How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[akd]

Terra Unit gets into the (very) close air support business for 3rd Separate Assault Brigade (cont. from previous video):

 

[The_MonkeyKing]

 

[The_MonkeyKing]

33 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

It is a non-sensical dictum.  No war ends until all sides decides it is over.  The Gulf War, the winners had enough and no longer advanced.   WW 1 Germany, the winning side did not pursue total unconditional victory, leaving clear communications of defeat on the table, and a lot has been written about how that was a strategic mistake.  WW2 the Allies kept going to the point that the losing side was pretty much entirely out of options - pretty much how indigenous resistance went in NA.

To say "the loser decides" is looking at one side of the coin to fit a narrative, not objective analysis and assessment. 

All sides have to agree to stop the war or it continues, war is a co-dependent system - to try and frame this as "loser decides + Russia is losing = Russia decides" is to over inflate Russian power and agency and denude our own - a trend some western pundits have had pretty much since the beginning of this thing.  This whole "Russian's have all the initiative" nonsense, is garbage analysis and has not borne out accurate assessments of how this war has progressed pretty consistently.

I think it is more about the winner decides first that it is over, after this the loser has to come to terms with the situation

[womble]

10 minutes ago, The_MonkeyKing said:

I think it is more about the winner decides first that it is over, after this the loser has to come to terms with the situation

I think you're getting carts and draft animals in the wrong order.

One side (let's say it's the one that's on top at the given point) sets out its conditions for ending the war. If the other side accepts those conditions, and complies with them, the war will end (so long as the condition-setting side doesn't move the goalposts).

So it's a bilateral process. The "winner" decides what the end of the war looks like. The "loser" decides if they're going to let that be the case.

In between, there's lots of what The Cpt calls "negotiation", and conditions for ending might be adapted. The conditions might be changed by actual discussion with words, as well. At the moment, the UKR claim (and I think I believe them, largely) that the war can't end until all their territory has been returned. I don't know what explicit demands regarding reparations and repatriations they've set out, but those are largely going to have to be enforced not by UKR, but by the international community and sanctions, rather than UKR force of arms. So that's one decision of the two. It's up to RUS whether they'll stop at that point. If UKR is restored to its pre-Putin borders, but RUS continues to harass with missile strikes and threaten maritime communications, the war isn't over.

Similarly, RUS can't just decide the war is over now, claim "Okay, you win, you kicked us back past the Dnepr" and expect the UKR to stop kicking their military's ***. Even if they pulled back to their pre-22 positions, that's no guarantee that the UKR would stop, so nothing would be decided.

[danfrodo]

1 hour ago, The_MonkeyKing said:

WW1 Germany got to decide when to call it quits, the entente was absolute in its demands. One of the best examples of the loser choosing when the war ends.

Germany's civilian population was starving and its army was going to have to retreat, probably all the way back to germany, after the failure of its final offensive.  So it 'decided' to quit because it was basically beaten.

55 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

WW 1 Germany, the winning side did not pursue total unconditional victory, leaving clear communications of defeat on the table, and a lot has been written about how that was a strategic mistake

But this was also a really good thing.  Letting Germany just go home.  If France et al had tried to invade & occupy germany it would've been very ugly, maybe mutinous for France.  This strategic mistake was only a mistake because of the terms the allies later forced onto germany.  Note that germany forced Russia into the treaty of brest-litovsk just a year before that was way worse than versailles.  Also, german plans for terms for France and friends following victory in the west were much worse than Versailles.  But it still stands that versailles was foolish, despite germany wanting to do much worse had it won.

[kevinkin]

https://wavellroom.com/2022/02/23/rise-of-the-rocket-launcher/

https://wavellroom.com/2023/04/26/rise-of-the-rocket-launcher-2/

Follow up to the original article publish as the war began. May go a bit overboard leaning on deep fires as the be all end all. However, some armies might what to organize around the rocket division as an efficient way to project firepower. 

[dan/california]

7 hours ago, JonS said:

Heh

I once dug a pit down through a rabbit warren, lots of kyoot kittens to deal with after that.

But the worst was digging in at the training area near Singleton, in NSW. The whole area is an iron pan, so it's tink-tink-tink for hours, moving about a teaspoon of dirt at a time. Then, come dawn, we found we'd dug down through a nest of now very angry inchies. Giving up on that spot we moved a few metres away and tink-tink-tinked our way down again, this time through a nest of fire ants.

**** Australia.

I would argue for a tactical repositioning, ideally one that inspired the enemy to occupy those exact spots. 

[danfrodo]

1 hour ago, akd said:

Terra Unit gets into the (very) close air support business for 3rd Separate Assault Brigade (cont. from previous video):

 

And they don't surrender.  Alone and under attack, can't have both grenade & rifle active so very vulnerable.  what the heck are they thinking???  Raise the white flag and get some good food and shelter.

