How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[dan/california]

 

Quote

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/10/08/reasons-united-states-should-support-ukraine/

Here’s one big reason (among many) for continued U.S. support of Ukraine

 

Editorial from a very conservative guy I usually don't like much fully supporting Ukraine,

[Battlefront.com]

13 hours ago, kimbosbread said:

Note just his voters, unfortunately. Support for Ukraine is decreasing fast on all sides in the US for a variety of reasons.

What can Ukraine do? Militarily, they need to win a big victory. Hopefully there will be a breakthrough, or a river crossing with Zelensky on Christmas or something that will capture the rather short attention of the American people.

This has been the concern of many, including quite a few in this forum, since the start of the war.  Western mindset is wanting to see "victory" as it has been traditionally understood.  Specifically, taking of territory.  This is one reason, I believe, that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were able to last so long by Western standards.  Same with Vietnam.  In those wars the friendly forces were not generally losing ground at all, or if so they were regaining it in short order.  If the ISAF forces were reduces to holding Kabul in 2005 there would have been massive pressure to withdraw, even if casualties and other costs were lower than they were by 2020.  It took a very long time for people to finally understand that you can control all of the territory and still lose the war.

What I believe we're seeing playing out in the West now is a return to the expectations of traditional victory mixed with the reluctance to back a "forever war".  Ukraine is not regaining territory, but it is still engaging in high intensity warfare with no end in sight.  This is not inspiring confidence in the West and therefore they are concerned about "throwing good money after bad".  It is made worse by the pro-Russian/anti-war/isolationist factions of the West loudly pushing alternatives to the war that are pure fantasy.  People like fantasy when reality isn't to their liking. 

What is frustrating is that people see the loss of Afghanistan only from the West's position.  They see that fighting an endless war against a determined opponent defending its home turf produced no gains.  This is akin to Russia, not Ukraine.  Ukraine is more akin to the Taliban winning the war through patient progress over time.  Therefore, according to their own logic they should believe that Russia will lose and Ukraine will win.  Since analytical thought is not a defining characteristic of the masses, it doesn't surprise me that many have adopted completely contradictory positions.

Unfortunately, Ukraine has likely suffered some degree of irreversible loss of confidence because this summer's offensive didn't have spectacular success.  If Ukraine were to get to Tokmak this month many of the people wanting to drop support would still advocate for it.  "Well, they got a little lucky in the end, but it's clear they can't win this".  Had they gotten to Tokmak in June attitudes towards supporting Ukraine would be more favorable for sure.

Steve

[Aragorn2002]

All that talk about stopping or reducing military support for Ukraine is a bloody disgrace. And a war the West can't walk away from. A fight to the death.

[Letter from Prague]

6 hours ago, dan/california said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Precision_Airdrop_System

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Precision_Airdrop_System#/media/File:JPADS_Illustration.png

The USAF aready has a gps guided parachute, it isn't a whole lot of engieering to get the rest of the way if somebody has not already done it. I have doubts about the utility outside of niche applications. A successful surprise attack would be exhibit one, as demonstrated unfortunately.  

Edit: although if the entire thing was plastic with a super low radar signature...

I love how like 70 % of what US recently makes is called Join Precision X. I want Joint Precision Fries with my Joint Precision Burger, thanks.

[Kinophile]

 

[Kinophile]

Infomative. 

 

 

[LongLeftFlank]

4 hours ago, dan/california said:

Editorial from a very conservative guy I usually don't like much fully supporting Ukraine,

LOL, the Catan school of strategy (I embargo your Wheat Port). But if he's onside, great.

[chrisl]

5 hours ago, billbindc said:

If pressed, I would say that any significant effect on Iranian aid to Russia will only come if Hezbollah jumps in with both feet and there's a full bore war in Lebanon. Other than that, the effects are going to be quite limited. I am getting the feeling that there's a not small chance that this changes Israeli attitudes towards the war in Ukraine. When the Gaza incursions are somewhat sorted out, we may see some interesting things.

It's not unheard of for Israel to attack Iranian weapons plants, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if they did so in response to this attack.  So there's some chance that it could reduce availability of Iranian weapons and ammunition for Russia.  Even without a direct attack, transportation could get harder.  So I don't really see any upside for Russia, and some real potential down side.  Particularly since Israel's support to Ukraine has been relatively modest so far.  

