How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Battlefront.com]

4 minutes ago, billbindc said:

I think this gets directly to the reason this time was different. The question that was being asked, correctly, by the Biden administration was “What are they going to do, after all of this political/military/economic investment in the build up if they *don’t* go?”. Neither France or Germany could answer that question in any reasonable way…which should have been the point at which they realized what was happening. 

Yes, exactly this.

My personal answer was that they would use the investment to pressure Ukraine into some concessions and, failing that, do a limited Donbas offensive with the large amounts of forces along the border threatening to widen the war.  The latter would not only tie down Ukrainian units, but it would also send a message to NATO "it could be worse, so tread carefully". 

This is pretty much what Russia did in 2014 after Yanukovych was ousted.  Russia initially arrayed a large amount of forces around Ukraine then used a small portion of them to invade Crimea.  The rest were there to give Putin follow up options.

As I've said many times, my mistake was that I gave Putin too much credit.  I did not understand how detached from reality he was and/or how desperate he was to "resolve the Ukrainian question" in one go.  All the way up until about February 20th I still didn't think he was stupid enough to do a full scale invasion, but then the finally pieces of information fell into place and it became apparent that was what was going to happen.

Steve

[danfrodo]

A side note on the ongoing discussion.  What does the UKR war mean for the politics of EU-western countries?  We see autocratic/fascist elements on the rise over the last decade.  Hopefully this will remind folks what autocracies look like.  

I have been thinking that the current times will be called by historians "The Second Age of Fascism".  The question for us poor slobs living right now is whether that age is ending or just beginning.  Maybe the downfall or weakening of Putin can help stop the slide into fascism, as a big source of fascist propaganda and 5th column stuff would lose funding.

[Haiduk]

Hmm... two destroyed armor ahead.... Nevermind! We are Russians! God with us! Move forward!

Zolotorivka outskirts, Luhansk oblast (Lysychansk area). Filming of 3rd BTG of 80th air-assault brigade.

 

Edited August 17, 2022 by Haiduk

[billbindc]

15 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Yes, exactly this.

My personal answer was that they would use the investment to pressure Ukraine into some concessions and, failing that, do a limited Donbas offensive with the large amounts of forces along the border threatening to widen the war.  The latter would not only tie down Ukrainian units, but it would also send a message to NATO "it could be worse, so tread carefully". 

This is pretty much what Russia did in 2014 after Yanukovych was ousted.  Russia initially arrayed a large amount of forces around Ukraine then used a small portion of them to invade Crimea.  The rest were there to give Putin follow up options.

As I've said many times, my mistake was that I gave Putin too much credit.  I did not understand how detached from reality he was and/or how desperate he was to "resolve the Ukrainian question" in one go.  All the way up until about February 20th I still didn't think he was stupid enough to do a full scale invasion, but then the finally pieces of information fell into place and it became apparent that was what was going to happen.

Steve

A lot of analysis in the margins comes down to personal inclination. I kept hearing from journalists and others working on Russia variations on “But it would be equivalent to Czar Nick’s decision to go into WWI!”. And that’s a pretty good take I think and it fit their very reasonable world view. Yours was similarly well informed by Putin’s track record. My own inclination is to avoid reading decision makers and be more swayed by what they do and what they commit. I wasn’t totally sure but that approach worked out this time. Let’s hope it’s wrong on Taiwan.

[Beleg85]

53 minutes ago, billbindc said:

If the Russian plan of saying "do not help Ukraine or we'll nuke you" and West saying "oh well I guess we won't help then, we don't want to risk nuclear war after all" worked, it would very obviously turned into "do not help Baltics or we'll nuke you" and "do not help everything east of Germany or we'll nuke you".

Not sure where you're from, but the beginning stages of war looked very bleak in places that were invaded and occupied by Russia relatively recently (they left here in 1992), probably in comparison to places a continent away or parts of Europe where people never had to live with that horror.

This might be my social bubble, but even around here - where Russia would have to go through at least Ukraine and Slovakia and likely Poland to get here - people somewhat calmly accepted we are next and the West likely won't help and started making preparations. The "active reserves" system of our Army basically collapsed because of too many volunteers. I myself tried to apply for a job in our intelligence because that's where I thought I'd be most useful as a person good at working with large amounts of data (but I gave up when they asked for perfect eyesight and drug-free past).

Czechs are most chill-out and non-problematic people in whole region. They rarely get pissed off; so, if Russians managed to bring even them into fury they should understand how f.....ed things has became.

