How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[OBJ]

25 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Option 5.  Go defence.  Play into attrition and corrosion.  Hope your opponent breaks before you do.

There is a "Go Under" as was tried in WW1 but I am honestly not sure what that would look like.  "Go around" could include amphib ops via the Black Sea but that is a lot of capability to try and build.

I don't think we in this forum should give up. As many have pointed out primacy cycles from offense to defense. I am pretty sure the world's militaries all get this, and are all working on solutions to restore offensive primacy, doctrinal, technical, organizational.

Our question is how to restore tactical offensive primacy.

Edited December 20, 2023 by OBJ

[billbindc]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

This is where @billbindc comes and tell us it is all going to be ok? Because my civil war warning light just went off like a badger in a rocket suit.

I'm not personally a fan of the Colorado decision for pragmatic political reasons but I think folks need to relax a bit. First off, Trump's trial in DC is going to provide ample evidence of an attempt to overthrow the election (in other words, the government) and the legal reasoning in Colorado is based at least in part on precedents set by Gorsuch. This is not some radical move...in most other political eras it would be uncontroversial. Indeed...it shouldn't be controversial now given that Trump is literally talking about being a dictator if he wins reelection. I would have preferred that they waited later in the cycle. That's all. 

As to civil war...I've heard talk of it for years, have seen the fascists marching down my streets, threatening my neighbors (in one particular instance on 1/5, they told one with a pride flag on his lawn "We will come back for you later."). What I will tell you is that once they actually went after the state...on 1/6...and were ejected from the Capitol they got the absolute crap beaten out of them and have never returned to DC. I think an actual armed insurgency would be the end of them, quickly and decisively. Fort Sumter's never turn out well.

So...not bring it on exactly but I'm not losing sleep over it. 

[The_Capt]

3 minutes ago, billbindc said:

I'm not personally a fan of the Colorado decision for pragmatic political reasons but I think folks need to relax a bit. First off, Trump's trial in DC is going to provide ample evidence of an attempt to overthrow the election (in other words, the government) and the legal reasoning in Colorado is based at least in part on precedents set by Gorsuch. This is not some radical move...in most other political eras it would be uncontroversial. Indeed...it shouldn't be controversial now given that Trump is literally talking about being a dictator if he wins reelection. I would have preferred that they waited later in the cycle. That's all. 

As to civil war...I've heard talk of it for years, have seen the fascists marching down my streets, threatening my neighbors (in one particular instance on 1/5, they told one with a pride flag on his lawn "We will come back for you later."). What I will tell you is that once they actually went after the state...on 1/6...and were ejected from the Capitol they got the absolute crap beaten out of them and have never returned to DC. I think an actual armed insurgency would be the end of them, quickly and decisively. Fort Sumter's never turn out well.

So...not bring it on exactly but I'm not losing sleep over it. 

I guess my concern is what happens if Trump does get elected but a state refuses to recognize it because he was never on their ballot?

Of course if the US actually votes in a guy quoting Mein Kampf in campaign speeches...who then buddies up to Putin who is fighting an illegal "de-nazification" war in Ukraine.  I mean how weird does it need to get?

[billbindc]

2 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I guess my concern is what happens if Trump does get elected but a state refuses to recognize it because he was never on their ballot?

Of course if the US actually votes in a guy quoting Mein Kampf in campaign speeches...who then buddies up to Putin who is fighting an illegal "de-nazification" war in Ukraine.  I mean how weird does it need to get?

Colorado isn't refusing to recognize the election...it is saying that Trump is an insurrectionist by their interpretation of the 14th Amendment so he can't be on their ballot. If he still manages to make it to 270, he still wins. 

And you hit at a point that would, in times where domestic political hegemony was intact (cribbing Gramsci here), be entirely uncontroversial. Nobody seriously doubts that Trump attempted an insurrection. Nobody seriously doubts that he tried to overthrow a duly held election. Nobody seriously doubts that Trump intends to subvert constitutional government if he gets elected again. 

I don't think Colorado's move was the best thing to do politically...but it's not exactly a stretch either.  

