How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Bulletpoint]

1 minute ago, DesertFox said:

Haven´t read them all, but @welt has interviewed and quoted the austrian guy:

Ukraine-News ++ Reisner: „Erste Phase der ukrainischen Offensive ist gescheitert“ ++ - WELT

Yeah but they don't write that the counteroffensive has failed, but that in that guy's opinion, the first phase of it has failed.

And then that twitter guy misquotes that in order to stir up a storm against the evil deceitful mainstream media. That we all love to hate. And promote himself as the guy who knows better.

[DesertFox]

5 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Yeah but they don't write that the counteroffensive has failed, but that in that guy's opinion, the first phase of it has failed.

And then that twitter guy misquotes that in order to stir up a storm against the evil deceitful mainstream media. That we all love to hate. And promote himself as the guy who knows better.

Ahh, I see what you mean. Yes, you surely have a point.

[kraze]

17 minutes ago, Letter from Prague said:

I mean we have seen enormous scale terrorism with no reaction. And just today we saw chemical weapons and we might see nuclear before the day is over.

I'm expecting Russians to start nuking residential districts of cities out of spite and I can read in this thread a very well written explanation why doing nothing about it is in fact the best choice.

"we will not stand by idly and watch these horrible warcrimes take place with cities being leveled using nukes - and promise that an international tribunal will eventually bring everyone responsible to justice"

I just hope I'll not see any BS like above while not seeing it because I get to live and not otherwise.

[The_Capt]

15 minutes ago, Letter from Prague said:

I mean we have seen enormous scale terrorism with no reaction. And just today we saw chemical weapons and we might see nuclear before the day is over.

I'm expecting Russians to start nuking residential districts of cities out of spite and I can read in this thread a very well written explanation why doing nothing about it is in fact the best choice.

The two of you have two narratives -

The Russians are savages who will stop at nothing to destroy Ukraine.

And

The West is sitting around and do nothing while the first one happens, and will continue to do so no matter what.

So if these are true…why hasn’t Russia simply used nuclear/chemical/whatever since day 1?  Why is this war even still happening?  Is Ukrainian resolve and resistance an effective deterrence to strategic nuclear strikes?  

If the West is so useless and, clearly ready to let Russia do whatever it wants (and you can come read justifications of this right here on this thread)…why do we even still have this thread?  Russias are genocidal savages who are being deterred from escalation…by what exactly?  Because we certainly know it is not the bumbling western powers.

Of course if this is the case then why are we spending billions to assist Ukraine?  Symbolism? Boredom?

Look, if you guys want to go bask in narratives that call for bloodbaths and holy crusades/WW3 there is a big ol Internet out there that will tell you exactly what you want to hear.  

If you want something that resembles a grown up conversation, stick around. But if you are advocating that we all jump on whatever crazy train that seems to float your boat right now: nope.

What is it gonna take for the West to directly intervene in this war?  You do not want to know.  And frankly this thread won’t matter if that happens because a lot of us will already be dead.

[DesertFox]

This is what is left of three Storm Z platoons:

 

 

[kraze]

3 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

The two of you have two narratives -

The Russians are savages who will stop at nothing to destroy Ukraine.

And

The West is sitting around and do nothing while the first one happens, and will continue to do so no matter what.

So if these are true…why hasn’t Russia simply used nuclear/chemical/whatever since day 1?  Why is this war even still happening?  Is Ukrainian resolve and resistance an effective deterrence to strategic nuclear strikes?  

If the West is so useless and, clearly ready to let Russia do whatever it wants (and you can come read justifications of this right here on this thread)…why do we even still have this thread?  Russias are genocidal savages who are being deterred from escalation…by what exactly?  Because we certainly know it is not the bumbling western powers.

Of course if this is the case then why are we spending billions to assist Ukraine?  Symbolism? Boredom?

Look, if you guys want to go bask in narratives that call for bloodbaths and holy crusades/WW3 there is a big ol Internet out there that will tell you exactly what you want to hear.  

If you want something that resembles a grown up conversation, stick around. But if you are advocating that we all jump on whatever crazy train that seems to float your boat right now: nope.