[LongLeftFlank]

1 hour ago, Kinophile said:

 

"Tokmak is now closed for Russian logistics"

Does anyone have any idea why this took so long?

Sure, HIMARS range, warhead sizes, etc., but one would think severing these rail lines, again and again, by whatever means available, should have been *top* priority for UA since at least last Sept 2022, knowing they intended to attack this front.

Forcing Ivan to long haul truck in all the materiel, mines, etc. would have placed a further immense strain on them and perhaps made these defences less formidable. And this is not hindsight, I was deeply worried about this at the time.

By the way, the latest Perun summary is essential listening; the density of the minefields is utterly unprecedented in history.

[Caspase]

Here is a relatively short article from Nature(!) about (one person's) life in the trenches:

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-03044-z?utm_source=Live+Audience&utm_campaign=89ae31d005-briefing-dy-20231006&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b27a691814-89ae31d005-51422516

What surprised me is that
a) There was enough free internet access for 'trivial' things such as publishing scientific papers while being in a trench fighting Russians.
b) He is allowed by the Ukrainian Army to go back to the UK (seemingly?) uninjured. I would have assumed that they would rather keep their 'veterans' in the loop while the war is still ongoing.

[chrisl]

26 minutes ago, Caspase said:

Here is a relatively short article from Nature(!) about (one person's) life in the trenches:

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-03044-z?utm_source=Live+Audience&utm_campaign=89ae31d005-briefing-dy-20231006&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b27a691814-89ae31d005-51422516

What surprised me is that
a) There was enough free internet access for 'trivial' things such as publishing scientific papers while being in a trench fighting Russians.
b) He is allowed by the Ukrainian Army to go back to the UK (seemingly?) uninjured. I would have assumed that they would rather keep their 'veterans' in the loop while the war is still ongoing.

Around the middle of the article it says he’s a British national of Ukrainian origin - that’s probably why he could leave.

[The_Capt]

On 10/7/2023 at 8:44 AM, Offshoot said:

So you can use artillery to destroy minefields...it just depends on the density.

 

Wanted to come back to this one.  This is not artillery clearing a minefield.  It is a minefield clearing a minefield.  The mines are too close together and the detonation pressure from one is setting off another.  Clearly the RA is in a “never too many mines” mood.  

[TheVulture]

1 minute ago, The_Capt said:

Wanted to come back to this one.  This is not artillery clearing a minefield.  It is a minefield clearing a minefield.  The mines are too close together and the detonation pressure from one is setting off another.  Clearly the RA is in a “never too many mines” mood.  

Oddly enough,  exactly the sort of thing discussed in the latest Perun video as a problem of over overly-dense minefields 

[The_Capt]

1 minute ago, TheVulture said:

Oddly enough,  exactly the sort of thing discussed in the latest Perun video as a problem of over overly-dense minefields 

Makes the obstacle very vulnerable to explosive breaching.  However I do not think the UA has that capability.  Not sure it would work though as line charge systems can be bulky and highly visible.

Did Perun mention that this appears to be an odd evolution in the concept of force multipliers?  The UA are doing force multiplication via C4ISR and precision.  While Russia is dumping dumb massed minefields everywhere.  The force multipliers are in competition with each other.  Biggest advantage for the UA is that their system can move.  Biggest for RA is that it is very cheap.

[TheVulture]

41 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Makes the obstacle very vulnerable to explosive breaching.  However I do not think the UA has that capability.  Not sure it would work though as line charge systems can be bulky and highly visible.

Did Perun mention that this appears to be an odd evolution in the concept of force multipliers?  The UA are doing force multiplication via C4ISR and precision.  While Russia is dumping dumb massed minefields everywhere.  The force multipliers are in competition with each other.  Biggest advantage for the UA is that their system can move.  Biggest for RA is that it is very cheap.

Yes, there was a section about how Russia's approach to mine laying (bury anything explosive you can find that goes bang when stepped on) is a problem for intelligence. Particularly in the context of 500m deep minefields with massive density not playing nicely with NATO expectations of what is needed to breach (or go around) minefields, and artillery deployed mines redrawing the problem while you are trying to solve it. 

[billbindc]

Fascinating to watch various Russian figures (MPS, GRU fonts, Dugin) jump in with statements that Russia is on Iran/Hamas' side. Strategic idiocy but the demands of the ethnonationalist impulse will out.

