How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Dave2214]

Interesting counter view:

https://www.19fortyfive.com/2023/09/how-the-russia-ukraine-conflict-could-be-americas-next-forever-war/

"The U.S. is thoughtlessly drifting toward repeating many of the worst mistakes Washington has made in the past half century. We lead with our emotions and support the Ukraine side in its war with Russia — a war that shows no sign of ending soon — yet without the requisite sober and honest analysis of what that support will cost us, what our strategy should be, or what achievable outcome we seek. We merely try to send tranche after tranche of support to Kyiv without any thought to the cumulative effect on our country."

So, there is no plan for victory. Just throw money at the problem. 

[Offshoot]

4 hours ago, Beleg85 said:

However, are we sure that sense of common suffering and bleakness of life is not something desirable if one wages a war? Note that what is a society held by misery (good term, I preferred "community of suffering") in Western terms, can be very effective social glue of entire civilzation, that means if properly channelled and kept just below boiling point; so far Putin is good at the last part, I'll give him that.

Again- apathy and misery are Russian ultimate trump cards, not weaknessess. They can go wild if played wrongly, but so far Putin is pretty skillfully operating on Russian phobias, massive historical traumas, lack of trust to each other and urge for greatness.

Russians even have their own word for it that is not easily translated, toska (тоска). It encompasses more than just misery or melancholy and is considered by some a core part of Russian identity.

[danfrodo]

48 minutes ago, Dave2214 said:

Interesting counter view:

https://www.19fortyfive.com/2023/09/how-the-russia-ukraine-conflict-could-be-americas-next-forever-war/

"The U.S. is thoughtlessly drifting toward repeating many of the worst mistakes Washington has made in the past half century. We lead with our emotions and support the Ukraine side in its war with Russia — a war that shows no sign of ending soon — yet without the requisite sober and honest analysis of what that support will cost us, what our strategy should be, or what achievable outcome we seek. We merely try to send tranche after tranche of support to Kyiv without any thought to the cumulative effect on our country."

So, there is no plan for victory. Just throw money at the problem. 

That's an interesting opinion on what's going on.  Except that we're spending nearly 800 BILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR on our military.  OMG we're going broke because we used ~5% of our already spent money to actually try to do something, militarily, that will help the world be a better place.   What cumulative effect on our country??  This is just utter horses-t.  If we had just stood by & let Putin win in UKR would he then decide to not try to poison all the world's democracies?  Would he not use fossil fuels to extort europe every time he wanted to?  This is tankie nonsense.

We have mountains of gear gathering dust and that's a huge portion of what we've sent.

And just because I am on a rant on this:  How about we turn this around by saying "those that want to freeze the conflict haven't given any thought to the cumulative effect on the world of pulling Putin's *** out of the fire".  Gawd this makes my blood boil.  

Edited September 27, 2023 by danfrodo

[Dave2214]

21 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

That's an interesting opinion on what's going on.  Except that we're spending nearly 800 BILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR on our military.  OMG we're going broke because we used ~5% of our already spent money to actually try to do something, militarily, that will help the world be a better place.   What cumulative effect on our country??  This is just utter horses-t.  If we had just stood by & let Putin win in UKR would he then decide to not try to poison all the world's democracies?  Would he not use fossil fuels to extort europe every time he wanted to?  This is tankie nonsense.

We have mountains of gear gathering dust and that's a huge portion of what we've sent.

danfrodo - 

You can't put thousands and thousands of Ukrainian lives in the context of the DOD budget. That's not right. If we want to win - win. All else is cruel. Crush and win fast.

Thanks for the reply to my post and do get your position. I respect it.  I just have a different view about winning and saving lives in the end compared to the way the US has handled this mess. American can print money, but can't print people and their God given souls. 

Regards,

- David  

[danfrodo]

2 minutes ago, Dave2214 said:

danfrodo - 

You can't put thousands and thousands of Ukrainian lives in the context of the DOD budget. That's not right. If we want to win - win. All else is cruel. Crush and win fast.

Thanks for the reply to my post and do get your position. I respect it.  I just have a different view about winning and saving lives in the end compared to the way the US has handled this mess. American can print money, but can't print people and their God given souls. 