What is it gonna take for the West to directly intervene in this war?  You do not want to know.  And frankly this thread won’t matter if that happens because a lot of us will already be dead.

Obviously it's not that simple:

See - the West didn't know what would "escalate" too much - first the consensus was that sending any western made weapons bar ATGMs and MANPADS could "escalate" and then, gradually, as the West called russian bluff, first "dumb" arty started pouring in, then "smart" arty started pouring in, then tanks and missiles, now "escalation" sits at planes.

And just like the West didn't know what would "escalate" too much - so did russians. But I think they started playing this "game" too. By gradually calling West's "bluff" more and more. We went from "russians aren't ever doing this" to "russians doing this" in just a few months with Kakhovka dam, itself a "bluff calling", being a logical step in between. With Kakhovka dam russians most likely killed a 5 digit number of people in one night but there was zero reaction. Even less than usual.

So russians didn't use chemical weapons or nuclear terrorism because they didn't know if it will trigger more reaction than they can handle because they certainly would not be able to fight NATO being exhausted in Ukraine. But now they are themselves "escalating". "Two can play that game" and all.

And that's where the "narrative" comes from. More like a bitter, gloomy observation about something out of one's hands.

[dan/california]

Yet another "appeal to the Czar" video. What i can't understand is how these guys can be quite so slow on the uptake. They can try to surrender, they can start shooting at their officers and/or the blocking troops, or they can die of for the great purpose of making the Ukrainians expend a little ammo. There is no third choice. I am not saying any of those choices are particularly good, but they are the ones on offer.

[Letter from Prague]

I'm going to skip the part where asking for more effective support of Ukraine is "calling for a bloodbath / crusade" because I don't see much point in engaging with that kind of misrepresentation. There isn't a day when this thread doesn't say Ukraine would fare much better with more and longer range PGMs or with modern fighter jets or with more tanks and drones and everything, not sure why that would be a crusade all of a sudden.

But then, what was the Western reaction to Russians blowing up the dam and then shooting and shelling people trying to save themselves from the flood?

What will be the reaction once the nuclear power plant goes?

EDIT: we will see in few days / weeks I guess.

Edited July 4, 2023 by Letter from Prague

[DesertFox]

We all know it, well everyone knows it. However now it is formally recognized:

 

 

[kraze]

Just now, DesertFox said:

We all know it, well everyone knows it. However now it is formally recognized:

 

 

Definitely need comments from the head of UN security council about this recognition.

[DesertFox]

6 minutes ago, kraze said:

Definitely need comments from the head of UN security council about this recognition.

It is UK in July and US in August...

Security Council Presidency | United Nations Security Council

[kraze]

10 minutes ago, DesertFox said:

It is UK in July and US in August...

Security Council Presidency | United Nations Security Council

sigh, russians can't just do a coup properly, they also ruin somewhat OK jokes by presiding only a month

well at least we now know a single location on planet Earth where russians follow the international law.

[The_Capt]

7 minutes ago, kraze said:

Obviously it's not that simple:

See - the West didn't know what would "escalate" too much - first the consensus was that sending any western made weapons bar ATGMs and MANPADS could "escalate" and then, gradually, as the West called russian bluff, first "dumb" arty started pouring in, then "smart" arty started pouring in, then tanks and missiles, now "escalation" sits at planes.

And just like the West didn't know what would "escalate" too much - so did russians. But I think they started playing this "game" too. By gradually calling West's "bluff" more and more. We went from "russians aren't ever doing this" to "russians doing this" in just a few months with Kakhovka dam, itself a "bluff calling", being a logical step in between. With Kakhovka dam russians most likely killed a 5 digit number of people in one night but there was zero reaction. Even less than usual.

So russians didn't use chemical weapons or nuclear terrorism because they didn't know if it will trigger more reaction than they can handle because they certainly would not be able to fight NATO being exhausted in Ukraine. But now they are themselves "escalating". "Two can play that game" and all.

And that's where the "narrative" comes from. More like a bitter, gloomy observation about something out of one's hands.

Ah so somewhat more complex…now we are getting somewhere.   So what you are saying is that western deterrence is at risk of failing as Russia continues to prod along red lines.  As we have failed to escalate in the past it shows our hand in not really planning to escalate in the future.

