How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Bulletpoint]

1 hour ago, kraze said:

Except they aren't requesting the same from Russia.

Of course they are.

"Russia should stop using antipersonnel landmines due to their indiscriminate nature, investigate their forces' use of them, and join the Mine Ban Treaty, Human Rights Watch said."

https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/01/31/ukraine-banned-landmines-harm-civilians

 

But of course they don't expect anything sensible from Russia. They expect it from Ukraine.

[Bulletpoint]

Regarding Ukraine and AP mines, the annual meeting of the parties to the Ottawa Convention has just concluded.

This from a newsletter I just received a couple of days ago:

“Ukraine is a reliable member of the international community and fully committed to the implementation of all international obligations including to the non-use of anti-personnel mines as a means of warfare”. Ukraine further added that even while exercising its right to self-defence, Ukraine has not sought to use this prohibited weapon. “We remain fully committed to the principles of the Ottawa Convention, to the letter and spirit of the Convention,” concluded the delegation.

So while Ukrainian troops might have used AP mines, the official Ukrainian position is still that they do not want to use those things.

That might change, of course, but it's worth keeping in mind that the mine ban convention is completely voluntary.

 

Edited June 30, 2023 by Bulletpoint

[chuckdyke]

If you make something illegal they soon innovate in the field. 

[pintere]

1 hour ago, Bulletpoint said:

While it's still too early to declare the Ukrainian counteroffensive a failure, it's definitely not progressing much so far.

At what point in time will we be able to properly evaluate the Ukrainian counteroffensive? Start of Autumn?

I’d say that if the Ukrainians still haven’t achieved a breakthrough by September, then we can say the counteroffensive probably fell short of its main objective.

[billbindc]

16 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

More evidence that we're seeing a larger turf war between FSB and MoD underway.  Prig was probably just the opening salvo.  There's more to come, I suspect:

Steve

Sushko is a fabricator. Avoid. 

[Seedorf81]

1 hour ago, Butschi said:

That's not a very fitting comparison, though. To make it semi-valid you would have to tell it like so: The house is burning with people still inside. There are no firefighters, the people inside fight the fire themselves. They are using extinguishers which contain a substance that is cheap and somewhat effective but harms people even years after (not only those in the house right now but also the people who are going to buy the house in 20 years). Years ago, they had protested against the use of such extinguishers and vowed never to use them even if their house was burning. Now the neighbors come over and point out that they had vowed not to use them and that there are other extinguishers that don't cause such problems.

Still not a perfect comparison but way more fitting.

Not entirely though.

They would be using ALL KINDS of extinguishers (Explosives, tanks, bombs, missiles, rockets, bullets, grenades and the lot) that also do damage to the house and the people. But somehow it's only the "cheap one" as you described it, that triggers comments.

 

 

[Butschi]

27 minutes ago, Seedorf81 said:

Not entirely though.

They would be using ALL KINDS of extinguishers (Explosives, tanks, bombs, missiles, rockets, bullets, grenades and the lot) that also do damage to the house and the people. But somehow it's only the "cheap one" as you described it, that triggers comments.

 

 

Well, the relevant point is: They themselves signed a treaty not to use AP mines. They never agreed not  to use explosives, tanks, bombs, missiles, rockets, bullets, grenades and the lot, so of course that doesn't trigger comments.

Look, I'm not judging Ukraine. I'm just saying that it is also non-sensical to call out HRW for criticizing Ukraine for using a type of weapon during a war that is banned by a treaty Ukraine signed voluntarily, and when said weapon is really only usable during a war (I mean, for what other purpose would you use AP mines? Keeping the neighbors' dog from peeing on your lawn?!)

Edited June 30, 2023 by Butschi

[cesmonkey]

Some twitter debate on the subject of DPICM:

 

[cesmonkey]

In a long post, the telegrammer Two Majors defends to his readers why they provide such detailed information on Russia's failures thus far to recapture the Antonovsky bridge. In summary, they feel they are making an important contribution by communicating what needs to be done according to the troops on the ground to some upper-level commander that will listen while those troops are currently suffering.

https://t.me/dva_majors/19842
 

Quote

The purpose of the publication is to convey the opinion "from the ground" to those very senior officers for the most complete assessment of the situation and making the right decisions.

 

[cesmonkey]

 

[benpark]

As of this morning (apparently) Twitter links will no longer open for those of us that will not be signing up for it, so please add a synopsis if the only information linked is their truncated format.

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, billbindc said:

Sushko is a fabricator. Avoid. 

Yeah, second reminder   I forgot about this guy and one of my trusted Twitter guys reposted it on his feed.  I tend to use that as my main filter, but it doesn't always work.

Steve

[Bulletpoint]

1 hour ago, pintere said:

I’d say that if the Ukrainians still haven’t achieved a breakthrough by September, then we can say the counteroffensive probably fell short of its main objective.

How big would that breakthrough need to be in order to say the offensive succeded? Of course we don't know what the Ukrainian command considers their objective for this counteroffensive, but how much would it take to be seen as a success for the Ukrainian public and from the allies?

