How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Sarjen]

31 minutes ago, CHEqTRO said:

No Russian involvment on this case. It seems it crashed on land, so hardly it was caused by the Russians.

Cogealac is far from the Black Sea. More likely to have had technical problems plus bad weather. 

[LongLeftFlank]

As we all know, this war isn't going the UA's way every day and everywhere....

Fighting from BRDMs? HMG platforms, I guess. I suppose they'll serve against soft-skinned vehicles. (footage in 3 parts)

Edited March 2, 2022 by LongLeftFlank

[sburke]

2 minutes ago, kraze said:

Today people shot dead a pro-russian mayor that had offered to surrender his town to russians when they were 15 km away.

Our government said nobody will be prosecuted for such actions and congratulated the deed.

Rules have changed after feb24.

Ukrainians aren't forgiving people anymore after six days of increasing war crimes.

 

it's a dangerous thing to have extrajudicial acts like this.  Understandable given the situation, but they might have been better served having him arrested and airing it for anyone else considering betraying their country.

[kraze]

8 minutes ago, sburke said:

it's a dangerous thing to have extrajudicial acts like this.  Understandable given the situation, but they might have been better served having him arrested and airing it for anyone else considering betraying their country.

That happens too, but to Ukrainians this is a war of survival. Russians didn't come to just enforce some geopolitical decisions, they came to "solve a Ukrainian question" - remember?

The increasing amount of violence against civilian population only enrages people and makes the fuse very very short when it comes to anyone who is OK with russians cluster bombing hospitals and nurseries.

And that's what they do without entering the city. Try imagining the massacre e.g. Kharkiv or Mariupol would face if any one of those surrenders.

Better to shoot one traitor than see russians murder thousands in that very town unopposed.

Edited March 2, 2022 by kraze

[akd]

1 minute ago, kraze said:

That happens too, but to Ukrainians this is a war of survival. Russians didn't come to just enforce some geopolitical decisions, they came to "solve a Ukrainian question" - remember?

The increasing amount of violence against civilian population only enrages people and makes the fuse very very short when it comes to anyone who is OK with russians cluster bombing hospitals and nurseries.

And that's what they do without entering the city. Try imagining the massacre e.g. Kharkiv or Mariupol would face if any one of those surrenders.

Nonetheless, Ukraine won’t survive without the West, and the support of the West can become quite tenuous if the war starts to be perceived as “both sides” for war crimes, or more of a civil war with Ukrainians turning on each other and abandoning the rule of law.  Just how it is.

[Phantom Captain]

8 minutes ago, sburke said:

it's a dangerous thing to have extrajudicial acts like this.  Understandable given the situation, but they might have been better served having him arrested and airing it for anyone else considering betraying their country.

Seems pretty reasonable seeing the wolves are at the gate and civilians are being burned alive by Russian bombs in civilian centers.

Traitors deserve what they have coming.

[womble]

10 minutes ago, kraze said:

Russians didn't come to just enforce some geopolitical decisions, they came to "solve a Ukrainian question"

It was chilling, almost inconceivable, to see that phraseology coming out of Russia, especially when they are so set on portraying the Ukrainians as Nazis. I mean, it'd be okay if the Ukrainian question was "What's your favourite Ukrainian dish?" but it so obviously isn't. If they wanted the West to start thinking of parallels between what Putin has set in motion and what a certain jumped-up sergeant did 90 years ago, they couldn't have picked more specific language.

10 minutes ago, akd said:

support of the West can become quite tenuous if the war starts to be perceived as “both sides” for war crimes, or more of a civil war with Ukrainians turning on each other and abandoning the rule of law.

True, but it'll take more than the occasional lynching (and I do mean occasional) of collaborators to get the West thinking of Ukrainian war crimes, and a lot more than that to make it look like an actual civil war. Right now, it's abundantly clear that Ukraine is more united than it was a week ago, maybe more united than it has ever been. That's not to say that Ukraine is going to get a free pass on war crimes, at least in the court of public opinion, but there's always a matter of degree in these things, and, to date, Russia is way out in front in the "bad boy" scoring. Even counting any possible "atrocities" which may or may not have been committed by those claiming to represent Ukraine in the Donbass enclaves. Not that there's any credible evidence of anything along those lines outside the normal errors of conflict, AFAIK.