But seriously, it happened I had an occassion to spend several days at the Polish border towns during first week of the war and can totally confirm the same mood. Rationally we knew NATO is here, but common people were bat**** scared nonetheless. They made extra supplies, checked bus timetables (in case), some had bags prepared with necessities. Nobody knew what Putin was capable of, where he will stop and Russian army was admitedly intimidating if only by its mechanized force. Ofc this is only fraction what Balts have experienced; my friend in Latvia even booked tickets for his family to leave country and was constantly packed, just in case something blew up next to the border. And he wasn't the only one.

Fortunatelly, fear very fast came into rage. Solidarity, slef-organization and cooperation among people of different nationalities of the first days was really something astonishing to observe close-up; probably only "Solidarity" movement from 80's and Fall of Berlin Wall came close to it.

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

This is the sort of thing I've always used as "ammunition" when arguing with Russians or their proxy Western useful idiots.  The people that have lived under Soviet (aka Russian) rule are the most enthusiastic about not having it happen again.  Just look at the members of NATO that met the 2% GDP spending for 2021:

"The other countries [other than the United states] that met the 2 percent threshold include the United Kingdom, Greece, Croatia, Poland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania."

Yup, definitelly. One learns to respect NATO uniforms much more when they are only bulwark against brutallity of this eastern Mordor 120 mln people happen to have as their neighbours. It is hard to overestimate how just presence of several NATO soldiers could be calming for locals - in my town it was a company of 20+years old paratroopers from US 82nd Airborne who seem to settled FOB at local McDonald. But boy, how local people were happy of their presence is difficult to describe...

Edited August 17, 2022 by Beleg85

[FancyCat]

The article linked has so much more information on Russia and attitudes to war. The head of former station Echo Moscow, a opposition oriented radio station, which was closed following the invasion, ill quote below, which is only part of the long article. Nevermind, look this stuff as well. Just part of the long article, please do read it all. https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/how-putin-s-war-changed-my-moscow-a-3b5049e7-93fd-4c2a-9c9f-742635ae2099

I think when looking at Ukrainian anger at Russia, this comes to mind, from article, Ukraine has "Within three decades, Ukraine has experienced five genuine changes of power, whereas Russia has seen none." for a people who have regularly seen changes in government, and experienced two revolutions (Orange and Maidan) since independence only 30 years ago, Russian attitudes towards their government must be near infantile. 

Also, the article has a interview with Alexander Borodai, who was appointed PM of the DPR in 2014 (after helping to annex Crimea), despite not being from Ukraine, says this: just absolutely dripping antisemitism.

Quote

He admits, of course, that there are Ukrainians who don't want that. But he says that with his Ukrainian surname, he has "at least as much right to decide on this as a Zelenskyy, who isn't even Ukrainian by blood." The comment is a jab at Zelenskyy's Jewish origin.

Quote

Head of Echo Moscow, radio station.

It was Venediktov’s ambition not to divide the world in friends and foes, to walk the line between government and opposition, to mediate between the sides. He had drunk wine with Putin, knew ministers, was friends with Putin's spokesman and with the head of the propaganda channel RT. On his radio station, he regularly opened up the floor to bellicose opponents of democracy, people like the writer Alexei Prokhanov. After Echo Moscow's closure, the latter said: Whoever wants to keep listening to it can "put his ear to the ground. Do you hear the sound of tanks driving through the Donbas? That's me talking."

Every autumn, Venediktov and his station had a big party where government officials, Duma deputies, Pussy Riot activists and opposition politicians met. They enjoyed wine and canapés in Zurab Tsereteli's art gallery, amidst kitschy portraits of czars and a massive, walk-in apple with erotic reliefs. Even the elderly Mikhail Gorbachev came. At the entrance stood the host, eccentrically dressed in a lumberjack shirt and safety vest, a cheerful master of ceremonies for a repressed and yet still functioning society. They still met at his place, even if, over the years, fewer officials and businesspeople attended.

Betrayal is a central category in Putin's thinking. There are enemies and traitors, he told Venediktov in a conversation lasting several hours in the summer of 2000, after the first PR disaster of his presidency, the sinking of the Kursk submarine.

Enemies fight you openly, you know where you stand, Putin declared at the time. Traitors stab you in the back. You can get along with enemies. But there can be no mercy for traitors.

"And where do I fall in this construction?" asked Venediktov.