[Haiduk]

It's claimed UKR MiG-29 launches HARM missile

 

[sburke]

‘Robin Hood’ hacker steals rich Russian crypto funds, gives to poor Ukraine (yahoo.com)

[Haiduk]

32 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

And they don't surrender.  Alone and under attack, can't have both grenade & rifle active so very vulnerable.  what the heck are they thinking???  Raise the white flag and get some good food and shelter.

1. "Russians don't surrender!"

2. Effect of cornered rat

3. "Magic drink" for Wagner's convicts, suppressing feel of fear and danger

Edited April 30, 2023 by Haiduk

[dan/california]

3 hours ago, The_Capt said:

You really can if one is trying to negotiate towards a workable victory.  I think what a lot of pundits are missing is that the West (US in particular) need Russia to lose - just enough.  This drives an incremental approach of slow eroding pressure as opposed to a coherent campaign plan that sees Russia tossed back over the border completely by X date.

As of today and the pending Ukrainian offensive the risk from a western perspective is not Ukraine doing enough, it is doing too much or going too far.  I disagree with the idea that Russia can sustain a 5 year war.  It ignores the main principle of corrosive warfare which is eroding an opponents operational system faster and better than they can repair it.  Russian forces would need a serious inject of external support to shore up its failing system.  So unless China steps in and gets really serious about reestablishing a level of symmetry, Russian is on the wrong end of a devolution curve.  

In the 21st century one cannot simply stuff ill-trained and I’ll-supported troops in holes and hold ground.  Not if your LOCs remain in clear view and actionable ranges.  Your armor is blunted, your AirPower denied and your guns are wearing out.  We are about to see how well a conventional defence hold up under these conditions and my bet is “not well”.

The risk of Ukraine over-reach is not small.  It could create shock and panic at political levels in Russia, and those conditions are when major mistakes start being made. This entire thing has hallmarks of threading a pretty tricky strategic needle.  It may feel good to see ATACMS hammering everything in depth but it could lead to an uncontrollable Russian collapse, which we have discussed at length, and clearly regardless of our opinions this is a serious concern to those in political leadership in the West.

To summarize - slow motion collapse with off-ramps = good.  Uncontrolled collapse in a suicidal game of chicken = bad.  The strategy we are seeing is aligned with the first one.

The_Capt’s second axiom - “strategy must not only encompass a theory of one’s own victory, it must also encompass a theory of an opponents defeat.”

Just to poke at both sides of the coin a little bit. We can adjust the horsepower of the side we are sponsoring all we want, but if the other side breaks a crank and spreads its motor all over the track little tiny pieces they are still going to lose spectacularly. At the other end a lot of the Western support for Ukraine is squishy and impatient, I am just not sure the political side can tolerate this level of strategic patience. Doubly so since influence operations in Western countries still seem to one of the few areas of minimal Russian competence. 

 

30 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

And they don't surrender.  Alone and under attack, can't have both grenade & rifle active so very vulnerable.  what the heck are they thinking???  Raise the white flag and get some good food and shelter.

Prigozhin's cool aid is disturbingly effective. It also can't be pointed out too often that an IFV with a 40mm grenade launcher, and a drone to observe the fire would speed up trench clearing by a LOT.

[sburke]

Fire breaks out in sanctioned Russia's factory manufacturing MLRS (yahoo.com)

[Haiduk]

14 hours ago, Kinophile said:

"The end." lol. 

So who was this guy,  a local? And why was he paddling with his hands? 

BTW, when you write "As if"  I think you might actually need to be writing, "It seems that". 

Maybe local collaborationist, serviceman of local volunteer battalion. Maybe Russian. It's unclear from TG post. 

When I write "as if" I mean "allegedly", reposting personal opinion of writer which reflects just his point of view, but it can't be proved. "It'seem that", as for me, I should use, when I guess something from MY point of view and opinion. Isn't it? )   

Edited April 30, 2023 by Haiduk

[Haiduk]

11 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

First footage I've seen of Marders training in Ukraine.  Haiduk, do you recognize the unit patch seen at the end?

80th air-assault brigade. Part of them now somewhere in Bakhmut area (but some SW from city). But this Marder battalion probably on training aboard. 

Edited April 30, 2023 by Haiduk

[kevinkin]

 Question: why do many UA units use "Separate" in the title? Is there a history behind this perhaps in how they are recruited?

 

[Haiduk]

11 minutes ago, kevinkin said:

 Question: why do many UA units use "Separate" in the title? Is there a history behind this perhaps in how they are recruited?

 

Not only Ukrainian. Russian too. Brigade structure implies bigger level of autonomous actions than regiments, forming a divisions. 

So, all Ukrainan and Russian brigades have "separate" in own titles. In Ukraine they subordinated directly to Operative Comamnds. In Russia - directly to Armies HQs. 