[OBJ]

This is an equipment solution that gets us beyond the depth of prepared defenses in a single lift, which I think is what we want. To restore tactical offensive primacy the offensive op-tempo will need to exceed the defenders ability to react in time other than to withdraw. I am not sure a series of 500m hops through the minefields is going to do that.

"Though at first glance it looks like the sort of quadcopter drones used to make videos, the T-600 is about the size of a compact car. It's an electric-powered demonstrator craft that is easily broken down for transport, has a payload of 200 kg (441 lb), top speed of 140 km/h (87 mph) and a range of 80 km (50 miles)."

https://newatlas.com/military/t-600-heavy-lift-drone-anti-sub-torpedo/#:~:text=Though at first glance it,80 km (50 miles).

@The_Capt I am still trying to find/understand EMP anti-drone capabilities and both 'cheap' commercial and military drone EMP resistance. As mentioned a couple pages ago understandable military interest in countering drones, EMP being a serious candidate. 

Edited December 20, 2023 by OBJ

[Battlefront.com]

46 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Option 5.  Go defence.  Play into attrition and corrosion.  Hope your opponent breaks before you do.

There is a "Go Under" as was tried in WW1 but I am honestly not sure what that would look like.  "Go around" could include amphib ops via the Black Sea but that is a lot of capability to try and build.

Yeah, I tried to be pithy   My thinking was "Go home" just meant you stop trying to breach.  Whether you surrender or just sit tight is immaterial to the breaching operation itself since it is effectively cancelled either way.

Steve

[The_Capt]

4 minutes ago, OBJ said:

This gets us beyond the depth of prepared defenses in a single lift, which I think is what we want. To restore tactical offensive primacy the offensive op-tempo will need to exceed the defenders ability to react in time other than to withdraw. I am not sure a series of 500m hops through the minefields is going to do that

So to my mind these would not be "infantry" that would be hopping.  They would be JTA(G)C teams.  If you push them out 1-2kms you can then get human-based C2 nodes to push UAS/UGV further out.  Keep doing that in waves until the Ground Force can breach through and pick up that unmanned cloud for breakout.  This is really a blend of a special and conventional op.

[OBJ]

25 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

So to my mind these would not be "infantry" that would be hopping.  They would be JTA(G)C teams.  If you push them out 1-2kms you can then get human-based C2 nodes to push UAS/UGV further out.  Keep doing that in waves until the Ground Force can breach through and pick up that unmanned cloud for breakout.  This is really a blend of a special and conventional op.

Surprise, concentration, speed, assuming we have local drone supremacy before launching, I think we need to go deeper on the initial lift to get the disruptive effect we want on the defenders ability to successfully counter, in my mind particularly decision making ability/cycle time. I am not sure what a ground component looks like, although I really do like 's @dan/california idea of drones dropping MICLIC to speed up mine clearance.

@The_Capt to your point, if the initial lifted force is primarily infantry or SOF JTA(G)C teams, with ISR support to identify and neutralize previously undetected defenses in depth, we still need someway to out tempo the defense's ability to recover/restore their front, some form of superior maneuver speed, so the offensive force breaks out leaving the defender with only the choices of staying and get cut off or withdrawing. A number of folks have posited networked human/UGV units. If the combined UGV/human unit has the maneuver speed needed to break the defense, great.  Once a grunt is on the ground his sustained unopposed maneuver speed is about 3/mph.

The risk I see so far in our discussions is we achieve partial penetration (yes I hear all the innuendo comments), but not fast enough to breakout, and end up with an expensive salient it's probably not worth holding.

We're solving breaching the minefield not breaking the defense.

Edited December 20, 2023 by OBJ

[kimbosbread]

Well, maybe… the drone-carrier attack needs to be backed up with a regular breach, presumably.

1. Send 20 drones each carrying 100 loitering munitions, release them for 1-2 hours loiter time, return to base 
2. This provides cover for 100 drones carrying 100 soldiers and their equipment, and return to base
3. Now the drones continue to bring loitering munitions, supplies and soldiers forward
4. At the same time, forward soldiers can leapfrop behind enemy positions or to cut off reinforcements (or just throw another 100 loitering munitions in their path)
5. Breach starts
6. Drones continue pushing supplies forward

EDIT: This won’t work with small jet engines. They require too much fuel and maintenance. The British torpedo drone is exactly what I was thinking of when we were discussing this yesterday.