Regards,

- David  

David, I am confused about what you were trying to say here. I went to look at the article, but he doesn't actually say anything useful other than lamenting that helping UKR hurts the military capability of the US.  WTF am I spending money if not for this war, right now.  Then he has this howling pile of speculated bulls-t:

Frankly stated, there is no likely viable path to a military victory for Ukraine. To continue supporting Ukraine “for as long as it takes” is no strategy at all. It is merely continuing, month after month, to send gear, ammunition, and other combat support to Kyiv. Doing so may prevent an outright military defeat for Ukraine, but no matter how much support the U.S. and NATO provide, Kyiv’s troops will almost certainly never drive Russia from its territory. What such support will do, however, is keep the war going, at the cost of sometimes many hundreds of Ukrainian troops daily. 

Why is this true?  Who says Kyiv can't defeat RU forces to the point of getting back the landbridge.  And maybe Luhansk?  he says this like he knows that to be true.  Maybe it's true, maybe it's not, but right now RU looks to be getting weaker while UKR is getting stronger.  

Also, he says meaningless ****e like "need to win" -- WTF does he think everyone is trying to do?  And he assumes we all want endless war just because we've been in long wars in the past.  It's ridiculous.  So we stop sending ammo & gear?  WTF does this clown think will happen then?  That Putin will sue for eternal peace?

[Fenris]

Kevin is that you?

Re the forever war comment I think there's a couple of points that make this quite different to previous interventions.

• Ukraine wants the help it's receiving and wants western partners to be involved.
• This time russia is directly involved and not sitting safely behind a proxy.
• Diminishing russia's ability to be a general pain the *** on the world stage is a big win for everyone (except russia).
• Better to spend treasure than your own servicemen's lives

And those are just the obvious ones.

[Dave2214]

danfrodo - 

I think the point, and I don't necessarily agree with it, is a war of attrition is not in anyone's interest. I posted the link to set up discussion. 

Thanks for the reply. 

Regards

- David

PS what does WTF mean. That's out of my wheelhouse. 

[BigDog944]

22 minutes ago, Dave2214 said:

PS what does WTF mean. That's out of my wheelhouse. 

What The Fsck!

[Dave2214]

Thanks BigDog44.

Last time I said that I was at bat in an playoff game and pitcher threw the ball into my head when in high school. 

Regards

David

PS the coaches used a bit more vulgar terms and I got on base with a walk and scored.

[Battlefront.com]

3 hours ago, billbindc said:

Someone is clearly leaking a particular version of events to media and only some media in the usual country(s) is picking it up. Why? Because that scenario looks quite a bit like a Russian disinformation operation. 

Indeed.  And as such then we should presume the timing is not accidental and is, instead, designed to effect a specific outcome.  The obvious reason to push the "Ukraine did it" is to increase political representation by the various groups that oppose supporting Ukraine ranging from pro-Russians to those simply angry about being denied access to cheap Russian gas.  I'm not well informed about what critical elections in Europe are in the near future, but it is probable that one or more are specifically being targeted.

Assuming this is an FSB/GRU operation.

Steve

[Offshoot]

16 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Indeed.  And as such then we should presume the timing is not accidental and is, instead, designed to effect a specific outcome.  The obvious reason to push the "Ukraine did it" is to increase political representation by the various groups that oppose supporting Ukraine ranging from pro-Russians to those simply angry about being denied access to cheap Russian gas.  I'm not well informed about what critical elections in Europe are in the near future, but it is probable that one or more are specifically being targeted.

Assuming this is an FSB/GRU operation.

Steve

Slovakia on 30th September is a close run race and the result could affect their position on Ukraine.

[Battlefront.com]

2 hours ago, Fenris said:

Kevin is that you?

Yup.  Not too difficult to spot, eh?  He has been banned again because that's how bans work.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

2 minutes ago, Offshoot said:

Slovakia on 30th September is a close run race and the result could affect their position on Ukraine.

I thought of that one, but I think the timing is not optimal as this is the sort of thing that takes a while to build up momentum.  At least that's my take on it.  So either it is an FSB/GRU operation that didn't get its product within the desired timeframe (quite possible as they don't likely directly control the publication process) or it is designed for something else that is a little further down the road.  It could also be more generalized for an entire season's worth of political activity across many countries.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

5 hours ago, Beleg85 said:

Sure they are, and the post was not intended as promoting doom and gloom. Just both Ukraine and West needs to figure out more innovative ways of defeating Russia, that includdes acceptance that their culture is builded on misery/apathy, which is accepted norm of life, even nurished and something they are proud of, not shy of. If we include influence of propaganda, it can be said that their social fabric is going straight into well...necrophilic direction. That embraces absurdity of life and subsequent "easy" death as a value in itself (albeit not in a way that, for example, Japanese in WWII did, who put much more pressure on value of sacrifice and honour- which were marks of increased social cohesion, not decreased like here).

