How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[paxromana]

2 hours ago, Vet 0369 said:

We began as a Republic and evolved (or devolved) into a Demoncracy. Perhaps why our two major parties are Republicans and Democrats.

What about the Know Nothings? 

[Ales Dvorak]

https://fas.org/blogs/security/2023/04/volkel-nuclear-weapon-accident/

[poesel]

12 hours ago, Haiduk said:

UKROboronProm started to produce light FRAG bombs for drones

Bigger one is OBP 23.1 - 1 kg of weight, 11 m of hit radius, smaller one - OBP 23.05 - 0,5 kg, hit radius - 4,5 m

That is one clever design.
The boxes are just chipboard cut with a laser cutter. The grenade shells are 3D printed. I guess 3 parts. An eye bolt for connecting it to a drone and I guess a safety pin.

The innards are a guess, but probably just a simple fuze, explosives and metallic objects to create shrapnel (the casing won't provide any).

Given the fuze and explosives you need less than $3000 of machinery to set up a production line in your cellar.

[Lethaface]

5 hours ago, Vet 0369 said:

I watched a “Master Course” one time on the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. The Presenter said that the Framers of the Constitution envisioned the U.S. as a Republic, and would be horrified to see it now as a two-party Democracy. He said tha one off the signers actually said “I am an Aristocrat! I love Liberty, but I hate equality!”

We began as a Republic and evolved (or devolved) into a Demoncracy. Perhaps why our two major parties are Republicans and Democrats.

A republic is generally considered to be democratic / a democracy. Aristocracy is something very different, a voting system in which only the aristocracy gets to vote is nowadays not considered democratic.
Don't know where you got the demoncratic idea from, but it's not cognitive congruent. 
As an example; our country is a representational democracy disguised as a constitutional monarchy. But we could easily transform into a republic by replacing our ceremonial King with a ceremonial President. 

How much powers a president has, how many parties there are, the common law/constitution etc, all of those things ARE NOT defined by whether the form of democracy installed in a governing body of a nation state is a republic or not.

[Beleg85]

Very rare example of open Israeli supply for Ukraine:

"Israeli 120mm M971 mortar shells in the hands of AU soldiers. The M971 is developed by the Israeli company Israel Military Industries, now owned by Elbit Systems (the company announced in 2018 that it would no longer produce the M971). According to the manufacturer, one M971 can cover an area of 100x100 meters. This is helped by its design, especially the fin-stabilized cargo carrier (the load is made up of 24 M85 rounds, smaller live ammunition, stacked in layers of four rounds). Most M971s are equipped with either a DM-93 mechanical time fuse or an M760 type electronic fuse, which are set to explode in the air directly over the attacked area. The fuse is triggered mid-flight and activates an explosive charge that releases smaller charges and hits nearby targets. In other words, they are cluster bullets."

 

 

[chuckdyke]

14 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

democratic

Democrats aka as Liberals by the GOP synonymous as socialists by the GOP aka republicans. The moment you have socialism in your party they look with absolute horror. whether it is National Socialist or Social Democrats it is socialist. My advice don't discuss politics in the US. I survived there for three months.

 

 

[DesertFox]

 

 

[The_Capt]

15 minutes ago, DesertFox said:

 

 

The anti-US/NATO types should be coming out shortly to tell us how this is all our fault and just another example for Russian provocation.  I mean Russia was simply minding its own business after all…

[Beleg85]

7 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

The anti-US/NATO types should be coming out shortly to tell us how this is all our fault and just another example for Russian provocation.  I mean Russia was simply minding its own business after all…

If within a decade we will see Kazakhstan joining NATO too, Russians will probably still play victims.

[Harmon Rabb]

1 hour ago, DesertFox said:

 

 

History in the making.

[Battlefront.com]

6 hours ago, The_MonkeyKing said:

 

"Mike Kofman joins the show yet again. This time, he explains why the debate over the wisdom of the Battle for Bahkmut is so important while still overshadowing other important debates. As Ukrainian forces are being pressed out of the city of Bahkmut, they prepare to go back on the offensive, which will put Russia on the defensive. The critical issue in Mike's view is what happens after the Ukrainian offensive"

My bullet points:

