How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[sburke]

2 hours ago, billbindc said:

 

Worth reading to get sense of the sheer, abject stupidity of this clown.

man the Homeland security internet vacuum is gonna go nuts seeing this info posted all over and reporting it.  Umm Steve, you might get a knock on the door.  I'd suggest maybe storing the uniforms and stuff somewhere safe that can't be connected to you.

[chuckdyke]

Run by an Elite which is incompetent. 

[Taranis]

"Ukrainian soldiers near the town of Chasiv Yar, not far from the frontline in Donetsk Oblast, on April 22. STRINGER / REUTERS"
*T-72

[Kinophile]

https://twitter.com/Mylovanov/status/1651251174874439683?t=qfVnvzlohbW6xKjtH2KLjg&s=19

[Beleg85]

Video reportedly from March:

 

[Battlefront.com]

7 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

Video reportedly from March:

 

Those are some interesting hits.  First one appeared to be a direct hit on the left side of the tank, the second one appears to have been hit on the top of the turret.  My guess is the first one was from something smaller, like ILAW or RPG-7, from a building on the left side of the street.  The second one probably was an NLAW and might have come from the right side of the street to the rear.  Which means both tanks passed straight through Ukrainian ambush positions.  Nice ISR there Ivan

Steve

[Beleg85]

16 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Those are some interesting hits.  First one appeared to be a direct hit on the left side of the tank, the second one appears to have been hit on the top of the turret.  My guess is the first one was from something smaller, like ILAW or RPG-7, from a building on the left side of the street.  The second one probably was an NLAW and might have come from the right side of the street to the rear.  Which means both tanks passed straight through Ukrainian ambush positions.  Nice ISR there Ivan

Steve

One would think after 15 months of trashing they would finally learn to coordinate tanks with infantry, or at least not to push them throught dense urban area. But no. Komandir nakazal.

Btw. we may soon see some muscovites wearing pots similar their ancestors did during WWII.

 

Edited April 27, 2023 by Beleg85

[billbindc]

9 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Yes and no.  The degree of centralized control is stronger than it was for the breakaway republics when the Soviet Union disintegrated, but some of the republics that broke away were VERY tightly controlled.  The Baltics, for example.

At the most basic level that matters, these regions have their own governments.  They are largely staffed by locals out of necessity (language, culture, willingness to live in that place, etc.) and have experience running their own daily affairs.  They have their own courts, schools, police, fire departments, road departments, etc. as well.  For sure they operate under edicts coming from Moscow more than not, but that could be fairly easily ignored and all decisions relegated to a regional capital.  Implementation and transition of this new rule would be difficult, of course, which would likely mean it is violent and generally messy.  Which is why this is an outcome that would best be avoided.

The more peaceful scenario is that Moscow cries uncle and voluntarily gives back the control that had previously been withdrawn in recent years.  This is a realistic scenario if Moscow senses the alternative is widespread disintegration.  As the video very rightly points out, Moscow can only fight one or two uprisings at a time.  It took all of Russia's concentration to wage war against the Caucuses (Chechnya being the highest profile one) and it lost the first round and only won the second round through intrigue.  Imagine if 10 of 15 republics all decide at the same time to give Moscow a big FU.  It will not be able to stop them all, or maybe even any of them thanks to the distraction in Ukraine.

There's also a hybrid possibility of some going violently, some renegotiating control, and some staying loyal.  No matter what the mix might be, in the end Russia will not be the centrally controlled territorial behemoth it currently is.

Steve

I agree that there were degrees of control in various republics in the USSR but there's an important difference between now and then...then the bureaucracy doing the controlling was collegial in nature and operated by a consensus that filtered up to the Presidium, etc. Today, such control is entirely personalized with local governors in effect appointed by Putin personally and with only one who has any degree of local autonomy due to unique circumstance (that would be Kadyrov, of course). In the old milieu, it was a fairly straightforward process for the bureaucracies in control at the end of the USSR to translate into local elites without immediate disruption to local power centers. Today? Local governors are creatures of the central node. Elections are fenced in with law and regulation that gives whoever has seized power the ability to keep it in safe hands and the status quo is enforced with lawfare and targeted elite violence. Put simply, the current system isn't just an upside down pyramid nationally...it's also one locally.