"An enemy," Putin said with a laugh.

"Now, I've moved into the other category," Venediktov says. In April, Venediktov was personally declared a "foreign agent," the term used to label media and individuals who are allegedly under foreign influence or receive foreign funding. Many officials have since broken off contact with Venediktov.

Venediktov views Simonyan's lack of empathy for Ukraine's children as reflective of Russian society writ large. "Eleven million Russian families have close relatives in Ukraine. That means there are 40 million people who have mother, father, brother, sister or grandchildren there. And then such support for the war. How can that be?" He says the propaganda alone isn't enough to explain it. "There's something bad that runs deep in people. It's about the younger brother Ukraine, who is viewed as a traitor because he wants to live better than you do."

It is also difficult for me to describe the relationship of Russians to Ukrainians because it is changing. Each generation of Russians has its own Ukraine. To the elderly, Ukraine is just a region where people speak a funny peasant dialect and like to eat bacon. Over time, they came to accept that there is a separate state for bacon eaters. But they could not see it as a foreign country.

For younger Russians, Ukraine is a foreign country. It doesn't bother them if the country strives to move closer to the West. And the eight years of estrangement since the annexation of Crimea in 2014 have left a stronger mark on them.

To me, young and old alike seem to have a poor understanding of Ukraine. The younger people have the advantage of at least being aware of this. Putin is 69 years old. He has no idea how little he knows about Ukraine.

Venediktov believes that Putin divides not only people, but also peoples, into enemies and traitors. "The Baltic states are Putin's enemies. Ukrainians are traitors – a part of our people who left, deserted, went over to the cursed NATO and the West." That's how Venediktov explained it to the president of Latvia the other day. It's Russia’s supposed proximity to the Ukrainians that explains the willingness to use force.

It was only in hindsight, after his initial horror at the attack had passed, that Venediktov found himself able to grasp the logic of Putin's actions. "This 'special operation' fits him like a glove," Venediktov says. "Putin is a fanatic." Venediktov says the Russian leader's world view has been firmly established for many years. "It's not Putin that surprises me, but Russian society."

At the end of March, someone placed a pig's head in front of Venediktov's apartment door, and a Ukrainian coat of arms and the word "Judensau" (Jewish pig) were pasted on the door. On the other hand, people approach him on the street and thank him for still being in Russia. "As long as I'm not physically threatened, I will stay in the country," Venediktov says. "But the only thing you can do right now is comfort, heal, reassure."

Nothing distinguishes Russian society from Ukrainian society more than the willingness to submit to an almost monarchical form of rule. It simply has not learned otherwise. Within three decades, Ukraine has experienced five genuine changes of power, whereas Russia has seen none.

Even among the elite, nobody sees themselves as being able to influence the president. The days when Putin depended on them and acted as an arbiter between different clans are long gone. Now the elite depends on Putin. And they are trembling. Resistance, even fleeing, seems futile.

"You can't run away in a submarine," says one well-connected businessman. "I told my kids: The task now is to survive."

"Putin has made a mistake of such fantastic magnitude that he will never be able to admit it. You'd rather take poison," says a former senior official. He says it took him a month and a half to recover from the shock of the attack on Ukraine. "I woke up every morning wondering if this was even true."

Wouldn't it then make sense to criticize the war? "I don't comment on political issues," the man says. "Besides, you can't change anything, anyway."

It's unclear who even still has influence at all over Putin in this autocratic system. The way the answer to that question is delivered is more interesting than the answer itself. "Yuri Kovalchuk. Is almost a second Putin," whispers one, pointing to the ceiling to indicate listening devices. Kovalchuk is a childhood friend of Putin and a banker who is said to have permanent access to the president. Then the interviewee says goodbye: "Be careful! There have been a lot of informants in Moscow lately."

 

 

[CAZmaj]

22 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Yup.  One genuinely great achievement of Tito was his leadership in keeping Yugoslavia from being a vassal state of the Soviet Union.  A weaker leader would not have even tried.

Certainly was good for NATO, but it was also good for the Yugoslav people.  Tito's reign was bad enough, but it could have been worse.