[The_Capt]

21 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

As we all know, this war isn't going the UA's way every day and everywhere....

Fighting from BRDMs? HMG platforms, I guess. I suppose they'll serve against soft-skinned vehicles. (footage in 3 parts)

That is not what I see.  I see the growing suspicion I have had for some time now that air superiority might be a dead concept, which has enormous implications.  Especially if you are trying to invade/occupy another country.

[womble]

Oh, and there's another reason the West can't and won't declare and enforce a "No Fly Zone" over Ukraine: if they did, they'd have to shoot down the Ukrainian air force too, which would make those linear bonfires less common. If they didn't apply the ban evenly to both sides, it'd be an "exclusion zone" or something, not a no fly zone, and very much a direct attack on Russia.

[dan/california]

3 minutes ago, Phantom Captain said:

Seems pretty reasonable seeing the wolves are at the gate and civilians are being burned alive by Russian bombs in civilian centers.

Traitors deserve what they have coming.

The cycle of barbarity is spooling up. We really need to tell the Russians they are done, with cruise missiles if necessary. before this thing goes the rest of the way ugly. I have this vision of Ukrainian girls blowing themselves up at Russian checkpoints that I SO want to keep confined to my nightmares.

[kraze]

8 minutes ago, akd said:

Nonetheless, Ukraine won’t survive without the West, and the support of the West can become quite tenuous if the war starts to be perceived as “both sides” for war crimes, or more of a civil war with Ukrainians turning on each other and abandoning the rule of law.  Just how it is.

Shooting a traitor during war isn't a war crime.

Just like a bystander shooting russian soldiers driving straight into Kyiv that didn't even get to their weapons before getting shot.

When russians enter a city - they don't behave like the said West. They go full warcrime berserk. They mass murder, rape, torture - it becomes a living hell for anyone who didn't or doesn't want to get out.

So I can guarantee you the thought of "would this look bad to a warm, cozy, peaceful West" in the face of russians quite possibly gauging one's eyes, while raping and murdering his wife - wouldn't even be on thought schedule. For whatever reason.

[Commanderski]

I think Twitter and social media is helping things from getting worse. If it wasn't for some of this modern technology the Russians would have had no problem of opening fire on some of those unarmed civilian barricades. Nobody wants to be filmed for something that would be used at a war crimes trial.

[Battlefront.com]

2 hours ago, Vet 0369 said:

Why the U.S. doesn’t “put boots on the ground” to satisfy it’s pledge is beyond me. I served the U.S. for more than thirty years in different capacities, and I must say that I’m disgusted that the U.S. Government has again shown that it cannot be trusted to keep it’s promises and commitments that it makes to defend others.

The time to have done something more forceful was in 2014 when Russian officially wasn't doing anything in Ukraine (a lie, of course).  The problem was in the US were also struggling with Afghanistan and ISIS.  There was no public support for putting military forces directly into a conflict zone.  Plus, Europe weaseled out of doing anything similar.

Now?  The problem is that if we put forces in there that almost certainly means us going to war with Russia.  That is a very, very dangerous thing and nobody in Europe, the US, or allied nations wants to have that happen.

The alternative is mostly what is going on now.  Do everything we can, short of direct military engagement, to make sure that Ukraine defeats Russia.  In the end we get a similar result (defeated, defanged Russia) but without risking WW3.

This is a crappy deal for Ukraine, but not as crappy as would be if Russia used nukes in western Ukraine.  They have a stake in this too, which is why I so far have not seen Zelensky asking for NATO to directly intervene.  And so far he has not been shy about asking for things, and he is getting almost all of them.  Including fast track to EU member status.