Edited April 30, 2023 by Haiduk

[Haiduk]

Russians have found T-64A somewhere and bring them to fromt. I suppose, they will go to LDPR units - they had small number of these tanks recently along with T-64B/BV. Interesting, in what conditions these tanks... Russian stocks of combat ready or repairable in short time T-64B/BV weren't enough large - so, they couldn't supply LDPR forces with these type only and were forced to give them T-72. Military Balance data for 2017 gives 2000 stored T-64 of all types, but I think 80-90 % of them is scrap metal. 

Ukraine also had hundreds of T-64A and T-64R (T-64 upgraded to T-64A), but most of them had the same conditions that in Russia. Though, several T-64A were spotted in the role of mine plougs (main gun was removed)

  

 

[danfrodo]

I just realized there's an added benefit to this war ending (w UKR victory, of course): all the history books start to get written and we'll get some insight into what is actually going on.   A war where 60+ yr old tanks are dragged out of storage and sent to fight in a war w modern high tech like drones, satellites, guided missiles.  Crazy. 

Prighozin stuff in this summary.  Threatening to retreat from Bakhmut if he doesn't get ammo.  Plus the split command structure where each front commander only cares about his own area.  Just what is needed to inhibit a coordinated defense.  It would be great to have RU's own command create heavy friction leading to reinforcements arriving too piecemeal and too late, plus refusal to send one's own ammo to a sector running out of shells.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/4/30/2166734/-Ukraine-Update-Wagner-mercenary-chief-Prigozhin-Russia-is-on-the-brink-of-catastrophe

 

[Kinophile]

2 hours ago, Haiduk said:

Maybe local collaborationist, serviceman of local volunteer battalion. Maybe Russian. It's unclear from TG post. 

When I write "as if" I mean "allegedly", reposting personal opinion of writer which reflects just his point of view, but it can't be proved. "It'seem that", as for me, I should use, when I guess something from MY point of view and opinion. Isn't it? )   

Correct! Allegedly or Supposedly work.  Allegedly would be from a report or source, and you'd use Supposedly if you had doubts about the source or the info. 

So I guess Allegedly is your best bet. 

[NamEndedAllen]

7 hours ago, The_MonkeyKing said:

Even if Ukraine captures all of its territories back next month, Russia can keep the war up as a cross-border war between two states likely for years. Russia doesn't have to negotiate and is very unlikely to as I see it. It is up to the loser to decide when a war ends. 

I think you are correct but with this caveat. IF/WHEN Ukraine were to recapture ALL its territories, the political context and strategies would change rather dramatically. At this point, the questions of NATO and EU membership become far more central than during the past year. As would the overall questions of what guarantees of Ukraine’s defense would the Western Allies be willing to make? In lieu of a genuine real peace, what is realistic and achievable in the case of two implacable nations staring at each other across their (mostly) international borders while periodically lobbing military strikes at each other? Your scenario, a territorially restored Ukraine is a clear Russian defeat - losing everything they had *before* this invasion. We talk a lot about Russian collapse, but that is only one possibility. In this sort of fragile “warm” stalemate, would NATO membership really be much too much risk of collapsing the Russian regime? Too much chaos?  If so, does the West have enough feasible carrots to convince an enraged, propagandized and mobilized Russia to stand down? No one knows.

Otherwise, I’ve been wondering how much of Russia’s military remains within Russia, especially its ground forces? After seeing the wonderfully detailed posts here of the Russian Order of Battle within Ukraine, and thinking about the numbers of units needed for border security, what’s left? And finally, IF the Russians within Ukraine are severely defeated, reduced and mostly driven back into Russia, apart from the nuclear force what military capability remains on the ground?

[DesertFox]

Pavlohrad. Remains to be confirmed what actually was hit there.

 

 

[Haiduk]

1 hour ago, Kinophile said:

Correct! Allegedly or Supposedly work.  Allegedly would be from a report or source, and you'd use Supposedly if you had doubts about the source or the info. 

So I guess Allegedly is your best bet. 

I just thought form "as if" is more corersponds to our more common equivalent, which means more wide and unpersonalized "allegedly". Because latter, I think, relates to some clear source "according to words of smbd.", when "as if" it's some sort of "rumors/many talks/some opinions talk about something". But maybe "as if" is just rare or obsolete form - I don't know such subtleties ) 

[Haiduk]

15 minutes ago, DesertFox said:

Pavlohrad. Remains to be confirmed what actually was hit there.

 

 

Pavlohrad is important industrial city for defense industry. Chemical and mechanical factories involved in producing of HE, some ammunitions, missile engines etc...

PS. Locals told about 4 hits (other write even 6) almost at the moment of air raid alarm was anounced. Probably one of defense factories was hit, because one explosion was especially huge

 

Edited April 30, 2023 by Haiduk

[Huba]

There is (was…) an ICBM decommissioning facility in Pavlohrad, perhaps that is what was hit. Great PR stunt for RU, but hitting a well known target like that makes more sense than them suddenly getting their ISR right.

 

Edited April 30, 2023 by Huba