• Starting with Bakhmut because of the big media footprint. In reality, Bakhmut matters very little eighter way at this point
  • the situation is unclear with the UKR information blackout
  • RUS has not "culminated" like many have stated every week for months (eventually going to be correct)
  • the situation has changed RUS is now pushing the city itself(reason for RUS tactic change unclear)
  • Starting to resemble Severodonetsk. Time will tell.
• RUS is starting to prepare for the UKR offensive sometime this month (for example now units' holidays are being canceled)
• On both sides, manpower is an issue. Issue not bodies but trained manpower and trained formations. 
  • RUS is again like last year doing everything possible to avoid another mobilization wave. Very similar tricks as before the last mobilizations and again unlikely to work out. They are looking at something like 400k.
  • It seems likely RUS is going to have to conduct another mobilization wave in the spring/summer to be able to continue this war
    • The last mobilization wave was consumed by replenishing the force they lost last year. There is no “additional” force.
• RUS has been following the UKR best-case scenario by conducting this highly attractional winter offensive and the last falls situation might replicate where RUS by exhausting itself gives UKR the opportunity to launch its own offensives 
  • The question is how much has RUS exhausted itself? 
    • Especially ammo depletion might prove significant 
  • Opposed to last year RUS still has territorial and mot-rifle units as reserves, the defense has had depth and overall unit-density is higher.
• UKR has generally changed its "defense in depth" to "hold everything" possibly because now the expectation is everything given will have to be taken back.
• Intangibles(like morale) are still intangibles and cannot be taken into account. If they could be they would not be called "intangibles".
• UKR offensive
  • UKR is going to get a substantial injection of ammo for this from the west
  • These troops have not been committed to the winter fight
  • UKR is going to suffer significant casualties and ammo depletion in any case and recovery and "follow through" are critical
• What happens after the UKR offensive is critical
  • Supply from the west? Now it looks spring-summer might be the high watermark for the western support. At least in certain critical systems like artillery ammo
    • critical decisions have only now been made to fix the ammo production issues 
    • It is very different to be able to provide enough to hold their ground and to provide enough to give UKR enough of a relative advantage for offensive operations
  • Last fall UKR was not capable to press its advantage to the end (even with the very critical condition of the RUS forces). This resulted in an operational pause that we are still seeing today. This might happen again in this year's offensive.
    • Will the west be willing and able to AGAIN provide UKR with sufficient military advantage for future progress after this new operational pause? (Unknown to Mike)
       

Thanks for taking the time to type this up.  You must be busy, what with all the celebration parties you are no doubt going to today

It seems that Kofman's assessment is largely inline with what we've been talking about lately.  The most important points being:

1. Russia has sufficient forces to have some degree of superficially adequate coverage of the entire front.  The quality of that coverage is yet to be seen.
2. In order to have this coverage Russia has committed all of its reconstituted and newly created forces.  The mobilized from last year have replaced casualties and rotations, not built up a reserve force.  It has no uncommitted forces of any significance out there yet to be committed.
3. Ukraine, on the other hand, does have an uncommitted force of some significant size.  It has also managed to keep its frontline adequately covered.
4. Neither side is in a position to absorb significant casualties without resorting to new mobilization efforts.  It is unclear how much Ukraine still has to draw from without running into significant complications, but it seems that Russia's next mobilization will be particularly difficult (Kofman didn't get into why, but mostly it's because Russia has already hit up the more vulnerable segments of society and now will have to draw from more consequential ones).
5. There is a lot riding on this offensive.  If Ukraine can not achieve something significant without bleeding itself white by mid Summer, then we are likely to have a defacto frozen conflict as neither side looks to have the ability to rebuild quickly.  Russia because it is running out of immediate resources to fight, Ukraine because the West is running out of immediate resources to provide to them.

Steve

[akd]

Possible example of ERA actually saving a tank from destruction by ATGM…temporarily:

 

Edited April 4, 2023 by akd

[Battlefront.com]

5 minutes ago, akd said:

Possible example of ERA actually saving a tank from destruction by ATGM…temporarily:

 

Whoa!  Looks like the missile to some degree survived after impacting the ERA, was deflected, and continued under power as did a corkscrew away from the tank.  Never seen anything like that before.  The second hit, however, I have seen plenty of times

Steve

[kevinkin]

Done deal:

https://apnews.com/article/nato-finland-russia-ukraine-membership-enlargement-c703d23a8423d89577d5b752d69d76eb

[Seminole]

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

The anti-US/NATO types should be coming out shortly to tell us how this is all our fault and just another example for Russian provocation.  I mean Russia was simply minding its own business after all…

You’re doing that thing again wherein you conflate the interventionist/neocon foreign policy advocates with the whole of the U.S., as though opposition to their constant finding of new wars for America to be involved in is itself ‘anti-American’.  

[Beleg85]

Russian propagandists are doing very vigorous mental gymnastics these days.