Steve

1/ Yes: Tito's leadership, Yugoslav's people resistance, and one mill + casualties fighting Nazis and liberating YU, after the WW2: 10% of GDP invested in the mandatory draft/major standing armed forces, well-equipped reserves, and territorial forces (annual training), one dozen underground/nuclear strike survivable command posts, military airports, and navy bases, years of stockpiles of ammo, weapons, uniforms, and dry food warehoused far away from the border with Warshaw pact countries, somewhat favorable geographic location – AND MAJOR military (major stockpiles of mostly USA WW2 weapons given to YU  for free), political (YU invited to mini NATO with Greece and Turkey) and financial (billions of $ in loans and financial assistance) support by USA, UK, France, and other NATO countries.
2/ Yes, it could have been worse, but it could have also been better – like, YU becoming European South Korea or Taiwan, or additional Finland or Sweden. Alas – YU was multinational, and bad things have happened since 1991.
 

[Battlefront.com]

11 minutes ago, billbindc said:

A lot of analysis in the margins comes down to personal inclination. I kept hearing from journalists and others working on Russia variations on “But it would be equivalent to Czar Nick’s decision to go into WWI!”. And that’s a pretty good take I think and it fit their very reasonable world view. Yours was similarly well informed by Putin’s track record. My own inclination is to avoid reading decision makers and be more swayed by what they do and what they commit. I wasn’t totally sure but that approach worked out this time. Let’s hope it’s wrong on Taiwan.

This is the inherent problem with an autocrat.  He could wake up on the wrong side of the bed and not only do something unexpected to his opponents, but also something different than what he said he'd do the day before.  Whim... not a great thing to have an entire country slaved to.

We do not know what information Putin sorted through to make his decision about invasion.  The assumption made by many, including me, is that the information was more-or-less grounded in reality.  Therefore, people like me assumed Putin wouldn't pursue a course of action that was most likely going to end his own regime.  I don't think that was a poor assumption to make as Putin isn't stupid or insane.  The problem was with the assumption that the information he used was good enough to avoid making a really bad decision.  From the little we know and can infer, it seems pretty clear that it was not.

Putin deserves full credit for this information gap.  He set up the conditions to ensure he was poorly informed by selecting toadies to run the government and punishing independent thinking.  A typical autocratic outcome.

Further, Putin ignored warnings from the US and others about what their red lines were.  This was him making a huge miscalculation about Western resolve.  He also completely disregarded the significance of his plans being known, in some detail, well ahead of time to the West generally and Ukraine specifically.  The element of surprise was a big part of his plan, unlike say Desert Storm.  So that's on him as well.

Steve

[poesel]

53 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

A side note on the ongoing discussion.  What does the UKR war mean for the politics of EU-western countries?  We see autocratic/fascist elements on the rise over the last decade.  Hopefully this will remind folks what autocracies look like. 

That depends a lot on in what shape Russia comes out of this. Those autocratic/fascist elements always looked towards the big brother in Moscow. And Moscow supported them politically or financially to cause disruption.

If Russia stays roughly in the same shape, her influence will stay, too. If Russia breaks apart or turns into a rainbow (fat chance), that support will go away and with it much of the power of those elements. But loosing this war will cost Russia a lot of political standing, and it will be a much poorer nation with less leverage.

The unholy Polish/Hungarian alliance seems to be a thing of the past, which is a relief for the EU. Hungary just voted, so we will be stuck with Orban for the time being. But Poland votes next year IIRC.
France just voted and dodged the bullet. Germany voted before the war, but the influence of our local fascists was and is waning. No chance in the foreseeable future.
Italy votes soonish and there is a very strong right wing party. Let's see how that turns out.

[Battlefront.com]

Hmmm... in theory videos like this should make it pretty clear how well the war is going to the Russian people.  It should also raise fears that they, or someone they care about, could be next:

The man just came to pick up his child from the kindergarten, he was grabbed by LNR soldiers and press ganged into being canon fodder.

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarRoom/comments/wqq41a/the_man_just_came_to_pick_up_his_child_from_the/

Steve

[danfrodo]

3 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Hmmm... in theory videos like this should make it pretty clear how well the war is going to the Russian people.  It should also raise fears that they, or someone they care about, could be next:

The man just came to pick up his child from the kindergarten, he was grabbed by LNR soldiers and press ganged into being canon fodder.

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarRoom/comments/wqq41a/the_man_just_came_to_pick_up_his_child_from_the/

Steve

OMG that is awful.  I am guessing the press gang is paid per new fodder-man and also has quotas that must be filled.

[sburke]

3 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Hmmm... in theory videos like this should make it pretty clear how well the war is going to the Russian people.  It should also raise fears that they, or someone they care about, could be next:

The man just came to pick up his child from the kindergarten, he was grabbed by LNR soldiers and press ganged into being canon fodder.