Of course it really did not quite happen that way did it?  We did escalate in scope, scale and effectiveness of capabilities sent to the UA.  Hell you guys got Patriots…only Israel gets Patriots. We know it was viewed as an escalation as Russia came right out and declared it.

Now Russia is definitely playing silly buggers at the dam, and may even have a “soft nuclear incident” as they continue to play footsy with the west - it is kinda on brand.  And we will reply by finally giving the UA ATACMS and other higher end capabilities.  Moreover, I suspect we will get more comfortable with footsy of our own - precise military strikes into Russia itself - will start non-kinetic and go from there.  They have already started with SOF and partisan looking stuff (aside: Russia has also shown its cards on this one as these are “technically” direct attacks on the “motherland” but somehow we are also not in WW3 yet).  We will (and should) get nervous at all this as if we escalate too far we not only risk “the big one” we also risk driving support in Putin’s direction - which is not what it was about a month ago.

As to “narratives”, look I get the sentiment.  I am pretty sure that a younger and idealistic kraze did not join Amnesty International or volunteer for the White Helmets when Russia was doing worse in Syria…and now Ukraine is basically Syria.  But the good news is that unlike Syria, the West actually did get its act together and decided to “do something”.  

Of course I am not sure what you and a few others are expecting to gain by shaming or insulting the West writ large, especially on this thread.  I mean what is your theory of change here?  Do you expect us to riot in the streets?  Write our government and advocate…what exactly?  Do you not see the risk of alienating your biggest supporters?  I get the need to vent, I really do but maybe we aren’t the bad guys here.  The situation is all hell and sh#tty but the way out is going to be slow, no getting past that.

As to consequences for Russia.  Well beyond the obvious daily warcrimes and whatever comes next.  Russia did this: https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/special-resources/preliminary-lessons-russias-unconventional-operations-during-russo-ukrainian-war-february-2022

That is the real dark stuff.  Pre-meditated and planned in egregious detail.  I think normalization with Russia may be a generation away after this.  Which is very good news for Ukraine after this war because it puts you on the “front line of freedom” and that is a good place to be...unlike Syria.

[Sekai]

27 minutes ago, Letter from Prague said:

But then, what was the Western reaction to Russians blowing up the dam and then shooting and shelling people trying to save themselves from the flood?

What will be the reaction once the nuclear power plant goes?

Poland / Romania won't ignore radioactive clouds creeping into their territories. That's the difference, compared to the dam.

[danfrodo]

5 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Of course I am not sure what you and a few others are expecting to gain by shaming or insulting the West writ large, especially on this thread.

I, for one, just vent sometimes about western support.  Western support has been phenomenal overall, but for the counteroffensive it would've been really nice to have more long range precision destruction, like ATACAMS, cluster, etc.  Sure, UKR has a lot of good stuff, but if one is trying to break thru deep defensives w minefields, they need all the corrosion they can get to lessen what is faced trying to breach & advance. 

The sooner UKR gets back its land, the sooner this war ends, so anything that can be done w respect to weapons should've been sent long ago.  Yes, some things off the table, but there's a lot we've held back and it's hurting progress.

On the bright side, we're seeing a lot of anecdotal info about RU formations & resources being severely, perhaps critically attritted.  But is it enough?  Time will tell.

[DesertFox]

We talked about the russian military complex and its production capacity a few pages back. Meanwhile:

 

 

[poesel]

An interesting thing we will never know is what would have happened if the West had supported Ukraine with the same stuff in March '22 as it does in July '23. What kind of reaction would Russia have shown.

Personally, I think the reaction would be the same as it is now - nothing (but talk).

But: this kind of support would not have gone well in the public for fear of a Russian escalation (except for the Baltics & Poland of course). So even if it had made sense militarily, it was a political non-starter.

[poesel]

19 minutes ago, Sekai said:

Poland / Romania won't ignore radioactive clouds creeping into their territories. That's the difference, compared to the dam.

Don't forget Germany: if there is another radioactive cloud from the East drifting here, the country will go nuts (again, if history repeats itself).

