue state.

It would be a pity to lose that good reputation just to kill a few more conscripts, not to mention to have to spend even more years demining their own territory after the war.

[Butschi]

8 minutes ago, Yskonyn said:

But the narrative of 'being European' has changed over the past years from being this utopian united people towards a view of more regards for the people themselves that should make up this 'European identity' and how we can leverage this to make the EU work (even better). And that's a good thing imo.

Ok, I see what you mean. Of course this should be about integration not assimilation and becoming some uniform undistinguishable mass.

[Zeleban]

11 minutes ago, CHEqTRO said:

No need I think, you surely have access to google, only I would ask you to have in mind that there is more to the modern story of latin america than just drug cartels.

And what is it? What made the United States act in the style of an insidious saboteur?

[Aragorn2002]

1 hour ago, Huba said:

It's great that the only issue with EU unity you see is Poland and you are so confident that you preach that as a fact. It might sound a little prejudiced to some, but we all know you mean well -  after all bigotry and contempt for the CEE people are not a EU problem, especially in NL, right? Love you too buddy

I knew you would understand.

[poesel]

4 hours ago, chrisl said:

I don't think the fighter/bomber is any deader than the tank (and probably less), but it's subject to the same kind of conditions as the future of tanks.  

...

  They're all part of an interconnected system that makes it possible to reach out and touch someone with as little risk as possible to the guys driving them around. 

...

Now what happens if you don't need a guy to drive/fly the stuff?

I think we are very rapidly reaching a point where it doesn't make much sense to actually fly a human that close to the action.

3 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

The old Hansa League countries.

That would include cities in modern Russia...

28 minutes ago, Zeleban said:

 

So, it seems that NATO is gradually becoming a territory through which missile strikes are launched against Ukraine. Zaluzhny said that during today's missile attacks, Russian missiles crossed Romanian airspace

If true, wouldn't that be a nice pretext to get rid of Transnistria? Joint action of Romania, Moldova & Ukraine.

Edited February 10, 2023 by poesel

[BletchleyGeek]

14 minutes ago, Maciej Zwolinski said:

When they hear Galicia, they think northwestern  Spain, and we think Lviv/Lwów/Lemberg.

Let me kindly indicate you where Galicia or Galiza is, the Old Kingdom of the Suevii. SW Spain is the Alentejo.

And I would like also to remind everyone that between Morocco and Spain there is a significant body of water and the last large scale amphibious operation involving mechanised divisions happened in June 1944. Getting mothballed tanks out of storage is neither trivial or cheap. Monetarism and taking part in economic war with the Russian Federation aren't precisely compatible either.

It may not seem that way right now, or tomorrow, but "something" in the public consciousness is shifting. 

 

[Maciej Zwolinski]

1 minute ago, BletchleyGeek said:

Let me kindly indicate you where Galicia or Galiza is, the Old Kingdom of the Suevii. SW Spain is the Alentejo.

You see how little I know of Spain. Apologies to all inhabitants of that wonderful country

[chuckdyke]

2 minutes ago, poesel said:

That would include cities in modern Russia...

Yes. It was a trading league, nothing wrong with Russian people they are just ruled by would be Tony Sopranos. Just feel sorry for them. 

[kraze]

57 minutes ago, Ales Dvorak said:

I do believe you have strong and reliable info source on " Russia did it ".

No, I just don't use BS sources, who are openly prorussian shills for the past decade.

Speaking of which - a prorussian shill blaming US for something is as good of an indication who did it as any.

[BletchleyGeek]

21 minutes ago, Maciej Zwolinski said:

You see how little I know of Spain. Apologies to all inhabitants of that wonderful country

Totally okay and no need to apologise. If anything, what we need is to look at what things bring European countries together and don't involve football, singing or just mere free flow of money.

Edited February 10, 2023 by BletchleyGeek

[Maciej Zwolinski]

8 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

Yes. It was a trading league, nothing wrong with Russian people they are just ruled by would be Tony Sopranos. Just feel sorry for them. 

It was a trading league between Germanic cities. Its members in the Baltics and Russia were cities inhabited by German/Scandinavian colonists (plus some Dutch, Scots etc.). There are no such cities this side of the Elbe anymore

[LongLeftFlank]

1 hour ago, Bulletpoint said:

I doubt that, since it would be a small military win and a big political/diplomatic loss to crash out of the AP mine convention like that.

Ukraine's (so far very effective) diplomatic narrative is that it's part of the "western" rules based order, respecting conventions and international agreements, while Russia is basically a rogue state.

It would be a pity to lose that good reputation just to kill a few more conscripts, not to mention to have to spend even more years demining their own territory after the war.

Sure, whatever. I am shocked, shocked.

'Unrestricted submarine warfare' was also explicitly banned by the 1936 Naval Protocol.  War crime, Brits were all ready to string up Doenitz for it in 1946.  And then the US Navy CINCPAC awkwardly cleared its throat.... 1943 war of the Marus, anybody? 