Edited December 20, 2023 by kimbosbread

[OBJ]

@kimbosbread as you and everyone else can probably tell, I very much appreciate this communities collective personal experience, historical knowledge, imagination and occasional sense of humor.

Now I am just asking, for the sake of argument, what assumptions go into 'drone-carrier attack needs to be backed up with a regular breach?' I don't have the answers to any of this, but am starting to get more interested in the question of why we, myself included, are assuming breaching operations need to be part of the attack that defeats the defense as we see it in Ukraine.

[The_Capt]

37 minutes ago, OBJ said:

@The_Capt to your point, if the initial lifted force is primarily infantry or SOF JTA(G)C teams, with ISR support to identify and neutralize previously undetected defenses in depth, we still need someway to out tempo the defense's ability to recover/restore their front, some form of superior maneuver speed, so the offensive force breaks out leaving the defender with only the choices of staying and get cut off or withdrawing. A number of folks have posited networked human/UGV units. If the combined UGV/human unit has the maneuver speed needed to break the defense, great.  Once a grunt is on the ground his sustained unopposed maneuver speed is about 3/mph.

The risk I see so far in our discussions is we achieve partial penetration (yes I hear all the innuendo comments), but not fast enough to breakout, and end up with an expensive salient it's probably not worth holding.

Ah you hit on the critical part of all this.  Main ground force breach and link up.  I am not even sure what that ground force would look like - could be IFVs and tanks, could be medium/light but it needs to be mounted and ready to move quickly. 

So lets say we have three 500m minefield belts in front of us in say 5km of depth.  Specifically designed to slow and attrit.  Defended by all the stuff I posted earlier.

Phase 1 - Recon.  ISR the living crap out of the place.  Do not prosecute targets yet, map them.  Map networks, control nodes and c-move routes in depth.

Phase 2 - Suppress.  C-UAS, C-EW, C-everything you can see.  You need to do this in multiple places or the enemy is going to know exactly where to prepare. Here CB will be critical.

Phase 3 - Isolate.  You want to cut off the 5x1 breaching operation, so think 5x10.  You need to cut C4ISR and c-moves.  Here our own FASCAM and Deep Strike will be critical.

Phase 4 - Bridgehead X-ing.  Combination of air mobility systems - jetpacks, quadcopters etc.  Push JTA(G)Cs, UGVs and weapons to the far side of first minefield.  Out to 1-2 kms.  Night, smoke and suppression anyway one can.

Phase 5.  Establish bridge head.  Set those JTA(G)Cs loose and hunt every ATGM team.  Cut off any c-moves.

Phase 6.  Breach.  Main ground force has about 5 mins to crack that minefield.  Explosive and mechanical.  And this would be after a thorough recon.

Phase 7 - Rinse and repeat.  You have already set local conditions.  Sustain them and move fast. Next bridge head force bounces next minefield.  Next breaching wave  (another 5 mins).  

Add that all up and theoretically one could do it in maybe an hour so now you have the isolation window.  You are basically killing anything looking to move into that box from well out.  HIMARs and deep strike on logistics nodes.  Good news is most RA are moving by trucks.  Tanks and IFVs are still out there so those UGVs need Javelins. 

Trickiest part is enemy ATGM teams.  If you miss a few (and you will) you will need redundant breaches built in.  But more importantly you need to be able to spot and kill those teams, likely with FPVs very quickly.

This whole dance is not easy or cheap. But if you can sustain momentum, you could have a mounted breakout force on the outer edge of this belt in about 60 mins by my calcs.  You would need to drill it.  You would need to enable it and empower it.  It would cost a helluva lot of money.

And it still may fail.  But so far it is the best idea I have heard.  One might be able to do it from afar with nothing more than a swarm of UAS, but I am not sure the tech is there yet with respect to endurance.  Human and UGV pairing gives the ability to hold those bridge heads.  C2 forward means you can react faster.  

Finally...and here is the real rub:  you need to do this in several places at the same time.  Overload RA C2 which is likely very comfortably static right now.  Force a manoeuvre decision on them and then layer it with friction.  Let them make the mistake.  Once you get break out, you have  whole new set of problems but minefields might not be one of them.