[The_Capt]

5 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

I, for one, just vent sometimes about western support.  Western support has been phenomenal overall, but for the counteroffensive it would've been really nice to have more long range precision destruction, like ATACAMS, cluster, etc.  Sure, UKR has a lot of good stuff, but if one is trying to break thru deep defensives w minefields, they need all the corrosion they can get to lessen what is faced trying to breach & advance. 

The sooner UKR gets back its land, the sooner this war ends, so anything that can be done w respect to weapons should've been sent long ago.  Yes, some things off the table, but there's a lot we've held back and it's hurting progress.

On the bright side, we're seeing a lot of anecdotal info about RU formations & resources being severely, perhaps critically attritted.  But is it enough?  Time will tell.

I gotta be honest here, as much as we would have liked the RA front to crack like an eggshell on the first weekend, it was a bit of a dream.  I wanted it too, and frankly given how hard the RA bled over the winter, and the frontages we are talking about, it was not a crazy dream.  But the bastards dug in, mined everything and now are going to have to be ground out, hopefully to a breaking point coming to a theatre near you soon.

I am not sure what, if anything, the West could have provided that they have not given already.  I am not sure anything “new” would have really made a big difference.  Even fighters 12 months ago would likely still be denied airspace.  ATACMS would be nice but no one is on board with UA striking directly into Russia just yet…except the Ukrainians, which we get.  The western failure was more likely failure to stock up and push the basics: ammo and engineer/logistical equipment type stuff - the boring stuff that really does matter.  

I think we are in a “slow is smooth, smooth is fast…when it happens” type of scenario.  Now before we all go doom and gloom we were in the exact same situation last Fall.  The Fall offensive went in at end-Aug and lasted until Nov. When the grandkids watch the war documentaries on this one, remember that was a loooong 3 months.  This offensive likely started in Jun so we may be talking Sep before we know how it really ends.

 No point on turning on each other either, just do what we did last time, strap in and ride it out.

[panzermartin]

14 minutes ago, DesertFox said:

We talked about the russian military complex and its production capacity a few pages back. Meanwhile:

 

 

Just a company of VBIEDs

[kraze]

40 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Ah so somewhat more complex…now we are getting somewhere.   So what you are saying is that western deterrence is at risk of failing as Russia continues to prod along red lines.  As we have failed to escalate in the past it shows our hand in not really planning to escalate in the future.

Of course it really did not quite happen that way did it?  We did escalate in scope, scale and effectiveness of capabilities sent to the UA.  Hell you guys got Patriots…only Israel gets Patriots. We know it was viewed as an escalation as Russia came right out and declared it.

Now Russia is definitely playing silly buggers at the dam, and may even have a “soft nuclear incident” as they continue to play footsy with the west - it is kinda on brand.  And we will reply by finally giving the UA ATACMS and other higher end capabilities.  Moreover, I suspect we will get more comfortable with footsy of our own - precise military strikes into Russia itself - will start non-kinetic and go from there.  They have already started with SOF and partisan looking stuff (aside: Russia has also shown its cards on this one as these are “technically” direct attacks on the “motherland” but somehow we are also not in WW3 yet).  We will (and should) get nervous at all this as if we escalate too far we not only risk “the big one” we also risk driving support in Putin’s direction - which is not what it was about a month ago.

As to “narratives”, look I get the sentiment.  I am pretty sure that a younger and idealistic kraze did not join Amnesty International or volunteer for the White Helmets when Russia was doing worse in Syria…and now Ukraine is basically Syria.  But the good news is that unlike Syria, the West actually did get its act together and decided to “do something”.  

Of course I am not sure what you and a few others are expecting to gain by shaming or insulting the West writ large, especially on this thread.  I mean what is your theory of change here?  Do you expect us to riot in the streets?  Write our government and advocate…what exactly?  Do you not see the risk of alienating your biggest supporters?  I get the need to vent, I really do but maybe we aren’t the bad guys here.  The situation is all hell and sh#tty but the way out is going to be slow, no getting past that.