All of that is a recipe for one of two outcomes should the state falter significantly...either a local potentate has retained enough freedom of action and power to seize the reins (the Federated State of Gazprom is one such possibility) or there will be forcible competition between the center and competing local factions. In other words, hybrid...where in the best case the violence is sub rosa and in the worst where there is blood running down the streets.

PS: If you want an excellent illustration of how it worked in USSR, it would be hard to better HBO's Chernobyl. The interplay between local committees, regional secretaries and the Center is hard to improve on.

Edited April 27, 2023 by billbindc

[kevinkin]

Under promise and over deliver is always a good thing when allowed to:

https://www.stripes.com/theaters/europe/2023-04-26/ukraine-russia-offensive-eucom-congress-9928802.html?utm_campaign=dfn-ebb&utm_medium=email&utm_source=sailthru&SToverlay=2002c2d9-c344-4bbb-8610-e5794efcfa7d

Another one of those scenarios:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/apr/23/truce-stalemate-ukraine-spring-offensive-volodymyr-zelenskiy

Out of patience, a group of former senior diplomats last week urged chronically over-cautious western governments to finally “go all in” and provide better tanks, longer-range missiles and fighter aircraft “to pave the way to Ukrainian victory”. As Haass urged, “it’s time for the west to stop deterring itself”. But it may be too late. Too many politicians have dithered for too long.

So everything rides on the coming offensive. Already dubbed “Ukraine’s longest day”, it could determine the country’s long-term relationship with both east and west. For now, Zelenskiy, backed by 64% of Ukrainians, is sticking, in public at least, to his maximalist position – that every last inch of occupied territory be liberated.

Yet even as his troops move into position, Zelenskiy is surely aware of the rear echelon second-guessing and political calculation that is going on between allies behind his back. To end their pain and suffering, Ukrainians may soon be asked to swallow a very bitter pill.

Edited April 27, 2023 by kevinkin

[dan/california]

Now with video...

[Battlefront.com]

2 hours ago, Beleg85 said:

One would think after 15 months of trashing they would finally learn to coordinate tanks with infantry, or at least not to push them throught dense urban area. But no. Komandir nakazal.

Btw. we may soon see some muscovites wearing pots similar their ancestors did during WWII.

 

Oh my.  I've been wondering where they've sourced helmets from recently as the old Soviet era steel helmets, that we saw a lot of last year, have largely gone away.  I did see one in a drone bombing video posted a few days ago, but that's the first I've seen in a while.

When you watch the video the question should be "with all that high tech industrial capacity, why aren't they making real ballistic protection instead of cope pads?".  The answer most likely is that Russia can't scale up due to materials (chemicals and maybe the fibers) shortages.  I also expect it takes much longer to crank out useful ones than these dressed up steel pots.

Steve

 

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, billbindc said:

I agree that there were degrees of control in various republics in the USSR but there's an important difference between now and then...then the bureaucracy doing the controlling was collegial in nature and operated by a consensus that filtered up to the Presidium, etc. Today, such control is entirely personalized with local governors in effect appointed by Putin personally and with only one who has any degree of local autonomy due to unique circumstance (that would be Kadyrov, of course). In the old milieu, it was a fairly straightforward process for the bureaucracies in control at the end of the USSR to translate into local elites without immediate disruption to local power centers. Today? Local governors are creatures of the central node. Elections are fenced in with law and regulation that gives whoever has seized power the ability to keep it in safe hands and the status quo is enforced with lawfare and targeted elite violence. Put simply, the current system isn't just an upside down pyramid nationally...it's also one locally.