And damn won't the post-war movie be epic.  Now whether it is a drama, tragedy or comedy is up to the Red God.

 

Edited December 20, 2023 by The_Capt

[Zeleban]

 

[kimbosbread]

19 minutes ago, OBJ said:

Now I am just asking, for the sake of argument, what assumptions go into 'drone-carrier attack needs to be backed up with a regular breach?'

To push supplies and heavier equipment forward. Eventually you’ll need to clear a lane and establish yourself and dig in, so you have to do it when the enemy is temporarily inconvenienced.

[The_Capt]

20 minutes ago, OBJ said:

@kimbosbread as you and everyone else can probably tell, I very much appreciate this communities collective personal experience, historical knowledge, imagination and occasional sense of humor.

Now I am just asking, for the sake of argument, what assumptions go into 'drone-carrier attack needs to be backed up with a regular breach?' I don't have the answers to any of this, but am starting to get more interested in the question of why we, myself included, are assuming breaching operations need to be part of the attack that defeats the defense as we see it in Ukraine.

Only way to achieve breakout.  To do it all via deep strike one has to project corrosive warfare to the point the RA collapse.  The UA already tried this and it worked in '22.  But conditions have changed and it is not working on the current line.  An all UAS/loitering assault is an idea - we bounced it around a few pages back - but I am not sure that it can be projected at a pace that the RA does not simply recover.  The bar is so low to hold ground right now.

And unlike a breaching operation, corrosive warfare would need to be much wider in scope and depth.  So hundreds of kms not tens.  I am not sure the UA could muster the drones or ammo to pull this off.  And it may take years to culminate.  So while I am a fan of the idea of corrosive warfare, I am not sure we are there yet.  Now tightened around breaches to essentially create tactical collapse around those minefields, and we might have a ballgame.

[kimbosbread]

One unsolved user interface problem for the soldiers being lifted/flying is they don’t have a HUD/FPV goggles, and this will be a pain with a helmet/earpro/eyepro/etc. Could slimmed down VR goggles be retrofitted to fit onto a NVG helmet mount? Could a google glass style corner-field-of-view be enough to provide relevant info?

If full-on-VR-goggles are too heavy, what about a pass-through-monocole that fits just one eye? It can be much lighter and smaller, and still give all the HUD info. The cool thing about a monocole is it could be used to aim weapons around a corner, etc.

[Battlefront.com]

32 minutes ago, Zeleban said:

 

Misleading.  First of all, it's an overstatement.  Do Russians have access to most consumer good categories that they had access to before?  Yes.  Do they have access to imported brands like they used to?  No.  Of course sanctions didn't end domestic production, even though it did disrupt some of it at the start.  Sanctions aren't able to do that unless there's a key imported component that is blocked.

As the NYT article I linked to yesterday illustrated, people need to understand that sanctions take time to work.  If they work at all.  Cuba, Iran, and North Korea are heavily sanctioned and they adjusted.

Steve

[The_Capt]

Finally got some down time. Couple solid articles on the air war:

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/content-series/airpower-after-ukraine/air-denial-the-dangerous-illusion-of-decisive-air-superiority/

https://warontherocks.com/2022/06/in-denial-about-denial-why-ukraines-air-success-should-worry-the-west/

Punchline:  Denial...there is your problem.  Long range high altitude AD drives AC to go low.  These systems are getting faster and harder to suppress.  When linked into C4ISR, they need only turn on to fire.  Then turn off and bolt.  Going low you run into a hornets nest of MANPADs.

 

[Zeleban]

8 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Misleading.  First of all, it's an overstatement.  Do Russians have access to most consumer good categories that they had access to before?  Yes.  Do they have access to imported brands like they used to?  No.  Of course sanctions didn't end domestic production, even though it did disrupt some of it at the start.  Sanctions aren't able to do that unless there's a key imported component that is blocked.

As the NYT article I linked to yesterday illustrated, people need to understand that sanctions take time to work.  If they work at all.  Cuba, Iran, and North Korea are heavily sanctioned and they adjusted.