To be more direct, since Russia is now regressing to its historical 'strong suit' as a dumb mass infantry force (flying in the face of its actual demography), it follows that Ukraine's surest path to victory is  measured in buckets of Russian blood.

....Secondarily, it is measured in beans and bullets *not* getting to their trenches, but that is a different kind of mines.

Look, we can afford to tut tut all we like on our keyboards, from the safety of our various gamer mancaves.  

But if cheap, plentiful AP mines kill and wound Russian skinheads by the bushel, and hinder them advancing to turn yet more Donbas towns into a moonscape, Zaluzhny's boys are absolutely gonna use them, whether the West goes tut tut or not. (And if they aren't effective then they won't use them).

Anyway, the postwar EOD clearing burden is already baked in; plenty of those 'legitimate' shells landing on the aforementioned moonscapes are duds.

Edited February 10, 2023 by LongLeftFlank

[Lethaface]

12 hours ago, Beleg85 said:

In wider context of possible rifts as to defining Russia  as long-term danger, I don't see at all Germany as weak partner even for USA. If they want to to put their own interest forward, they will. And this must not necessarly involve giving UA access to NATO in any short period of time. France stance seem to actually be similar. West Europeans still seem to be in transition period about viewing Russia; these things can take decades to form and being absorbed by populations and business/political elites alike.

Anyway, that's why countries of the Eastern Flank needs own sufficent military forces; there is almost biological understanding of physical danger on behalf of Muscovy now, regardless of who rule Kremlin. Let's hope there will no going back to "business as usual" after year or two after shooting stops.

Every country needs a sufficient self defense. Show me a country that doesn't put it's own interest forward. Anyway I don't know but from some of your posts I get a hint of hostility about 'west Europe' and 'east Europe'. 
If we start about political elites creating a rift in Europe before the war, well I could point to some countries in the East as well. Including your own. But imo the war has caused some paradigmas to shift, mainly the view on Russia. 

It's time for Europe / EU to stop bickering about perceived past grievances and look ahead. Get over Germany would be my advise. If we keep pointing the finger at eachother 'look he was wrong, I'm merely saying so not pointing the finger' how are you expecting any successful cooperation?

[Butschi]

44 minutes ago, Maciej Zwolinski said:

Look at the Ukrainian war from that perspective. Poland, the Baltics, the Czech Republic - we moved immediately to help the Ukraine and against Russia because our individual national history and perspective made it an obvious choice. Should we wait until all EU countries come to the same conclusion? With the strongest country and at that time considered the leader of all things European expressing the opinion that Kiev will fall in 3 days and until this date putting up a show of resistance because that is what German voters expect? When would that pan-Eu action have started rollling, in May 2022?

I get your point but I'm not sure if it supports or contradicts my point. I mean, a united Europe would certainly have worked faster and more coherent than this constant bickering between the member states. Which was, I'd like to remind you, mostly about national interests on almost all sides. Of course, that united response could have been to stay out of the conflict. 

Btw. could you CEE guys please decide on whether you want German leadership or not? I'm perfectly ok with "no". In case the answer is "yes", you would have to accept that not all decision end up the way you like, though. "Yes but Germany has to lead in the direction we want it to" clearly doesn't work because, well, that would be the opposite of leadership.

 

[Bulletpoint]

8 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Sure, whatever. I am shocked, shocked.

'Unrestricted submarine warfare' was also explicitly banned by the 1936 Naval Protocol.  War crime, they were all ready to string up Doenitz for it in 1946.  And then the US Navy CINCPAC awkwardly cleared its throat.... 1943 war of the Marus, anybody? 

To be more direct, since Russia is now regressing to its historical 'strong suit' as a dumb mass infantry force (flying in the face of its actual demography), it follows that Ukraine's surest path to victory is  measured in buckets of Russian blood.

....Secondarily, it is measured in beans and bullets *not* getting to their trenches, but that is a different kind of mines.

Look, we can afford to tut tut all we like on our keyboards, from the safety of our various gamer mancaves.  

But if cheap, plentiful AP mines kill and wound Russian skinheads by the bushel, and hinder them advancing to turn yet more Donbas towns into a moonscape, Zaluzhny's boys are absolutely gonna use them, whether the West goes tut tut or not. (And if they aren't effective then they won't use them).

Anyway, the postwar EOD clearing burden is already baked in; plenty of those 'legitimate' shells landing on the aforementioned moonscapes are duds.

I think you completely missed the point of my post. Ukraine is fighting a war on the battlefield, but also a diplomatic war about opinion. They want to be seen as the good guys. And in most of the world, using AP mines is not what the good guy does. It's not about what I think or you think.