Congratulations to our Finish friends of being successfully brainwashed into joining The Club, after so many years of peaceful cooperation with Russia, which as we all know was builded on common history, mutual respect and friendship.

Edited April 4, 2023 by Beleg85

[Astrophel]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

Ukraine because the West is running out of immediate resources to provide to them.

This is the central concern.  Nato has not prepared to fight this kind of war for fifty years maybe.  I remember training to deal with an expected russian tank attack and saying "if this is what russia wants to do then we better do something else altogether".  In the intervening years we have welcomed the Apache, increasingly sophisticated air warfare systems, empowered infantry, etc, etc.  "We" never prepared to fight this kind of war.  So, no, we do not have enough russian calibre artillery shells, etc.  

Personally I believe we need to push through and make sure the Ukrainians win and the post-USSR empire loses.  There is a "geopolitical" opportunity that might not come again.  The Russian public is already programmed to believe they are fighting Nato and so any "Green Men" will come as no surprise.  

My main concern is that the US establishment has a big voice in decided what can and cannot be done.  And these are the same guys who constructed the fiasco in Afghanistan.  Ukraine is getting supplied too little and too late by back room types trying to draw new borders on the map instead of focussing on the internationally agreed borders.

[The_Capt]

2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Thanks for taking the time to type this up.  You must be busy, what with all the celebration parties you are no doubt going to today

It seems that Kofman's assessment is largely inline with what we've been talking about lately.  The most important points being:

1. Russia has sufficient forces to have some degree of superficially adequate coverage of the entire front.  The quality of that coverage is yet to be seen.
2. In order to have this coverage Russia has committed all of its reconstituted and newly created forces.  The mobilized from last year have replaced casualties and rotations, not built up a reserve force.  It has no uncommitted forces of any significance out there yet to be committed.
3. Ukraine, on the other hand, does have an uncommitted force of some significant size.  It has also managed to keep its frontline adequately covered.
4. Neither side is in a position to absorb significant casualties without resorting to new mobilization efforts.  It is unclear how much Ukraine still has to draw from without running into significant complications, but it seems that Russia's next mobilization will be particularly difficult (Kofman didn't get into why, but mostly it's because Russia has already hit up the more vulnerable segments of society and now will have to draw from more consequential ones).
5. There is a lot riding on this offensive.  If Ukraine can not achieve something significant without bleeding itself white by mid Summer, then we are likely to have a defacto frozen conflict as neither side looks to have the ability to rebuild quickly.  Russia because it is running out of immediate resources to fight, Ukraine because the West is running out of immediate resources to provide to them.

Steve

That first one is the rub for Russia.  The troop density they need to sustain for a defence in depth is far too low for the frontage they have bitten off.  The UA has done it through ISR coverage backed up by fires and likely rapidly mobile counter move forces.  The RA has not demonstrated any of this capability, in fact the capability they had has demonstrated erosion, not growth, so they can only offset with manpower…which is also a shrinking pool thanks to baffling wastages in the Winter offensives.

So Russia has a really big frontage to try and freeze the conflict while the UA only has to find the weak spots to exploit - and keep exploiting.  As to mobilization, I am not sold that the west is at the bottom of the barrel yet.  In fact I know we are not even close.  Now political will is the one thing that may start to run low but materially we have a long way to go before we are totally Winchester.  Now dipping into stocks will make us uncomfortable but those stocks are there.  For example Canada still has about 70 Leo 2 (and we all love those guys - The Capt said sarcastically) we could ship another dozen or more with parts etc.  

Would we be happy, nope.  Would we be in trouble if China invades Taiwan?…trust me 12-24 Canadian Leo2s are not going to make a difference in Taiwan.  But could we do it if we had too, yes.  And there are a lot of nations in NATO with war stocks etc with a lot of depth.  So again, Russia is not on the winning end of that calculus either.  What we do not need is a Ukrainian military disaster which would result in a lot of western political testicular retreats into abdomens. 

[cesmonkey]

https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3350958/biden-administration-announces-additional-security-assistance-for-ukraine/

 

Quote

Today, the Department of Defense (DoD) announces critical new security assistance for Ukraine. This includes the authorization of a Presidential Drawdown of security assistance with more ammunition for U.S.-provided HIMARS, air defense interceptors, and artillery rounds that Ukraine is using to defend itself, as well as anti-armor systems, small arms, heavy equipment transport vehicles, and maintenance support essential to strengthening Ukraine's defenders on the battlefield valued at up to $500 million. 

In addition, we are announcing a significant package of air defense capabilities, as well as artillery and tank ammunition, mortar systems, rockets, and anti-armor systems using $2.1 billion in Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI) funds

 

[The_MonkeyKing]

36 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

Russian propagandists are doing very vigorous mental gymnastics these days.