Steve

 

Pekka Kallioniemi is one of the most ardent supporters of Ukraine, why would he spread false information? Western firms are gradually returning to Russia. Without even waiting for the end of the war. Many on this forum argued that Western businesses would never return to Russia due to reputational risks, as well as fear of their business being confiscated by the Russian government. However, we see today that many companies have returned to the Russian market in one way or another. If a Western firm trades with Russia, it loses nothing, and vice versa, if a Western firm refuses to do business in Russia, it loses millions.

[danfrodo]

17 minutes ago, Zeleban said:

 

Pekka Kallioniemi is one of the most ardent supporters of Ukraine, why would he spread false information? Western firms are gradually returning to Russia. Without even waiting for the end of the war. Many on this forum argued that Western businesses would never return to Russia due to reputational risks, as well as fear of their business being confiscated by the Russian government. However, we see today that many companies have returned to the Russian market in one way or another. If a Western firm trades with Russia, it loses nothing, and vice versa, if a Western firm refuses to do business in Russia, it loses millions.

I am wondering whether seeing shopping malls in St Pete or Moscow are truly representative of the larger picture.  Those cities have all the rich people and the rich can usually get black market stuff.  So could be representative but could also be misleading as to the state of the wider population.

[dan/california]

2 hours ago, OBJ said:

I don't think we in this forum should give up. As many have pointed out primacy cycles from offense to defense. I am pretty sure the world's militaries all get this, and are all working on solutions to restore offensive primacy, doctrinal, technical, organizational.

Our question is how to restore tactical offensive primacy.

To the good guys only, by preference

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

I guess my concern is what happens if Trump does get elected but a state refuses to recognize it because he was never on their ballot?

Of course if the US actually votes in a guy quoting Mein Kampf in campaign speeches...who then buddies up to Putin who is fighting an illegal "de-nazification" war in Ukraine.  I mean how weird does it need to get?

It isn't what this forum is about, but the millstone around Trump and the Republicans is abortion. And the reddest states are are being intentionally crazy about enforcing their bans because it plays the the part of the base that votes in primaries. The good news for the the rest of us is that the red state primary base is not NEARLY big enough to win a national election. Abortion bans lost in Kansas and Ohio for bleeps sake.

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

Ah you hit on the critical part of all this.  Main ground force breach and link up.  I am not even sure what that ground force would look like - could be IFVs and tanks, could be medium/light but it needs to be mounted and ready to move quickly. 

So lets say we have three 500m minefield belts in front of us in say 5km of depth.  Specifically designed to slow and attrit.  Defended by all the stuff I posted earlier.

Phase 1 - Recon.  ISR the living crap out of the place.  Do not prosecute targets yet, map them.  Map networks, control nodes and c-move routes in depth.

Phase 2 - Suppress.  C-UAS, C-EW, C-everything you can see.  You need to do this in multiple places or the enemy is going to know exactly where to prepare. Here CB will be critical.

Phase 3 - Isolate.  You want to cut off the 5x1 breaching operation, so think 5x10.  You need to cut C4ISR and c-moves.  Here our own FASCAM and Deep Strike will be critical.

Phase 4 - Bridgehead X-ing.  Combination of air mobility systems - jetpacks, quadcopters etc.  Push JTA(G)Cs, UGVs and weapons to the far side of first minefield.  Out to 1-2 kms.  Night, smoke and suppression anyway one can.

Phase 5.  Establish bridge head.  Set those JTA(G)Cs loose and hunt every ATGM team.  Cut off any c-moves.

Phase 6.  Breach.  Main ground force has about 5 mins to crack that minefield.  Explosive and mechanical.  And this would be after a thorough recon.

Phase 7 - Rinse and repeat.  You have already set local conditions.  Sustain them and move fast. Next bridge head force bounces next minefield.  Next breaching wave  (another 5 mins).  

Add that all up and theoretically one could do it in maybe an hour so now you have the isolation window.  You are basically killing anything looking to move into that box from well out.  HIMARs and deep strike on logistics nodes.  Good news is most RA are moving by trucks.  Tanks and IFVs are still out there so those UGVs need Javelins. 