All of that is a recipe for one of two outcomes should the state falter significantly...either a local potentate has retained enough freedom of action and power to seize the reins (the Federated State of Gazprom is one such possibility) or there will be forcible competition between the center and competing local factions. In other words, hybrid...where in the best case the violence is sub rosa and in the worst where there is blood running down the streets.

For sure the most important thing to keep in mind is that there is no one scenario that will play out if regions start to question the legitimacy of the current Moscow centric system.  It will be a sort of "all of the above", with some doing A, some doing B, some doing C, etc. and the specific mix determining the overall character of the breakup.

As I said above, the majority of the apparatus are staffed by locals.  If there's a move to separate from Moscow within that particular area, there won't be much to stop it from progressing rapidly.  It is quite different than other breakup scenarios where there's one or more power blocs within the apparatus with significant degree of control under personal authority.  What is happening in Sudan, for example, is an excellent example of this. 

The key is some existing elite (legal or illicit) taking advantage of the situation and muscling in as the leader.  As we have seen, the Russian people are pretty much disinterested in disruption, therefore if the action is swift there won't likely be an immediate counter challenge UNLESS there's more than one elite in a particular area that are in opposition to each other.

After a bunch of such coups I would expect counter coups and general nastiness to prevail in many places.  Which is to say that even if regions leave the Russian Federation peacefully, it doesn't mean things will be peaceful for long.  As I said, we are still seeing bloody conflicts between regions that separated peacefully in 1990.

For any of this to happen we need a catalyst event.  Maybe some protests over the probable new mobilization or deploying regular conscripts into Ukraine get mishandled and protestors die.  If that happens in a couple of cities in one region, that's potentially bad enough, but if a few of these incidents happen in several already unhappy regions it could spiral out of control quickly.  Let's remember how fast the Soviet Union went form seemingly in control to utter chaos because of relatively small scale events at just the right time.

Steve

[poesel]

16 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Well Door #2 in all this is much worse.  A Russia in complete free fall is really risky.  We have never had a nuclear power disintegrate below the state-level - the USSR devolved into a bunch of pre-existing states and even then it was touch and go for a bit.

 

What I think is missing is a discussion in the west on how to treat a post-war Russia (one that has retreated from Ukrainian territory).

We should give Russia a perspective on what to expect when they end this war. Then they can evaluate that against continuing the war and make a proper decision.

Currently, the future looks glum with either war and non-war. But sticking with war and Putin is at least a known factor. Thus there is no real revolt in Russia because there is no alternative.

16 hours ago, Fenris said:

Wonder if this is true.  I would really like to see one working under combat conditions

 

This has been verified by the CEO of Rheinmetall a few months ago.

[Centurian52]

22 hours ago, kevinkin said:

Investigative reporting almost always has an agenda.

I don't put a whole lot of stock in mainstream reporting. But I always try to remember Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity". Everyone has preconceptions and bias which may color their analysis if they aren't careful. That isn't the same thing as having an agenda (though I'll admit that some extreme right organizations, like Fox, may have an agenda).

The problem with mainstream reporting isn't that they have an agenda. It's that they aren't very good at their jobs. To be more precise, they are good at their jobs, but the incentive structures of their jobs do not encourage good reporting. One problem is that they are generalists, not specialists. They try to report on every subject, and that means they are almost never specialists in the subject they are reporting on. I am willing to trust ISW's reports so much because I know they specialize in the subject they are reporting on. They get very good at reporting on one subject, and they never attempt to report on subjects that they do not specialize in. So specialization over generalization may be one key to good reporting.

[Centurian52]

20 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

That's the official line, but I think it's more the other way around. If you wanted Kyiv to take a peace offer, they wouldn't have much choice but to accept. At least if the alternative was no more weapons.

This makes the mistake of assuming that there is a single decisionmaker somewhere who could cut off the supply of all weapons. But there isn't. You would have to get every single western country to agree to not send any more weapons (good luck convincing Poland, for example, to stop sending weapons). No one country, even the United States, has the power to force Kyiv to accept any peace deal that they don't want to accept. 