 

 

 

[cesmonkey]

 

[The_Capt]

7 minutes ago, cesmonkey said:

 

At this point I am not really trusting either narrative - “Russia did it”, “Ukraine did it”.  The idea Ukraine could somehow ship weapons to Hamas is laughable.  But this could also be a play by Kyiv to pin this whole thing on Russia to garner support.  Yeesh, can’t we just do one war at a time?

[Carolus]

36 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

At this point I am not really trusting either narrative - “Russia did it”, “Ukraine did it”.  The idea Ukraine could somehow ship weapons to Hamas is laughable.  But this could also be a play by Kyiv to pin this whole thing on Russia to garner support.  Yeesh, can’t we just do one war at a time?

Well, it is just one World War / Cold War at a time, and this is all simply part of it.

Yes, I know, there was this discussion about the definition of world war some pages back, but I think what we are seeing is clearly the early stages of a new lukewarm war in which two global blocs try to outdo each other, create chaos, start operations and needlepricks to weaken each other (well, one bloc is. The other bloc, which is us, is mostly bending over and taking the proverbial beating with whatever stick is being chosen this month).

It is the declared goal of China, Russia and Iran to dissolve the "Western bloc" (no remotely comparable position exists in the West). Sure, they are not behind every single negative thing globally (e.g. the Hamas likely acted very independently in Israel), but they will jump on exploiting every opportunity that so happens to present itself to increase its destabilizing effect on those countries who came to the conclusion "maybe genociding people for territory is actually not okay" over the last century - a shaky minority position on the globe and in human history, and it will get smaller.

The Western bloc meanwhile is mostly apathic, selling weapon parts to its own enemies, sharing technology with the enemy, moving its industrial bases to the enemy territory, while allowing foreign propagandists and spies to move freely in the midst of their populations, both in cyberspace and real space.

We are currently losing intentionally and willingly and with seeing eyes, mostly because it allows certain Western oligarchs to continue to make money and because big parts of our populations enjoy the fantasy of "if we just focus on ourselves nothing bad will happen to us" too much.

Ukraine is just ahead of the curve by miles compared to the other Western countries (and yes, at this point I count Ukraine as part of the Western bloc) in understanding this, and thus also tries to grasp for every opportunity which presents itself.

Edited October 9, 2023 by Carolus

[Vanir Ausf B]

4 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

"Tokmak is now closed for Russian logistics"

Does anyone have any idea why this took so long?

Sure, HIMARS range, warhead sizes, etc., but one would think severing these rail lines, again and again, by whatever means available, should have been *top* priority for UA since at least last Sept 2022, knowing they intended to attack this front.

Tokmak probably isn't really closed for Russian logistics. If it were that simple it would have been done months ago, as you alluded to. One of the most pervasive myths in this war is that you can "close" a supply route with indirect fires. That's not how it works. Russian and Ukrainian forces are separated by only a few kilometers in most places yet those forces are resupplied. There is attrition, yes, but plenty gets through.

[Beleg85]

2 hours ago, billbindc said:

Fascinating to watch various Russian figures (MPS, GRU fonts, Dugin) jump in with statements that Russia is on Iran/Hamas' side. Strategic idiocy but the demands of the ethnonationalist impulse will out.

Predictable behaviour; especially given "Eastern mirage" of some more crazy Russian nationalists. Wars in Middle East or Central Asia (including Iran) are important element of Russian imperial psyche, even if they were few and rather marginal from point of view of average muscovite. Ofc. failed Afghanistan invasion excluding.

But officially Kremlin does not support any side and is "concerned", so these are visible blinks toward more radical part of society "you see, we are those proud wild boars rooting under US-dominated order". Nice, warm feeling of being proper empire radiates even more.

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

At this point I am not really trusting either narrative - “Russia did it”, “Ukraine did it”.  The idea Ukraine could somehow ship weapons to Hamas is laughable.  But this could also be a play by Kyiv to pin this whole thing on Russia to garner support.  Yeesh, can’t we just do one war at a time?

Russian social and official media use it as obvious proof that Ukrainian militaries are corrupted to the bone; I wouldn't be surprised if they purposfully shiped weapons captured in Ukraine with this very sole purpose in mind. If WSJ material about Iran planning whole thing in meetings in Lebanon is true (seems very likely) then question if - and when- Kremlin knew will start to pop up.