Trickiest part is enemy ATGM teams.  If you miss a few (and you will) you will need redundant breaches built in.  But more importantly you need to be able to spot and kill those teams, likely with FPVs very quickly.

This whole dance is not easy or cheap. But if you can sustain momentum, you could have a mounted breakout force on the outer edge of this belt in about 60 mins by my calcs.  You would need to drill it.  You would need to enable it and empower it.  It would cost a helluva lot of money.

And it still may fail.  But so far it is the best idea I have heard.  One might be able to do it from afar with nothing more than a swarm of UAS, but I am not sure the tech is there yet with respect to endurance.  Human and UGV pairing gives the ability to hold those bridge heads.  C2 forward means you can react faster.  

Finally...and here is the real rub:  you need to do this in several places at the same time.  Overload RA C2 which is likely very comfortably static right now.  Force a manoeuvre decision on them and then layer it with friction.  Let them make the mistake.  Once you get break out, you have  whole new set of problems but minefields might not be one of them.

And damn won't the post-war movie be epic.  Now whether it is a drama, tragedy or comedy is up to the Red God.

 

Once you hit the outer edge of the belt there needs to be significant light mounted forces ready to floor it and spread the chaos far enough that the Russian system can't compensate.

[Zeleban]

25 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

I am wondering whether seeing shopping malls in St Pete or Moscow are truly representative of the larger picture.  Those cities have all the rich people and the rich can usually get black market stuff.  So could be representative but could also be misleading as to the state of the wider population.

The absence of foreign brands in Russia is precisely aimed at putting pressure on residents of large Russian cities. Residents of the rest of Russia, even before the start of the war, were not interested in popular Western brands.

Rich residents of large cities should have felt that Russia was being punished for its aggressive behavior and put pressure on. Instead, Moscow residents do not consider themselves European outcasts at all; just like in the good old days, they buy expensive Western goods in boutiques in the center of Moscow.

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, Zeleban said:

Pekka Kallioniemi is one of the most ardent supporters of Ukraine, why would he spread false information?

I did not say it is false, I said it is incomplete.  Has he done a systematic survey of all Western companies that pulled out of Russia, or did he just walk around an upscale mall?  The latter.   Yet he said:

Russians still have access to absolutely every product they had prior to Feb 2022. The only difference is that the brand name may have changed a bit.

Emphasis on "absolutely every".  That is quite a statement designed to get clicks and followers.  This is far from the first time we have seen this sort of thing on social media.

1 hour ago, Zeleban said:

Many on this forum argued that Western businesses would never return to Russia due to reputational risks, as well as fear of their business being confiscated by the Russian government. However, we see today that many companies have returned to the Russian market in one way or another. If a Western firm trades with Russia, it loses nothing, and vice versa, if a Western firm refuses to do business in Russia, it loses millions.

There were companies that never stopped doing business with Russia.  It is not surprising some are happy to sell to third countries (like Turkey) and profit from illegal sales into Russia.  Capitalism and morality aren't often friends.

Aside from this, the NYT article I posted the other day goes into far more detail about these sorts of corporate deals.  It also goes into detail about how the Russian government has stolen the infrastructure from many of these companies.  I don't know about Reebok specifically, but it is quite possible that the Russian government took all of their retail and warehouse infrastructure then gave it to a Judo buddy of Putin.  If you think corporations don't mind when a government steals billions of Dollars worth of their investments... well... you're wrong.  This sort of thing is what will make companies very hesitant to get back into Russia.

Steve

[mosuri]

On 11/19/2023 at 4:53 PM, LongLeftFlank said:

Yeah, I have been wondering too whether the Russians might crack the lid on chemical weapons, if not to 'break' the stalemate, at least to amp up strain on the UA infantry and LOCs.

1. Purely militarily, would (rocket delivered*) agents be helpful in reducing a fixed position like Avdiivka? Could they kill and disrupt enough to allow Russian troops to occupy the salient without becoming debilitated themselves (well, give or take a few hundred more mobiks, yawn)?

2. Could they conduct more 'focused' attacks (and are these militarily useful, or is gas warfare still really a blunt instrument, only useful in saturation quantities across large areas)?