As to consequences for Russia.  Well beyond the obvious daily warcrimes and whatever comes next.  Russia did this: https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/special-resources/preliminary-lessons-russias-unconventional-operations-during-russo-ukrainian-war-february-2022

That is the real dark stuff.  Pre-meditated and planned in egregious detail.  I think normalization with Russia may be a generation away after this.  Which is very good news for Ukraine after this war because it puts you on the “front line of freedom” and that is a good place to be...unlike Syria.

Of course the West escalates. That's what I mentioned. Too slow for my taste as Leos would've been absolutely amazing about a year ago before russians mined our lands to hell and back - but that's my personal opinion. And of course defensive stuff is top notch. Problem is that at some point russians seem to have outpaced this escalation.

Because let's be realistic here and ask ourselves a serious question - if the only deterrent for russians from dropping tactical nukes on Kyiv after much of our crop lands being irradiated for the next few centuries - would be providing us with ATACAMS on a condition we never use them anywhere within a russian territory - how long would it take for a tactical nuke to get from its new shiny launch pad in Belarus to the sky over Kyiv?

As for Syria:

I had no illusions about russians once I started seeing their reaction towards their second invasion of Georgia back in 2008. Syria? I thought Aleppo is a very good indication of what russians will do to our cities once they are able to (after all they already invaded Ukraine at that point).

I just couldn't be too vocal or too idealistic about it because everyone would just look at me and tell me I'm being "russophobic", "hateful" or something. Pretty sure I'd be even quickly banned here if it was 2016 for my opinions about russians - as a bonus. Being right actually sucks.

Edited July 4, 2023 by kraze

[danfrodo]

Whew, dodged a bullet, that was scary -- you know, that moment when it says "The_Capt quoted you....".   I came out relatively unscathed.  And set him up nicely to learn us some learnin'.  

I am not one who thinks F16s would really make things all that much better right now.  But the ability to push those helos farther & farther away from front?  That would pay off.  And, of course, like TheCapt said, more boring engineering stuff.  I jumped on the 'campaign season' bandwagon well before the offensives started, so I figured it would take a while.  I just hate seeing UKR soldiers die.

[akd]

[danfrodo]

3 minutes ago, akd said:

well well well, someone at the front is not getting resupplied for a while.....

[The_Capt]

20 minutes ago, kraze said:

Because let's be realistic here and ask ourselves a serious question - if the only deterrent for russians from dropping tactical nukes on Kyiv after much of our crop lands being irradiated for the next few centuries - would be providing us with ATACAMS on a condition we never use them anywhere within a russian territory - how long would it take for a tactical nuke to get from its new shiny launch pad in Belarus to the sky over Kyiv?

That is not really how it works.  Anything short of nuclear weapons in Ukraine is not going to give strategic deterrence.  Ukraine is waging an epic war right now but no weapons we can give Ukraine are going to deter Russia from the big nasty stuff. 

What is deterring Russia from the use of nuclear weapons on Kyiv is that it would raise our level of uncertainty about Russia as a rational state to a crisis point - the worse thing any revisionist power can do is get the West to get off the couch.  If we are being brutally honest, we in the West would feel very bad about Kyiv on the receiving end of a nuclear device but that is not what would cause the reaction…it would be the uncertainty of nukes in New York or Toronto (well maybe not so much Toronto).

That uncertainty would demand a response, and even Russia does not want to see what that would look like.  We brought them to their knees in a proxy war with a small power that was supposed to fall in a few days.  Do you think that maybe what happens if we really get involved isn’t in the Russian calculus?  I argue that the evidence that they have tied themselves into knots to avoid direct escalation with NATO proves that they are very concerned.

I do not think Russia has outpaced anything.  They are on the freakin defensive right now while managing whatever that freakin thing was a couple weeks ago.  No one serious is talking about Russian victory, we are too concerned with Russian full blown collapse.  They are barely able to conduct coherent anything right now, let alone a game of escalation dominance.  Most of the energy is trying to figure out how to prevent a Russian spiral, up or down because they are a complete hot mess.  

Syria, Georgia, Chechnya, we talked ourselves into a status quo lie, that much is true.  We embraced our certainty to the point that it became a blindfold.  Russia’s biggest mistake, and it is one for the history books, was tearing that blindfold off with this war.