How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[dan/california]

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/early-bird-brief/id1644772953?i=1000633614797

If you feel the neeed to have your blood pressure go up by twenty points, forty five minutes of pro Vlad weasel words from this excuse for Republican Congressman will do the job just fine.

[Lethaface]

7 hours ago, The_Capt said:

I don’t think it is nearly as cut and dry as the average person thinks.  There are upsides to a stalemate at this point.  To be totally brutal an endstate where both sides can claim victory (and defeat) often makes for the best outcome.  Ukraine is still a free nation, our support ensured they stood up against an illegal invasion and largely repelled it when there should have been no chance of that success.  

Russia and Putin can claim victory as they took an additional 7% of Ukraine at an eye-watering cost.  But this will likely keep ol Flat Face in power for a few more years before Time does its thing for us all.  This avoids a Russian free fall experience, and we get the added bonus of Europe buying our oil and gas (or alternatives) while we righteously continue to isolate Russia -this is why it won’t matter who is in the White House post-war. 

A lose-lose starts to look like a win-win.  US administration can point to all the upsides going into ‘24, plus we are looking at Armageddon in the Middle East which keeps the Bible Belt focused elsewhere.  We hopefully do a whole bunch of reconstruction in Ukraine and go all South Korea on the place.  Russia continues as downward spiral but slowly enough they don’t start WW3.  And we can all focus on China as the next big threat worthy of trillions in defence spending on bloated military capabilities that probably won’t work.

So you see, a stalemate is not the end of the world.  In fact I would not be surprised if in some circles they are kinda pushing for it.  The total and utter crushing of Russia has some serious risks.  This outcome sidesteps a lot of them.  Now everyone is both happy and unhappy.  Sometimes no decision is the best decision.

I for one am not convinced we are there yet, but we definitely can see it from here.

Plus Ukraine can, at least theoretically, also do 'cease fire' / 'frozen conflict' type of games. Rogue entities could still make Russian occupation feel like Iraq on steroids while officially blaming Russia or at least denying any involvement. From some perspectives that would be more difficult for Ukraine than for Russia, but why should they play into the Russian game as long as they aren't inside NATO or EU?

[Lethaface]

Besides Zalushny's statement has probably more intents outside of what is in the statement, than inside. After all it is coming from a General directly involved in a hot war. He isn't writing op-eds for a career opportunity.

[Lethaface]

7 hours ago, Kraft said:

This is not Putins autocrat perspective.

He wants to restore a great empire and make history books, costs are calculated differently

Putin does not care about a few hundred thousand dead convicts, immigrants, muslims, whatever

Economic damage is only an issue if it reaches a nations breaking point. Look at conditions in Venezuela, absolutely abysmal, child death rates are at 25% due to starvation etc etc etc - where is the regime change? - it will take far far more until apathetic russians will roam the streets demanding change, they are content with a bag of Potatoes for a dead son, after all.

When he feels weekness due to instability, or other autocrats occupying the mind of the west, this will all start again, maybe in Ukraine, maybe someplace else and it signals exactly this to China, sacrifice a few peasents and get to paint the map.

This is already a confrontation between the West and East and just like when the soviet union keeled over, the first thing the west wants to do is to get back to business as usual, as if Putin will just Accept Minsk3 and will behave like a dog in his corner, this kind of irrelevance to the world fueled his whole empire restoration motives

Venezuela might not have a regime change, but it isn't doing 'good' from whatever pov. So not sure if that is an example others will want to follow.

[chrisl]

2 hours ago, kimbosbread said:

A good amateur cyclist can do 300W sustained per hour. A properly doped up Grand Tour winning cyclist does 500W sustained. A sprinter is doing about 2000W, but over 10-20 seconds only.

Tesla batteries (Panasonic laptop batteries last I checked) are 250WH per kg.

If you can give a soldier for the cost of say 5kg in batteries an extra 50W for 24h, that’s actually a lot of power.

EDIT: This obviously implies 100% efficiency, but even at 50% this is not an insignificant benefit.