[cesmonkey]

2 hours ago, Zeleban said:

Exit at 500 km/h slow exit? Let's be honest with ourselves, modern military aviation has nothing to do with car racing like formula 1. World War II aviation had much more to do with racing due to the lack of accurate and long-range weapons. F / A - 18 is significantly inferior in speed to other modern fighters like the MiG-29 or Su-27, this does not at all make it vulnerable to these types of aircraft due to more advanced weapons, electronic warfare systems, radar, pilot ergonomics. In modern combat, the A-10C will not need to quickly exit close combat. After all, modern weapons allow him not even to engage in close combat

I'm all for giving Ukraine a batch of A-10s and seeing what they can do with them.

There's been already way too much of "Ukraine doesn't need this", "Ukraine wouldn't be able to use this", "Giving this to Ukraine would be a waste", and "If we gave this to Ukraine, it would just overwhelm them".

[LongLeftFlank]

7 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I think you completely missed the point of my post. Ukraine is fighting a war on the battlefield, but also a diplomatic war about opinion. They want to be seen as the good guys. And in most of the world, using AP mines is not what the good guy does. It's not about what I think or you think.

Noted, and your points are entirely reasonable btw, so hope you don't take it personally.

...But reelpolitik and historical experience (e.g. Uboats) says to me that the 'court of world opinion' has already divided over this war, and nobody is going to toss over Ukraine for breaking some rules its invader has already ignored, in a titanic HE-intensive struggle for its existence, on its own territory, where its people bear the entire practical consequences of its military decisions.

Also, victors write the history books, and indict the war criminals.

Edited February 10, 2023 by LongLeftFlank

[Bulletpoint]

10 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Noted, and your points are entirely reasonable btw, so hope you don't take it personally.

...But reelpolitik and historical experience (e.g. Uboats) says to me that the 'court of world opinion' has already divided over this war, and nobody is going to toss over Ukraine for breaking some rules its invader has already ignored, in a titanic HE-intensive struggle for its existence, on its own territory, where its people bear the entire practical consequences of its military decisions.

Also, victors write the history books, and indict the war criminals.

I am under no illusions about that, and I'm not saying world opinion would immediately turn against Ukraine if they started to use AP land mines.

It's just always a balancing act between their military usefulness and the diplomatic (and later demining) cost. So far, it seems Ukraine has decided that it's not worth it. There are now some allegations that Ukraine has used air delivered petal mines though.

When I comment about mines and cluster munitions here, it is not to "clutch pearls", but because I think it's interesting whether such a convention can be upheld in a full scale war.

And this war is a real hard test of the Mine Ban Treaty.

[Maciej Zwolinski]

11 minutes ago, Butschi said:

Btw. could you CEE guys please decide on whether you want German leadership or not? I'm perfectly ok with "no". In case the answer is "yes", you would have to accept that not all decision end up the way you like, though. "Yes but Germany has to lead in the direction we want it to" clearly doesn't work because, well, that would be the opposite of leadership.

That is the crux of the problem. There are some core decisions, that everybody is afraid to give up to the popular vote of people who are likely to think differently . For Poland that may be security, perhaps immigration or intra-EU trade. For Germans I would guess interest rates, budget etc. We cannot reliably count on getting the majority in our favour, so a Polish governement which wants to have any influence over those has to push for unanimity/high qualified majority. It of course makes the decision process cumbersome and slower, but leaves the option of going it alone/in a coalition of the willing instead of being outvoted e.g. on border controls. Germany the affluent and influencial has more options to get a majority in its favour, so different things work for you.

 

[Maciej Zwolinski]

12 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

When I comment about mines and cluster munitions here, it is not to "clutch pearls", but because I think it's interesting whether such a convention can be upheld in a full scale war.

And this war is a real hard test of the Mine Ban Treaty.

It has always made as much sense as trying to go off atomic energy in Europe after the tsunami in Fukushima. The impulse for the ban was the demining of post-Khmere Rouge Cambodia. As if any future Khmere Rouge regime would give a toss about international conventions. And as if any full scale war between industrialised nations would not leave hundred of tons of UXO to be removed from the soil anyway.

Edited February 10, 2023 by Maciej Zwolinski
typo

[Bulletpoint]

4 minutes ago, Maciej Zwolinski said:

It has always made as much sense as trying to go off atomic energy in Europe after the tsunami in Fukushima. The impulse for the ban was the demining of post-Khmere Rouge Cambodia. As if any future Khmere Rouge regime would give a toss about international conventions. And as if any full scale war between industrialised nations would not leave hundred of tons of UXO to be removed from the soil anyway.

The point of the covention is not so much that countries promise not to use mines, as that they commit to stop producing them and especially destroying the mines in their stockpiles. So that when war breaks out, the mines are simply not available.

In Ukraine, they only managed to destroy about half, so they still have more than 3 million old Soviet mines in stock.

The UXO is of course also a problem, but less so. There are still places in Europe where WW1 shells keep coming out of the ground, but the farmers continue to plow their fields. They leave the rusty old shells by the side of the road for specialists to take care of.