Probably there are many different takes on this. My view is that they would need to reach the sea. It would not be enough to take the first defensive line and also recapture what's left of Bakhmut.

Another way of seeing it is that they need to retake enough land and do enough damage to cause meaningful political change in Russia. But I think reaching the sea is more likely.

[Bearstronaut]

17 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Of course we don't know what the Ukrainian command considers their objective for this counteroffensive, but how much would it take to be seen as a success for the Ukrainian public and from the allies?

Yes we do. It's quite obvious from where the major attacks are that the Ukrainian goal is to reach the Sea of Azov and cut Russian GLOCs to Crimea.

[cesmonkey]

Update from Rybar on that bridge:

 

[kimbosbread]

Excellent, Russia is worried about the river crossing. How many of the maining reserves will now get pulled over there? Or will they use more precious assets like Iskanders and remaining jets/helos?

[Yet]

sorry Ukr, but whats the power of a treaty if its so easily dismissed. imo the officers who ordered the APmines should be redirected to mine cleaning operations and clean at least 10x the mines they ordered to be placed or to be send to The Hague. 

RU didnt sign the Treaty, but The Hague will expect them for a lot of other reasons.

Edited June 30, 2023 by Yet

[dan/california]

6 hours ago, Seedorf81 said:

"Human Rights Watch urges Ukraine to stop using AP mines (as promised).

I don't like war, I don't like this killing and slaughtering and suffering, and I don't like the use of mines. Period.

But are these Human Rights Watch-people insane???

Asking this NOW? In a full-blown existential war???

How ignorant and naive can you be?

 

 

18 minutes ago, Yet said:

sorry Ukr, but whats the power of a treaty if its so easily dismissed. imo the officers who ordered the APmines should be redirected to mine cleaning operations and clean at least 10x the mines they ordered to be send to The Hague. 

RU didnt sign the Treaty, but The Hague will expect them for a lot of other reasons.

If we want the Ukrainians to be able to afford to make these little distinctions in how to kill Russians, all we have to do is commit NATO's air forces to this war. It will be over in three days, and we can all feel really good that the the Russians died burning in their own diesel instead of something incendiary we dropped. In the absence of that, Ukraine is fighting an existential war where losing means the some combination of rape, torture, a train ride to the a Siberian gulag, and outright murder of essentially the entire country. That is a proven fact, the Russians have made it VERY clear.

Furthermore the sheer quantity of ordinance, whether mines or forty year old artillery shells with a 25% dud rate, used in the parts of Ukraine that have been fought over are already far past the point making vast areas unlivable, and unusable. Either the engineers come up with a better way to do de-mining or it is already a problem. 

Edited June 30, 2023 by dan/california

[fireship4]

21 minutes ago, Yet said:

imo the officers who ordered the APmines should be redirected to mine cleaning operations and clean at least 10x the mines they ordered to be placed or to be send to The Hague. 

Er, I don't think you get sent to the Hague for breaking a voluntary treaty.

[dan/california]

1 hour ago, Bulletpoint said:

How big would that breakthrough need to be in order to say the offensive succeded? Of course we don't know what the Ukrainian command considers their objective for this counteroffensive, but how much would it take to be seen as a success for the Ukrainian public and from the allies?

Probably there are many different takes on this. My view is that they would need to reach the sea. It would not be enough to take the first defensive line and also recapture what's left of Bakhmut.

Another way of seeing it is that they need to retake enough land and do enough damage to cause meaningful political change in Russia. But I think reaching the sea is more likely.

I generally agree, but until the weather ends the summer fighting season, the single biggest metric is which side has had to commit more of its reserves. As long as 75% or more of the units Ukraine has held back for the offensive are uncommitted we just don't know much. As Wagner has just proven, you can go a VERY long way, very quickly, when the fight goes out f the other side.

[dan/california]

I think we know the Balts opinion on getting Ukraine in NATO soonest.

[Yet]

6 minutes ago, fireship4 said:

Er, I don't think you get sent to the Hague for breaking a voluntary treaty.

noop, thats why i said imo ;). 

Though i am afraid nothing whatsoever is going to be done. Ukr itself should make clear that this was a mistake and they will fix it. 

 

cleaning up 10x what you place sounds like a good start no?

Edited June 30, 2023 by Yet

[Bearstronaut]

6 minutes ago, Yet said:

noop, thats why i said imo ;). 

Though i am afraid nothing whatsoever is going to be done. Ukr itself should make clear that this was a mistake and they will fix it. 

 

cleaning up 10x what you place sounds like a good start no?

They are mining their own country. Obviously they will try to demine the countryside after the war ends.

[Yet]

4 minutes ago, Bearstronaut said:

They are mining their own country. Obviously they will try to demine the countryside after the war ends.

ofc, but you miss the point. 

1. make a statement

2. stop placing the mines

3. make the individuals who ordered them to be placed responsible for cleaning. 

[Bearstronaut]

1 minute ago, Yet said:

ofc, but you miss the point. 

1. make a statement

2. stop placing the mines

3. make the individuals who ordered them to be placed responsible for cleaning. 

How does this help Ukraine win the war? That is their only concern right now.