And if you've ever given someone a little push to get over a hill while using a power meter, or been pushed, a few tens of watts can make a huge difference in your fatigue and recovery by keeping you from having to go over AT and recover repeatedly.  

[Lethaface]

7 hours ago, akd said:

More views of Oct. 10 Avdiivka assault:

 

These clips you keep posting give me some WW2 east front vibes. 

[akd]

1 hour ago, Beleg85 said:

Clip from Krynki village (Dnieper area).

Entire Russian squad being stopped in their feet and wiped out by what apperas to be Ukrainian snipers or MG's. Later they may be given drone-born grandes

This is probably the drone fragging seen at the end (or a subsequent one). Warning, exploding Russian:

 

[kimbosbread]

10 minutes ago, chrisl said:

And if you've ever given someone a little push to get over a hill while using a power meter, or been pushed, a few tens of watts can make a huge difference in your fatigue and recovery by keeping you from having to go over AT and recover repeatedly.  

Yeah that’s exactly it. We don’t need to go full Mobile Infrantry all in one go, as much as everybody wants that. “Marginal Gains”!

If we can build an exoskeleton or armor that gives soldiers even 25W per hour sustained for 24h, that’ll be an enormous leap forward. And then if you have 1000W on tap for short duration, it adds another dimension to the capability. Given current technology, there’s probably a sweet spot for  system weight vs boost to soldier “power” available.

I don’t think there are any practical problems other than the actuator problem I’ve mentioned a few times. Molded carbon fiber is incredibly light and strong (or even aluminum if you are poor country that can do the 21st century properly), batteries have sufficient energy density, single chip computers have enough power to actuate everything safely so the person inside the armor doesn’t get drawn and quartered by accident etc.

[Lethaface]

3 minutes ago, kimbosbread said:

Yeah that’s exactly it. We don’t need to go full Mobile Infrantry all in one go, as much as everybody wants that. “Marginal Gains”!

If we can build an exoskeleton or armor that gives soldiers even 25W per hour sustained for 24h, that’ll be an enormous leap forward. And then if you have 1000W on tap for short duration, it adds another dimension to the capability. Given current technology, there’s probably a sweet spot for  system weight vs boost to soldier “power” available.

I don’t think there are any practical problems other than the actuator problem I’ve mentioned a few times. Molded carbon fiber is incredibly light and strong (or even aluminum if you are poor country that can do the 21st century properly), batteries have sufficient energy density, single chip computers have enough power to actuate everything safely so the person inside the armor doesn’t get drawn and quartered by accident etc.

There will be many practical problems but indeed 'it could be done today' imo. Obviously not for every soldier, but given that we will probably see more high tech enabled 'SF' type of light infantry utilizing drones/etc, there doesn't need to be funding iot equip every grunt. 

[Lethaface]

If NATO would be smart it would go on a truly 'joined effort' from R&D to deployment & training.

[Kraft]

47 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

Venezuela might not have a regime change, but it isn't doing 'good' from whatever pov. So not sure if that is an example others will want to follow.

The point is that the king still sits on gold even if the peasents starve.

We are also far from that - so what exactly is this "punishment" of economic "isolation" /read this as a trade reduction in russias case, Russia still very happily trades with the rest of the world and vice versa, some companies pulled out, others made great profit there.

All one can argue is that this economic reduction reduces Russias potential to build as many weapons as they could but a) they are maintaining the war good enough, b) judging by North Korea (which is completely isolated vs just the west doing - less trading - not nothing), which still hangs on after half a century and remains a threat to SK and the world.

So how much does this "economic pain" really deter Putin, or other autocrats ? In my view, not at all. 

Edited November 3, 2023 by Kraft

[Harmon Rabb]

Can't say I have ever heard of Colonel Lupanchuk before.

But with how important the use of Special Forces have been to the AFU in this war. I would say this man will have a lot of work to do.