[kevinkin]

42 minutes ago, Centurian52 said:

(though I'll admit that some extreme right organizations, like Fox, may have an agenda).

Same holds true for the left as well. But I am starting read about a new race to the center. Someone probably focus grouped and found the public is tuning out to obvious partisan reporting all over the airwaves. If the public tunes out, ad fees decrease. Not at all sure if that trend will hold up moving into 2024. But there is no way to grow market share if you continue to dish out the same product to the same people. And money is what it's all about. It's even second to trying to convince the electorate to vote one way or the other. I agree it would be best for reporters to stay in their lane. However, when to are commenting on public policy and how it is made, the reporter has to wear many hats. Many readers know how news rooms work and can see through lazy or biased reporting, but many also think Joe Scarborough is the second coming of Thomas Jefferson. 

Edited April 27, 2023 by kevinkin

[Battlefront.com]

35 minutes ago, Centurian52 said:

The problem with mainstream reporting isn't that they have an agenda. It's that they aren't very good at their jobs. To be more precise, they are good at their jobs, but the incentive structures of their jobs do not encourage good reporting. One problem is that they are generalists, not specialists. They try to report on every subject, and that means they are almost never specialists in the subject they are reporting on. I am willing to trust ISW's reports so much because I know they specialize in the subject they are reporting on. They get very good at reporting on one subject, and they never attempt to report on subjects that they do not specialize in. So specialization over generalization may be one key to good reporting.

Fully agree with the last statement.  I generally don't read a lot about the war's military aspects in mainstream media because that is something they are generally quite weak on.  They interview the same old same old people, maybe a few new ones here and there, and let those people do the analysis for them.  That's not ideal because they might not be talking to the right people. 

Case in point is that they relied heavily on the likes of RAND, Kofman, and other long established think tankers and they were definitely not good sources of information before the war and especially the first 6 months that followed.  If they had instead done an "investigative journalist" approach, the people in that group might have found better sources of information.  Especially after the war started and the established ones were so wrong.

That said, there's been some fantastic investigative articles because the publication got the right people in place with budget and time to do it right.  The NYT article documenting the Bucha war crimes might be one of the best pieces of reporting out of this whole war, both in terms of the information they gathered and how they presented it:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/video/russia-ukraine-bucha-massacre-takeaways.html

This sort of reporting is exceptional generally, not to mention within mainstream media specifically.  This sort of thing just doesn't happen by placing a few calls and weaving things together.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

4 minutes ago, kevinkin said:

Same holds true for the left as well. But I am starting read about a new race to the center. Someone probably focus grouped and found the public is tuning out to obvious partisan reporting all over the airwaves. If the public tunes out, ad fees decrease. Not at all sure if that trend will hold up moving into 2024. But there is no way to grow market share if you continue to dish out the same product to the same people. And money is what it's all about. It's even second to trying to convince the electorate to vote one way or the other. I agree it would be best for reporters to stay in their lane. However, when to are commenting on public policy and how it is made, the reporter has to wear many hats. Many readers know how news rooms work and can see through lazy or biased reporting, but many also think Joe Scarborough is the second coming of Thomas Jefferson. 

My long time criticism of right leaning news organizations, like Fox, is that they really don't do much in the way of real journalism and just about no investigative journalism.  They are an entertainment network pretending to be a source of news.  The recent information uncovered by the Dominion lawsuit proves that it wasn't just a hunch, it was a fact that Fox treats its audience as an ATM.  Whatever keeps them happy goes on the air, anything that might make them turn elsewhere doesn't.

Who knows, maybe the mounting costs of being an entertainment industry posing as news will finally get the Murdoch to redirect his companies to do real journalism.  As someone who is middle right on most of the real issues facing this world, I for one would very much like to see that happen.  Until then, the left will go unchallenged in the mass media because they don't seem very eager to argue against themselves.  Go figure

Steve

[Jiggathebauce]

Some interesting constructive criticism of Ukraine's diplomatic approaches outside of it's efforts to the west.  Just started reading it.

 https://commons.com.ua/en/ukrayinska-diplomatiya-na-globalnomu-pivdni/

[sburke]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

Especially after the war started and the established ones were so wrong.