Congratulations to our Finish friends of being successfully brainwashed into joining The Club, after so many years of peaceful cooperation with Russia, which as we all know was builded on common history, mutual respect and friendship.

I shall present you with the original version of the song:

 

Finns are very glad to join NATO. Many NATO beers and liqueurs have been and will be popped today! ("OTAN" translates "to drink alcohol" in Finnish)

I hope this will materialize in much more support for Ukraine from us. At least all the three biggest parties have stated UKR support has been too little and too late, including from us fins. With the limited packages, the government has always added that the fact we are outside NATO is limiting our support.

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, Seminole said:

You’re doing that thing again wherein you conflate the interventionist/neocon foreign policy advocates with the whole of the U.S., as though opposition to their constant finding of new wars for America to be involved in is itself ‘anti-American’.  

Not sure how gaining an ally in a war (cold and otherwise) that has been going on since 1945 is "interventionist/neocon" related.  To me it seems rather smart to have more friends than the other guy.  Alliances tend to discourage armed conflicts, not encourage despotic expansionists.  The lack of alliances, on the other hand, tend to encourage despotic expansionists. 

The world is a complicated place.  People that don't acknowledge this fact discredit their opinions and themselves in the process.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

36 minutes ago, The_MonkeyKing said:

Finns are very glad to join NATO. Many NATO beers and liqueurs have been and will be popped today! ("OTAN" translates "to drink alcohol" in Finnish)

oh now THAT is funny

Steve

[The_Capt]

42 minutes ago, Seminole said:

You’re doing that thing again wherein you conflate the interventionist/neocon foreign policy advocates with the whole of the U.S., as though opposition to their constant finding of new wars for America to be involved in is itself ‘anti-American’.  

You doing that thing again where you dance on the edge of the argument that this war was somehow a discretionary strategic diversion that we could have avoided.  Further glancing off the idea that this war is also somehow the West/US fault because it got involved in containing an obvious genocidal dictator.  

It is the part where you conflate isolationist foreign policy advocates with the whole US, as though support of US involvement in the broader planet - one which is largely engineered the global order thereof - and pays for their lifestyles, is itself "Anti-American".

[Vet 0369]

6 hours ago, Lethaface said:

A republic is generally considered to be democratic / a democracy. Aristocracy is something very different, a voting system in which only the aristocracy gets to vote is nowadays not considered democratic.
Don't know where you got the demoncratic idea from, but it's not cognitive congruent. 
As an example; our country is a representational democracy disguised as a constitutional monarchy. But we could easily transform into a republic by replacing our ceremonial King with a ceremonial President. 

How much powers a president has, how many parties there are, the common law/constitution etc, all of those things ARE NOT defined by whether the form of democracy installed in a governing body of a nation state is a republic or not.

A republic is generally considered to be democratic / a democracy. Aristocracy is something very different, a voting system in which only the aristocracy gets to vote is nowadays not considered democratic.
 

The U.S. originally specified that only white men, age 21 or older, who owned property, were allowed to vote for their Representatives. Senators were selected/elected by the State Legislatures. The “Voters” didn’t get to directly elect Senators to represent their States in the Senate until the 20th Century. Benjamin Franklin supported a vote to remove the requirement of owning property and penned a very succinct reply to a five-page statement by his supporters in favor of removing ownership of property. He said “A man owns an A**, the man can vote. The A** dies, the man can no longer vote. Therefore the vote lies not with the man, but with the A**.” I used to use it when I was teaching Executive Branch Regulatory Writers how to write in plain language (required in the 1990s by a Presidential Executive Order).

Don't know where you got the demoncratic idea from, but it's not cognitive congruent. 
 

It was a typo.

Edited April 4, 2023 by Vet 0369
Profanity filter misread the animal name.

[cesmonkey]

1 hour ago, The_MonkeyKing said:

I shall present you with the original version of the song:

 

Finns are very glad to join NATO. Many NATO beers and liqueurs have been and will be popped today! ("OTAN" translates "to drink alcohol" in Finnish)

I hope this will materialize in much more support for Ukraine from us. At least all the three biggest parties have stated UKR support has been too little and too late, including from us fins. With the limited packages, the government has always added that the fact we are outside NATO is limiting our support.

They say they deliver to anywhere in the EU if somebody wants to buy some to join in the celebration:
https://olaf.fi/collections/olaf-leopard-beer/products/otan-lonkeroa-long-drink-5-5-0-33l