Sooooo... I hear you and my heart agrees with you, but my mind says to let Ukraine do its thing with our help and we'll sort out things out when Russia's defeated.

Steve

[The_Capt]

7 minutes ago, dan/california said:

The cycle of barbarity is spooling up. We really need to tell the Russians they are done, with cruise missiles if necessary. before this thing goes the rest of the way ugly. I have this vision of Ukrainian girls blowing themselves up at Russian checkpoints that I SO want to keep confined to my nightmares.

They won't need to, the insurgency will have self loitering munitions (air and ground based) supplied by the west.  The Russians at that checkpoint will get hit and then Anonymous will hack their pay so their families don't get anything, and then go after their credit ratings and mortgages (with 50% interest thanks to sanctions).

I am old school in a lot of ways now that I am advancing in age: when you see your troops abandoning your tanks and walking away, while old ladies on the other side are standing in front of them and staring them down...you seriously need to re-think what you are doing.  This is not rocket surgery.

Edited March 2, 2022 by The_Capt

[CHEqTRO]

4 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

That is not what I see.  I see the growing suspicion I have had for some time now that air superiority might be a dead concept, which has enormous implications.  Especially if you are trying to invade/occupy another country.

I disagree. Two years ago the azeris were able to achieve full air superiority over the Nagorno Kharabak, to devastating effect to the Armenians. Plus, the way the Azeris planned and carried out that operation was probably something more resembling a "modern" war than what we are seeing now from the Russians.

[The_Capt]

1 minute ago, CHEqTRO said:

I disagree. Two years ago the azeris were able to achieve full air superiority over the Nagorno Kharabak, to devastating effect to the Armenians. Plus, the way the Azeris planned and carried out that operation was probably something more resembling a "modern" war than what we are seeing now from the Russians.

Well they should have sent a memo to our guys in Iraq because we kept losing it below 2000 feet.  In the case above, I am thinking the Armenians were playing by the old rules, I am pretty sure the Ukrainians are not.

[dan/california]

1 minute ago, CHEqTRO said:

I disagree. Two years ago the azeris were able to achieve full air superiority over the Nagorno Kharabak, to devastating effect to the Armenians. Plus, the way the Azeris planned and carried out that operation was probably something more resembling a "modern" war than what we are seeing now from the Russians.

The Azeris are better. That will be the epitaph of the Russian army when this is all over.

[DerKommissar]

8 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

That is not what I see.  I see the growing suspicion I have had for some time now that air superiority might be a dead concept, which has enormous implications.  Especially if you are trying to invade/occupy another country.

Yeah. Let's say you destroy all radar guided AA, and all aircraft. If they have modern manpads, what can you do?

Any low flying aircraft can be shot down with ever improving infrared missiles. 3km-4km will be the floor for 'safe' operations.

Makes all LOS attacks dangerous and you'd still have to rely on stand-off attacks -- or clear all the infantry.

[kraze]

15 minutes ago, womble said:

Oh, and there's another reason the West can't and won't declare and enforce a "No Fly Zone" over Ukraine: if they did, they'd have to shoot down the Ukrainian air force too, which would make those linear bonfires less common. If they didn't apply the ban evenly to both sides, it'd be an "exclusion zone" or something, not a no fly zone, and very much a direct attack on Russia.

No-fly zone for everyone is perfect for us, as russian ground forces in their current state would be completely screwed and would most likely get routed in days

Edited March 2, 2022 by kraze

[The_Capt]

13 minutes ago, DerKommissar said:

Yeah. Let's say you destroy all radar guided AA, and all aircraft. If they have modern manpads, what can you do?

Any low flying aircraft can be shot down with ever improving infrared missiles. 3km-4km will be the floor for 'safe' operations.

Makes all LOS attacks dangerous and you'd still have to rely on stand-off attacks -- or clear all the infantry.