Steve

This is the part that bugs me.  They never ask - so when you said on x date that this was gonna happen and it didn't, what did you get wrong and how has this changed your perspective on how things may be going differently than you would expect? (and why should we believe you now?)

Edited April 27, 2023 by sburke

[Grossman]

2 hours ago, poesel said:

What I think is missing is a discussion in the west on how to treat a post-war Russia (one that has retreated from Ukrainian territory).

We should give Russia a perspective on what to expect when they end this war. Then they can evaluate that against continuing the war and make a proper decision.

Currently, the future looks glum with either war and non-war. But sticking with war and Putin is at least a known factor. Thus there is no real revolt in Russia because there is no alternative.

This has been verified by the CEO of Rheinmetall a few months ago.

There is no future for Putin if he ends the war. His life is dependant on continuing hostilities.  It's up to the hierarchy in Moscow to judge outcomes, and it's up to the people to influence the hierarchy. At what point do they say enough.?

[billbindc]

10 minutes ago, Grossman said:

There is no future for Putin if he ends the war. His life is dependant on continuing hostilities.  It's up to the hierarchy in Moscow to judge outcomes, and it's up to the people to influence the hierarchy. At what point do they say enough.?

I'm less convinced of this now than I was a year ago. Putin has demonstrated an ability to take people like Kadyrov and Prigozhin out of the box and put them back in again. The FSB has quite clearly terrorized elites thoroughly. Russian propaganda outlets are talking about the possibility of losing the war and the sky isn't falling...either in general or on the mouthpieces saying it. So far, the regime isn't showing cracks and there is no overt evidence of any clique successfully jockeying to build an alternative power base. Prigozhin and Kadyrov tried it and failed. 

Putin may *believe* that certainly. But I think this Autumn of the Patriarch ends like the book...with nobody quite believing he's gone until the vultures start gathering at the palace. 

[Battlefront.com]

15 minutes ago, billbindc said:

I'm less convinced of this now than I was a year ago. Putin has demonstrated an ability to take people like Kadyrov and Prigozhin out of the box and put them back in again. The FSB has quite clearly terrorized elites thoroughly. Russian propaganda outlets are talking about the possibility of losing the war and the sky isn't falling...either in general or on the mouthpieces saying it. So far, the regime isn't showing cracks and there is no overt evidence of any clique successfully jockeying to build an alternative power base. Prigozhin and Kadyrov tried it and failed. 

Putin may *believe* that certainly. But I think this Autumn of the Patriarch ends like the book...with nobody quite believing he's gone until the vultures start gathering at the palace. 

Agreed, except that I think we can see cracks.  They just aren't in the people as much as the structure.  The economy, for example, is a significant crack that is getting worse.  Another one is the social contract with the people that life would not slide backwards.  There are also others that we are suspicious that might be there if certain events happen, such as if Crimea is taken a lot of that patriotic good will that Putin received in 2014 might go away.  That sort of thing.

That said, I do agree that Putin has successfully navigated himself out of either a coup or a straight up challenge to his rule.  I think it was touch and go there for a while, but a combination of Russian apathy and dead oligarchs headed things off before they really got rolling.

Steve

[Haiduk]

Next toy for new 37th marines brigade except Oshkoshs and AMX-10RC - 70 mm guided rockets APKWS. This is upgrade of Hydra rokets, equipped by semi-active laser guidance by BAe Systems. Germany handed over 20 pick-ups with APKWS launchers. 

APKWS, being integrated to VAMPIRE complex can be used also as SHORAD - USA claimed supply of these complexes as far as in August, but no one was spotted yet. 

On the video 37th marines brigade uses APKWS to hit a house and optical surveillance equipmnet on the mast. 

 

[Artkin]

Wow, thats some precision.