Quote

Source: Zelenskyy in an evening video address on 3 November 

Quote: "Made a replacement in the command staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, appointing Colonel Serhii Lupanchuk as the new commander of the Special Operations Forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

 

This is an experienced officer, a combat officer, the right commander and a person who can give our Special Operations Forces more power. We are expecting new results.

General Viktor Khorenko, who commanded the Special Operations Forces [before this], will continue to carry out special tasks as part of the Main Directorate of Intelligence."

Source: Zelenskyy explains what former Commander Khorenko of Special Operations Forces will do (Pravda.UA)

[Letter from Prague]

Sugar coating might feel nice, but Russia keeping the land bridge is an enormous strategic victory for Russia (even if not a complete one, because Ukraine still exists), and a huge failure of the Western world order.

If we can't even (be bothered to) give Ukraine enough to win - Ukraine who is clearly read and willing to fight and just needs _stuff_ - how can we stand up to China?

Ukraine losing will prove all the people speaking of Western stagnation and decay right.

[Harmon Rabb]

 

[The_Capt]

13 minutes ago, Kraft said:

The point is that the king still sits on gold even if the peasents starve.

We are also far from that - so what exactly is this "punishment" of economic "isolation" /read this as a trade reduction in russias case, Russia still very happily trades with the rest of the world and vice versa, some companies pulled out, others made great profit there.

All one can argue is that this economic reduction reduces Russias potential to build as many weapons as they could but a) they are maintaining the war good enough, b) judging by North Korea (which is completely isolated vs just the west doing - less trading - not nothing), which still hangs on after half a century and remains a threat to SK and the world.

So how much does this "economic pain" really deter Putin, or other autocrats ? In my view, not at all. 

So what does Russia sell?  What sustains this gold throne?  Oil and gas.  The West ain’t buying it anymore and that is going to continue.  So Russia sells to China or India (Iran has their own).  1) all the infra is going West so know they have an eastward problem.  2) China and India are going to guy Russia and undercut profits 3) A lot of expertise ran away and keeps running away. That brain drain is going to really start hurting.

No, the Russian economy does not get away with this all scot free.  Major market shifts are not painless.  Can Russia still do Grey zone crap and play silly buggers, sure…but we already risked managed that for over a decade.  It is going to cost Russia billions, maybe hundreds of billions to rebuild military power after this war.  Will there be oligarchs?  Yup.  Will Putin stay rich?  Yup.  Will Russia be in a position to do Ukraine War 2.0 in the next 10 years…no freakin way.

None of this is “good” but it ain’t all bad either.  The dance will continue but Russia is boxed up and can only do so much.  Our biggest risk is taking our eyes off this ball as we go all scope eye on China.

[dan/california]

 

[dan/california]

We are appproaching the point where drone operators highest priority target is other drone operators.

[The_Capt]

15 minutes ago, Letter from Prague said:

Sugar coating might feel nice, but Russia keeping the land bridge is an enormous strategic victory for Russia (even if not a complete one, because Ukraine still exists), and a huge failure of the Western world order.

If we can't even (be bothered to) give Ukraine enough to win - Ukraine who is clearly read and willing to fight and just needs _stuff_ - how can we stand up to China?

Ukraine losing will prove all the people speaking of Western stagnation and decay right.

Ok, how?  How is it a “major strategic victory”?  How is Russia’s position better than it was before this war if that is all they gained?  Is it decisive?  Does it create strategic options we cannot counter?

It sucks and we all would like it other wise.  But calling it a “major strategic victory” is hyperbole.  I will even buy operational.  Strategic would be half of Ukraine under Russian control and the other half held by a Vichy-esque puppet.  While NATO starts falling apart.

We got Finland and Sweden.  We got political Will for a decade.  We will get the rest of Ukraine.  Russia got a corridor of land which will secure Crimea better but it cost them far more than that was worth.