And by also tossing around some tear gas, WP and thermite, could they muddy things enough to just loudly deny deny deny it all, intending to control the critical real estate before an organised investigation, air and soil sampling, etc. can occur? (thinking here about the many reported incidents in Syria)

3. Politically, whether or not we could 'prove it', what could the West do in response that we're not doing already? Send NBC gear, fine. But it's not like we're in a position to send the UA chemical warheads.

...And short of them gassing civilians in quantity, would it be a casus belli for intervention? I personally doubt it. Just another folder for the war crimes file.

* aerial spray / crop duster delivery being assumed unavailable, unless large drones could somehow do it on a local basis

Step by step this war gets more unpleasant. CNN claims russians are now using tear gas:

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/12/19/europe/ukraine-soldiers-russia-frontlines-cmd-intl/index.html

While "only" tear gas, having to scramble for your mask and having to wear it hampers observation and defending your trench for sure.

[The_Capt]

6 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

I did not say it is false, I said it is incomplete.  Has he done a systematic survey of all Western companies that pulled out of Russia, or did he just walk around an upscale mall?  The latter.   Yet he said:

Russians still have access to absolutely every product they had prior to Feb 2022. The only difference is that the brand name may have changed a bit.

Emphasis on "absolutely every".  That is quite a statement designed to get clicks and followers.  This is far from the first time we have seen this sort of thing on social media.

There were companies that never stopped doing business with Russia.  It is not surprising some are happy to sell to third countries (like Turkey) and profit from illegal sales into Russia.  Capitalism and morality aren't often friends.

Aside from this, the NYT article I posted the other day goes into far more detail about these sorts of corporate deals.  It also goes into detail about how the Russian government has stolen the infrastructure from many of these companies.  I don't know about Reebok specifically, but it is quite possible that the Russian government took all of their retail and warehouse infrastructure then gave it to a Judo buddy of Putin.  If you think corporations don't mind when a government steals billions of Dollars worth of their investments... well... you're wrong.  This sort of thing is what will make companies very hesitant to get back into Russia.

Steve

Could also be like a NK shopping mall.  A bunch of modern nice stuff that no one can actually afford:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/276323/monthly-inflation-rate-in-russia/

https://tradingeconomics.com/russia/interest-rate

https://take-profit.org/en/statistics/wages/russia/

https://tradingeconomics.com/russia/currency

 

[dan/california]

5 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

I did not say it is false, I said it is incomplete.  Has he done a systematic survey of all Western companies that pulled out of Russia, or did he just walk around an upscale mall?  The latter.   Yet he said:

Russians still have access to absolutely every product they had prior to Feb 2022. The only difference is that the brand name may have changed a bit.

Emphasis on "absolutely every".  That is quite a statement designed to get clicks and followers.  This is far from the first time we have seen this sort of thing on social media.

There were companies that never stopped doing business with Russia.  It is not surprising some are happy to sell to third countries (like Turkey) and profit from illegal sales into Russia.  Capitalism and morality aren't often friends.

Aside from this, the NYT article I posted the other day goes into far more detail about these sorts of corporate deals.  It also goes into detail about how the Russian government has stolen the infrastructure from many of these companies.  I don't know about Reebok specifically, but it is quite possible that the Russian government took all of their retail and warehouse infrastructure then gave it to a Judo buddy of Putin.  If you think corporations don't mind when a government steals billions of Dollars worth of their investments... well... you're wrong.  This sort of thing is what will make companies very hesitant to get back into Russia.

Steve

Russia is burning its seed corn to stay warm in five different ways. Indeed they seem to be shoveling it on the fire faster in the effort to intimidate everyone into giving up. If we don't give up the Russians are going to be spectacularly bleeped. Someone mentioned in the last hundred pages that Russian airline have had four or five extremely close calls, like airplanes landing in wheat fields that will probably never leave close calls. That string and a great many others are going to run out. 

Tightening up high tech/machine tool exports seems to have finally become a priority, it is criminal that it hasn't happened sooner. The other thing that STILL needs doing is an actual travel ban. Sending all the oligarchs kids home from Oxford and Columbia, too. The travel ban is the perfect sanction, because poor Russians aren't traveling anyway, and the rich ones will really care.