Therefore, killing as many soldiers as it can be done may not be sufficent to knock them off, even if we reach half a milion or so. Problem is that our toolbox is so limited here, compared to Putin's...

And there is the problem in a nutshell.  Killing Russians is one of the few things Ukraine can actively do to liberate its land, but it might not be enough to put an end to the war.  Ukraine seems to understand this better than anybody and they are extremely creative.  If anybody can figure out a way to knock Russia out, it's Ukraine.  Whatever that solution might be, it's hard to imagine that killing loads of Russians won't be a part of it.  Therefore, the focus on killing as many Russians is not misplaced, rather probably essential.

I do think that at some point casualties will cause problems for the Putin regime.  Not necessarily direct or singular, possibly something that contributes to tipping something else over the tipping point.  Economic collapse is the one I've always been holding out hope for.

Still won't settle the long term threat Russia poses for the world, especially Ukraine, but it's a start.

Steve

[cesmonkey]

Is it a drone or a long-range torpedo?
 

 

[danfrodo]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

Yup.  Not too difficult to spot, eh?  He has been banned again because that's how bans work.

Steve

for reals, that was kevinkin??  I was thinking maybe I overreacted but now thinking maybe not.  I think a lot of forum members would read that little article and be really tweaked.  It was a disgusting example of concern-trolling.  And he offered no plan for actual victory.  Saying he wanted victory, then advocated cutting off UKR.  It was like some drunken kevinkin post..... hey.... I wonder if he moonlights as a writer on that website...

[danfrodo]

back to the war.  There's an interesting video here of an RU observation post precision hit by UKR.  Also says RU building new rail lines in the south as backup in case they lose the ones running thru tokmak.  I hope UKR gets within HIMARS or GMLRS range of that line.  Folks keep pointing to the defenses around Tokmak.  but don't need to take it, just need to cut the supply lines.  Then everything has to come over the kerch bridge or by boat.  And yet we hear from 'serious people' that UKR can never take back the landbridge.  But how will RU hold it w seriously disrupted supply lines over the long, cold winter?

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/9/27/2195843/-Ukraine-Update-Russia-is-literally-retrenching-around-Tokmak

 

[Battlefront.com]

49 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

for reals, that was kevinkin??

Yes.  I don't advertise our full range of abilities to sniff out ban duckers or sock puppets, but there is no doubt.  As if the posts themselves weren't enough.

49 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

I was thinking maybe I overreacted but now thinking maybe not.  I think a lot of forum members would read that little article and be really tweaked.  It was a disgusting example of concern-trolling.  And he offered no plan for actual victory.  Saying he wanted victory, then advocated cutting off UKR.  It was like some drunken kevinkin post..... hey.... I wonder if he moonlights as a writer on that website...

The publication, 1945, skews to the right and the think tank the author belongs to appears to be ideologically biased in favor of isolationism.  The article itself is riddled with bad analysis of the sort that comes about when the author has a specific box to put something in regardless of how hard it has to be stuffed.  Comparing US support for Ukraine with Afghanistan and a laundry list of CIVIL wars calls into question the bottom line conclusions.  The core arguments made in favor of cutting off support for Ukraine could be applied to any armed conflict.  Including the US involvement in WW2.  Hell, might as well have surrendered to the Japanese after Pearl Harbor because it should have been clear we would never win, or at least not going to war with Nazi Germany because we couldn't possibly fight two wars at once.

The fact that he has concluded that Russia can not be defeated, without looking at Russia's failures in Afghanistan and Chechnya, is another problem.  Making sweeping and unsupported statements that Ukraine killing Russians and destroying decades worth of its military capacity doesn't make the US and its allies safer is yet another problem.

Bottom line is this article stinks of preexisting and narrow point of view being applied to Ukraine without regard to factors or competing theories.  Round peg fits square hole just fine if you hammer it hard enough approach.

The only thing this author stated that I can agree with is that the US should have a better explained strategy other than providing support for Ukraine.  I don't think anybody who contributes to this thread would disagree with that, at least.

Steve

Edit - PS, it is worth reading opposing views, no matter how flawed.  Over time one can start to see patterns in what is said and, as importantly, what is not said.  It makes it easier to spot bias that may be better hidden than this particular piece.  Understanding the possible bias of an analysis is critical in weighing its value.

[kimbosbread]

So to get back to the war, and Russias’ infomation/propaganda war, how does the West fight back?