That corridor is an arbitrary metric.  Right next to “all of Crimea” and “every inch of pre-2014”.  They have sentimental value but in the hard calculations of geopolitics and military gains they do not mean as much as people think.  The West is not going to fall because this war got stuck where it is.  Ukraine is not going to slide back into Russian control.  Hell Russia doesn’t have the forces to exploit that corridor for a long while yet.  And by the time they do I am sure it will be mined and defended to the hilt.

In war there is what you must do. Want to do. And hope to do.  The trick is really understanding which is which.

[dan/california]

Is ritual suicide a an effective propaganda tool? Becuse that is the BEST explanation I have for some of these operations.

[Kraft]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

So what does Russia sell?  What sustains this gold throne?  Oil and gas.  The West ain’t buying it anymore and that is going to continue.  So Russia sells to China or India (Iran has their own).  1) all the infra is going West so know they have an eastward problem.  2) China and India are going to guy Russia and undercut profits 3) A lot of expertise ran away and keeps running away. That brain drain is going to really start hurting.No, the Russian economy does not get away with this all scot free.  Major market shifts are not painless.  Can Russia still do Grey zone crap and play silly buggers, sure…but we already risked managed that for over a decade.  It is going to cost Russia billions, maybe hundreds of billions to rebuild military power after this war.  Will there be oligarchs?  Yup.  Will Putin stay rich?  Yup.

I generally agree with this. Although I think this lack of Infrastructure is not as much an issue, and will be resolved within time. China can tie russia a knot and throw that lifeline, they've sunk enough billions across the world to debt trap contries vital to shipping lines (or buy 25% of German Hamburg harbour infrastructure (still, in 2023), as a funny sidenote)

A little cash to get this useful puppet will not be an issue cheap labor cant fix and the profits for Russia will be lower, but ofc remain high enough to finance Russia just so it can be a continued problem for the West, while also getting a good deal on it.

Quote

 Will Russia be in a position to do Ukraine War 2.0 in the next 10 years…no freakin way.

None of this is “good” but it ain’t all bad either.  The dance will continue but Russia is boxed up and can only do so much.  Our biggest risk is taking our eyes off this ball as we go all scope eye on China.

I disagree, because the same Minsk dance has been done before. Ukraine style operations, they are doing it every day, if the war froze, Russia could start another Avdiivka assault the day after, there is no safety and the paper is worth as much this peace will be written on. All it takes is a little instability, another Donald Trump, EU wide unlucky constalation of Parties, which could potentially deadlock support and this show starts for the 3rd time.

And while the west gets cozy and forgets in the next 10 years, or starts facing climate issues, or has another Donald excourse in international relations management, or needs trillions to deal with China, Russia builds up (2014/16/23 deja vu). So many things that will be more important than the current <5% of defense spending aid given, which already seems like the greatest burden, while UA is in active war for survival. Now imagine how much this will be a budget issue that can be reduced, if there has been "peace" for 5-10 years.

This is the shakiest, "victory" "win" one can claim, which really, is just painting a failure, namely the defeat of the Russian threat. Any kind of negotiations like this are a tumor that will erode stability for the next decades, because the second the ship gets a little tilted, this peace will break.

The "red line" has shifted again

 

Edited November 3, 2023 by Kraft

[sross112]

6 hours ago, Kinophile said:

What the actual f**k... 

Was he getting it to comrades who needed one,  but were dangerous to get to? Or hoping to decapitate a random mobik? 

Pretty sure it is a spoof on one of the Far Cry games where there is a shovel launcher that is ridiculous. 

 

https://farcry.fandom.com/wiki/Shovel_Launcher

 

I remember one of my sons playing that and telling me about it. Made my brain hurt......

 

On a side note, a couple of us brought up the Power Armor a couple thousand pages ago, so glad to see us circling around to it! Now if one of these smart laser/nuclear/quantum physics guys on here could just throw together a Fusion Core to get them ripping that would be great.  

[dan/california]

12 minutes ago, sross112 said:

Pretty sure it is a spoof on one of the Far Cry games where there is a shovel launcher that is ridiculous. 

 

https://farcry.fandom.com/wiki/Shovel_Launcher

 

I remember one of my sons playing that and telling me about it. Made my brain hurt......