And all the while your opponent is using stuff from Amazon as airborne ISR...the thing air superiority is supposed to remove.  Who are we kidding the Ukrainians are going to be getting Class 1 and 2 systems with strike capability too.  Up until this goat rodeo I would have bet Russia had this covered with some hi tech C-UAV stuff but after watching them throw up all over themselves for a week now, I am less confident. 

Bottom line, I do not think there will be air superiority for either side in reality and that is really weird. 

Follow up: Or this nightmare: https://www.avinc.com/tms/switchblade-600

 

Edited March 2, 2022 by The_Capt

[Haiduk]

Fragments of Russian Su-25SM. Location unknown

 

[TheVulture]

Update from yesterday that I've missed if anyone else has already posted it:

https://defence-blog.com/ukrainian-army-receives-more-turkish-made-unmanned-combat-aerial-vehicles/

Ukrainian Defense Ministry said earlier today that the country’s Armed Forces received additional Bayraktar TB2 Turkish-made unmanned combat aerial vehicles from Turkey.

“New Bayraktar TB2s have already arrived in Ukraine and are at combat positions,” Oleksii Reznikov said.

Bayraktar TB2 unmanned combat aerial vehicle can carry a maximum payload of more than 150 kg. The drone can fly up to 22,500 feet and loiter for more than 24 hours.

Bayraktar TB2 drones, which entered the Turkish army’s inventory in 2014, are currently used by Turkey, Ukraine, Qatar, and Azerbaijan.

Separately the Ukrainian Defense Ministry said that the Kremlin was attempting to use heavy bomber sorties to somehow block the growing flow of weapons and military aid from the country’s international partners, especially those in Europe.

[kraze]

11 minutes ago, CHEqTRO said:

I disagree. Two years ago the azeris were able to achieve full air superiority over the Nagorno Kharabak, to devastating effect to the Armenians. Plus, the way the Azeris planned and carried out that operation was probably something more resembling a "modern" war than what we are seeing now from the Russians.

Nagorny-Karabakh was actually a russian occupied territory, on behalf of Armenia, kinda like a "blood pact" between them and Armenia - which is why russian relations with Azerbaijan are so lukewarm.

[Battlefront.com]

47 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

As we all know, this war isn't going the UA's way every day and everywhere....

The BMP in that Tweet is almost certainly DPR forces, not Ukrainian or Russian.  Notice the dark red paint on it.  This is not something that Ukraine does, but there was images of what was likely DPR with the same paint jobs.

Hard to tell about the destroyed tank.  I don't know my details of the different models enough to know more about it.

Steve

[db_zero]

12 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

The time to have done something more forceful was in 2014 when Russian officially wasn't doing anything in Ukraine (a lie, of course).  The problem was in the US were also struggling with Afghanistan and ISIS.  There was no public support for putting military forces directly into a conflict zone.  Plus, Europe weaseled out of doing anything similar.

Now?  The problem is that if we put forces in there that almost certainly means us going to war with Russia.  That is a very, very dangerous thing and nobody in Europe, the US, or allied nations wants to have that happen.

The alternative is mostly what is going on now.  Do everything we can, short of direct military engagement, to make sure that Ukraine defeats Russia.  In the end we get a similar result (defeated, defanged Russia) but without risking WW3.

This is a crappy deal for Ukraine, but not as crappy as would be if Russia used nukes in western Ukraine.  They have a stake in this too, which is why I so far have not seen Zelensky asking for NATO to directly intervene.  And so far he has not been shy about asking for things, and he is getting almost all of them.  Including fast track to EU member status.

Sooooo... I hear you and my heart agrees with you, but my mind says to let Ukraine do its thing with our help and we'll sort out things out when Russia's defeated.

Steve

There is debate as to whether promises were made to Gorbachev after the Berlin Wall fell that NATO would not expand East but it was an informal promise noting more.

When the Ukrainians gave up nukes and promises were made the West would defend Ukraine it was informal so far as I know.

Perhaps the lesson for all is if you want/expect America to keep to its word it will have to be debated in congress and the senate, then formally ratified .