• Promote separatism in Dagestan and Chechnya and Buryatia and all those other places Moscow and St. Petersburg look down on.
• Figure out how to drive a wedge between China and Russia. To me, this is the one to go after. Claim China has patrols on Russian land, claim secret Putin agreement to cede part of East Russia to China, claim Biden signed off it, etc. The more outlandish and more varieties the better.
• Figure out how to piss off Iran with Russia. Koran burnings probably wouldn’t work, but there has to be some angle a respectable (ie non US) human intelligence agency can figure out.

It all comes down to the same thing- making a deal with the West is better than ceding territory to China, or Muslims or whatever else middle and upper class Russia fear and hate.

Obviously a deal with Putin probably won’t happen, but we are all patiently waiting for Coup 2.0, right?

[Aragorn2002]

4 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

I thought of that one, but I think the timing is not optimal as this is the sort of thing that takes a while to build up momentum.  At least that's my take on it.  So either it is an FSB/GRU operation that didn't get its product within the desired timeframe (quite possible as they don't likely directly control the publication process) or it is designed for something else that is a little further down the road.  It could also be more generalized for an entire season's worth of political activity across many countries.

Steve

Early general elections are scheduled to be held in the Netherlands on 22 November 2023 to elect the members of the House of Representatives. The Netherlands is just a small country, but not unimportant in the support of Ukraine.

It's also important to mention that the dutch military intelligence HASN'T come to any conclusions. Our intelligence service has a lot of experience with the Russians and their tricks. Journalists only want to bring 'news'. In this case the 'source' is nothing more than speculation and suspect 'evidence'. 

EVEN in the case the Ukrainians would be behind this (which I don't believe for a second, because it could have cost them this war) I'd say; Well done, you saved the West a lot of useless discussion and dangerous temptation.

 

Edited September 28, 2023 by Aragorn2002

[Letter from Prague]

8 hours ago, dan/california said:

Make them criss cross Bangkok five times just to talk to people, and on, and on. 

Based on my experience, the Bangkok Tuk-Tukers are already experts at that.

[Yet]

8 hours ago, Harmon Rabb said:

Germany Stalls Delivery of Long-Range Cruise Missiles to Ukraine (wsj.com)

I know someone else is going to post this eventually so I will just do it.

My main question would be is this decision set in stone or is Scholz waiting for the United States to officially announce ATACMS. Like he waited for the United States to announce sending Abrams tanks.

I would be interested in hearing from our German friends who understand German politics more.

Please no Germany bashing day, I think we have had enough of that here.

 

nah. its logical. 

Schulz heard that Taurus is installed with a beertap and bratwust-cooker and there are real Germans inside.

totally undestandable that Germany wont send them

[poesel]

9 hours ago, Harmon Rabb said:

Germany Stalls Delivery of Long-Range Cruise Missiles to Ukraine (wsj.com)

I know someone else is going to post this eventually so I will just do it.

My main question would be is this decision set in stone or is Scholz waiting for the United States to officially announce ATACMS. Like he waited for the United States to announce sending Abrams tanks.

I would be interested in hearing from our German friends who understand German politics more..

 

(my bold)
The short answer is: probably yes. There are indeed some real reasons to not send Taurus, but in the end it is just stalling.

Bavaria votes in ~2 weeks. Support for Ukraine is NOT a topic in this campaign. All main parties are for it. Still, sending Taurus is a sensitive issue for the voters of the chancellors party. So I guess, he tries to not do anything, at least until this vote is through.

If there was a vote in the parliament to send Taurus, yay would win. But it doesn't work like that. So the decision is not set in stone, it is just delayed. In this regard, the same as in the US.

 

[Seedorf81]

Deleted. Too late, no relevance no more.

Edited September 28, 2023 by Seedorf81

[Butschi]

9 hours ago, Harmon Rabb said:

Germany Stalls Delivery of Long-Range Cruise Missiles to Ukraine (wsj.com)

I know someone else is going to post this eventually so I will just do it.

My main question would be is this decision set in stone or is Scholz waiting for the United States to officially announce ATACMS. Like he waited for the United States to announce sending Abrams tanks.

I would be interested in hearing from our German friends who understand German politics more.

Please no Germany bashing day, I think we have had enough of that here.

 

Waiting for ATACMS is probably one thing. The other may be a legal issue. Apparently German technicians would have to be send to Ukraine, not for maintaining (alone) but for actually programming the coordinates. (Don't know why it of that is actually true) this is somehow different than with e.g. storm shadows.

That would indeed make Germany a more or less direct participant in the war. Which (apart from all the the other ramifications) is a thing Scholz can't decide alone.