 

On a side note, a couple of us brought up the Power Armor a couple thousand pages ago, so glad to see us circling around to it! Now if one of these smart laser/nuclear/quantum physics guys on here could just throw together a Fusion Core to get them ripping that would be great.  

Well that would solve every problem but China instantly, because every other enemy we have would be flat broke. I mean actually starving levels of flat broke in many cases.

Edited November 3, 2023 by dan/california

[Homo_Ferricus]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

No, the Russian economy does not get away with this all scot free.

Of course it doesn't, and yes it will be painful for them. But not terminal and not in a way that precludes significant and destabilizing future Russian menacing of the west. There are plenty of painful economic changes we in the west endure yet somehow we often come out of it stronger. Let's not get sucked into "Russia sucks" beliefs about this. We hooted and scoffed about the ruble collapsing, crippling sanctions, unmaintained planes falling from the sky, freezing of finances and corporate pullouts. And here they are, adapting as hardy humans do.

Quote

It is going to cost Russia billions, maybe hundreds of billions to rebuild military power after this war.

Sure, but they will have the means--they will feel the brain drain and economic difficulties sure, but Russia is populous, resource-rich and has a heavier war industry than most other countries, and has a heavyweight financial sponsor to its east. Say what you will about demographic decline and economic projections; all I said is still true. We all know how anxious the current Ru military leadership is to squander opportunities, but for a country like this on paper, having been evacuated of their old tanks and legacy military equipment is practically an invitation to rebuild according to the new ways of war. The impact of losing 3000 tanks becomes almost a blessing than a curse. Very possible we see some shuffling of leadership to enable such rebuilding in the next 10 years, depending on how things go politically.

Quote

 Ok, how?  How is it a “major strategic victory”?  How is Russia’s position better than it was before this war if that is all they gained?  Is it decisive?  Does it create strategic options we cannot counter?

I don't think history will remember the catastrophic losses and the dead peasants so much as It will remember that Putin looked on a map and said, "That's mine now." And so it was. It's a symbolic victory and a (im)moral victory of strategic significance. Despite the answers to your questions about whatever practical advantages Russia has won and at which cost, I believe the optics of history will above all capture the image of Russia taking what it wants. A strategic corridor no less.

Quote

Strategic would be half of Ukraine under Russian control and the other half held by a Vichy-esque puppet.  While NATO starts falling apart.

That would be a Total Victory, not just a strategic one. As when Hitler conquered France.

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

We got Finland and Sweden.  We got political Will for a decade.  We will get the rest of Ukraine.  Russia got a corridor of land which will secure Crimea better but it cost them far more than that was worth.

That corridor is an arbitrary metric.  Right next to “all of Crimea” and “every inch of pre-2014”.  They have sentimental value but in the hard calculations of geopolitics and military gains they do not mean as much as people think.  The West is not going to fall because this war got stuck where it is.  Ukraine is not going to slide back into Russian control.  Hell Russia doesn’t have the forces to exploit that corridor for a long while yet.  And by the time they do I am sure it will be mined and defended to the hilt.

In war there is what you must do. Want to do. And hope to do.  The trick is really understanding which is which.

I do not have your experience, education or analytical skill. I love reading your posts and thank you for them. This post is a manifestation of my deep wariness of those that keep increasing the tint of their rosy glasses (not saying you are). Hubris comes before the fall and our societies have become fat with it. I can only trust that our institutions are still staffed by talented and committed individuals like yourself, and are refreshing themselves adequately as times change and entropy takes its toll.

I wouldn't say I'm pessimistic, I'd say I'm advocating for sober and serious preparation.

Edited November 3, 2023 by Homo_Ferricus

[danfrodo]

18 minutes ago, Homo_Ferricus said:

I wouldn't say I'm pessimistic, I'd say I'm advocating for sober and serious preparation.