Edited October 9, 2023 by Beleg85

[Vanir Ausf B]

A good rundown on changes the US Army is making because of lessons learned in Ukraine.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/change-plans-us-army-embraces-110000928.html

• Upgraded artillery. Willing to buy from outside the US.
• A lighter Abrams tank with a smaller logistical footprint. Top attack protection must be increased.
• Tactical operations centers must get smaller, both in size and in electromagnetic signature.
• Remote logistics (tech support, really).
• Lots of SHORAD

 

[LongLeftFlank]

18 minutes ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

Tokmak probably isn't really closed for Russian logistics. If it were that simple it would have been done months ago, as you alluded to. One of the most pervasive myths in this war is that you can "close" a supply route with indirect fires. That's not how it works. Russian and Ukrainian forces are separated by only a few kilometers in most places yet those forces are resupplied. There is attrition, yes, but plenty gets through.

Agreed, but I am specifically talking about rail, not trying to interdict the 'last mile.'

It is simply bizarre to me that the Russians have been able to run steady rail shipments for hundreds of km, parallel to a hostile front since UA reclaimed the initiative last fall.

Millions of landmines and cement barriers, plus sustainment for 3 armies didn't just appear there; it was all carried. Mostly on trains.

If HIMARS couldn't reach, hit the bastards with something else: commandos/partisans on a one-way-trip if you have to. Sacrifice aircraft. Bridges, embankments, locomotives. They fix one, blow it again. Interdiction. That was much of the advantage of forcing Russia to defend this long 'land bridge'.

Can you cut supply off completely? Hell no. Can you substantially reduce the flows by forcing Ivan to run a Red Ball Express from Rostov or Kerch? I don't see why not.

What am I missing other than 'well shucks, they didn't do it, so there must be some reason'? Like what?

[Battlefront.com]

4 hours ago, TheVulture said:

Oddly enough,  exactly the sort of thing discussed in the latest Perun video as a problem of over overly-dense minefields 

Heh... just listened to that this morning and was going to say the same thing!

BTW, shout out to Perun *AGAIN* for an excellent and entertaining (in a geek way, according to my wife) summary of where we are and how we got to be here.

  

3 hours ago, TheVulture said:

Yes, there was a section about how Russia's approach to mine laying (bury anything explosive you can find that goes bang when stepped on) is a problem for intelligence. Particularly in the context of 500m deep minefields with massive density not playing nicely with NATO expectations of what is needed to breach (or go around) minefields, and artillery deployed mines redrawing the problem while you are trying to solve it. 

Perun split this into two subtly different parts of the same problem.  Not only can't you make assumptions in the planning stage, but you can't make them even when you're in the execution stage.  This means you can't pick where to "go around" the densest minefields before you commit engineering resources, but even after you commit you don't really know what you're going to find in terms of depth and density. 

There's really no way to solve for that.  Even the neat-o-mosquito IR drones flying in the late afternoon after a sunny day probably misses a range of types of explosives deployed by Russia.  It also won't detect stacked mines.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, Carolus said:

It is the declared goal of China, Russia and Iran to dissolve the "Western bloc" (no remotely comparable position exists in the West). Sure, they are not behind every single negative thing globally (e.g. the Hamas likely acted very independently in Israel), but they will jump on exploiting every opportunity that so happens to present itself to increase its destabilizing effect on those countries who came to the conclusion "maybe genociding people for territory is actually not okay" over the last century - a shaky minority position on the globe and in human history, and it will get smaller.

We already saw Russia do this with Syria.  The civil war there was not of Russia's making, neither was it done by the West, but it was indirectly part of the struggle between both.  Russia and Iran supported the Syrian regime and the West opposed it, the people who rose against Assad shouted Western slogans and those shooting them down by people with a Russian and Iranian mindset.  But once the civil war started, both sides engaged directly (the West *WAY* less than Russia, of course).  Russia used it to acquire a base, military experience, and Human "bombs" to throw at European border states. 

In this case, however, a third force came into being.  And that is fanatics who believe neither side is really on their side.  In the case of Syria that third side took the form of ISIS.  While Russia and Iran were very happy to have ISIS undoing so much hard Western work in Iraq, ISIS was also undoing and potentially denying Russia and Iran what they wanted.  So it was a three way conflict with one side, the fanatics, being the enemy of the other two.

Steve