Good points, Homo_Ferricus.  On you last sentence, I am wondering what you are meaning.  Serious preparation for Putin doing more mischief?  Or mental preparation that the conflict might actually be frozen and, like you say, this is what history locks in (Putin takes landbridge)?

I am worried that Putin might get the frozen outcome he wants.  But I am not ready to concede that UKR won't get the landbridge back.  We just don't know. 

Certainly doesn't look good for UKR right now, at end of campaign season that yielded huge RU loses everywhere except territory, and UKR looking like it has no means to get the territory back.  Landbridge is only ~100km wide and UKR only managed ~15km of that.  Not enough to cut Tokmak, not enough to do much of anything.  

My next rose-colored hope is that RU burns through so much men & material in these attacks that UKR can achieve something meaningful over the winter.  (and yes, is rose-colored)

Edited November 3, 2023 by danfrodo

[Battlefront.com]

49 minutes ago, Kraft said:

I generally agree with this. Although I think this lack of Infrastructure is not as much an issue, and will be resolved within time.

I don't agree with this. There are many large problems facing the Russian economy that I see no solution for:

1.  much of its critical industrial capacity is highly dependent upon the West.  Some of it can eventually get replaced by Chinese equivalents, some can not.  The biggest one is oil and gas exploration and exploitation.  They have been relying quite heavily on Western companies in recent years because a) it was a quick way for oligarchs to get rich and b) they are having some of the technological challenges that other petroleum product countries are (i.e. easiest product has been tapped already).  China and India have f'all experience with this and I think Iran doesn't have the same expertise Russia needs (I could be wrong about that).

2.  Russia sunk a LOT of money into Western based infrastructure.  Aircraft, machinery, IT systems, etc.  Probably all of these can be replaced, but that means writing off the current stuff and having to make new investments.  Those either cost money.  Where is the money going to come from?

3.  Russia's export economy was never all that great to begin with, now it's worse than that.  Close to 2/3rds of Russia's exports prior to the war were based on petroleum (I am including fertilizers an industrial chemicals) and about 50% of the value of their exports went to European countries.  To regain economic strength to 2021 levels Russia must now invest in something other then petroleum based economy that have significant marketable value to the developing world.  I say that is IMPOSSIBLE to do.  They would have to spend trillions on something that might only get them billions over a long period of time.

4.  Russia's economy was on the decline even before this war.  They didn't figure out how to fix problems when the magnitude was much smaller, so don't count on them doing an even better job with even more problems now.

5.  The losses suffered in this war for Russia are catastrophic.  They will need to continue rebuilding and that's expensive.  Especially when there's all sorts of strain on the economy even without military spending and the diversion of the workforce away from other things.  It won't be pretty.

6.  There's all kinds of signs that internal discontent is on the rise.  Still wildly low compared to where it should be, but higher than Putin is likely comfortable with.  Exhibit A is his fear of mobilizing again.  The worse the economy gets, the more likely discontent will grow and turn into something more threatening than Magyar's Birds.

7.  Putin's image is as a man who is Making Russia Great Again.  That's going to be a harder and harder sell as things continue to decline (again, they were declining BEFORE the war).  Certainly NATO, the #1 fictitious enemy of Russia, is stronger than it was and Russia's military might has now is obviously inferior.

49 minutes ago, Kraft said:

I disagree, because the same Minsk dance has been done before. Ukraine style operations, they are doing it every day, if the war froze, Russia could start another Avdiivka assault the day after, there is no safety and the paper is worth as much this peace will be written on. All it takes is a little instability, another Donald Trump, EU wide unlucky constalation of Parties, which could potentially deadlock support and this show starts for the 3rd time.

The cost to Russia for maintaining the status quo 2015-2022 was nothing compared to the costs going forward.  The occupation costs alone are going to be staggering even without Ukraine blowing stuff up if Russia decides to go hot again.  I also expect that Ukraine will start blowing stuff up again as soon as they decide the timing is right.  If Russia tries another Avdiivka again, Russia will lose something in return.  Ukraine going forward is NOT the same Ukraine as 2015-2021.

Steve