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarRoom/comments/wqq41a/the_man_just_came_to_pick_up_his_child_from_the/

Steve

and why aren't those soldiers at the front? oh yeah those are the dirt bags who are just enforcers for the mob boss.

[FancyCat]

1 minute ago, Battlefront.com said:

Hmmm... in theory videos like this should make it pretty clear how well the war is going to the Russian people.  It should also raise fears that they, or someone they care about, could be next:

The man just came to pick up his child from the kindergarten, he was grabbed by LNR soldiers and press ganged into being canon fodder.

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarRoom/comments/wqq41a/the_man_just_came_to_pick_up_his_child_from_the/

Steve

LNR Steve, obviously not anyone important, and besides, they aren't really Russians anyway. The article i linked in a post above, Russian attitudes to their colonized peoples, "brother peoples" are that they are inferior. They are "Russians", but there's a clear hierarchy of status that separates them. 

As long as Putin illustrates his absolute terror at mobilization of the general Russian population, I daresay Russians will regard these videos as looking at a far away war as long as nothing occurs against Russia itself. 

The opposition head of Echo Moscow, made a amazing point, 11 million Russian families have close relatives in Ukraine, or nearly 40 million with close ties, and yet this full scale invasion occurred, despite 40 million? 144 million is the population of Russia, nearly 25% of Russia's population has ties to Ukraine, and yet the full scale invasion of Ukraine was done. The idea proposed by the head of Echo Moscow, that these are traitors, and therefore, why Russia's invasion continues is just quite a match to my ears. 

 

[Beleg85]

35 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Putin deserves full credit for this information gap.  He set up the conditions to ensure he was poorly informed by selecting toadies to run the government and punishing independent thinking.  A typical autocratic outcome.

It is genuinly hard to understand why autocrats do not use internet as a magic wand to escape from echo chambers they inevitably fall in. Half hour of internet surfing a day would probably secure power of Kaddafi, Hussain and several other bad guys for probably end of their life.

Btw, Putin reportedly can barely use mouse and cursor.

30 minutes ago, poesel said:

That depends a lot on in what shape Russia comes out of this. Those autocratic/fascist elements always looked towards the big brother in Moscow. And Moscow supported them politically or financially to cause disruption.

In the West, yes, In Central Europe it is much more complicated- PiS was always hardliner against Russia and alliance with Orban was it's achilles foot in domestic politics (it still is). Slovenia and Slovakia similarly.

Italy is separate matter- several commentators of local politics state that Meloni is less favourable to Putin than obvious shill like Salvini. Even le Pen in France could, in case she hold the office, turn against her sponsor- strange things can happen when candidate become real decision-maker and must bear international stigma...

Politicians like them are oportunists, not genuine Putin lovers. It is another front at which Putin failed miserably- he builded this kind of support by decade if not more, and now it will melt before his eyes.

Edited August 17, 2022 by Beleg85

[Endyamon]

30 minutes ago, poesel said:

That depends a lot on in what shape Russia comes out of this. Those autocratic/fascist elements always looked towards the big brother in Moscow. And Moscow supported them politically or financially to cause disruption.

If Russia stays roughly in the same shape, her influence will stay, too. If Russia breaks apart or turns into a rainbow (fat chance), that support will go away and with it much of the power of those elements. But loosing this war will cost Russia a lot of political standing, and it will be a much poorer nation with less leverage.

The unholy Polish/Hungarian alliance seems to be a thing of the past, which is a relief for the EU. Hungary just voted, so we will be stuck with Orban for the time being. But Poland votes next year IIRC.
France just voted and dodged the bullet. Germany voted before the war, but the influence of our local fascists was and is waning. No chance in the foreseeable future.
Italy votes soonish and there is a very strong right wing party. Let's see how that turns out.

About Italy, you don't have to worry about right wing party. All the polls indicate that Fratelli d'Italia (far right) will get most of the votes. I would add "luckily" because the head of the party (Meloni) believes in Nato and wants to continue to support Ukraine. The 2 problems were Berlusconi and Salvini, since the first was a dear friend of Putin and the latter was financed by Russia, but they will be already happy if they will get a 20% together, which means they will decide nothing

You can also view the "far right party" as an enemy of communism, which in many minds, is still represended by Russia. You can fight communism by sending aid to Ukraine

 

Edited August 17, 2022 by Endyamon

[Battlefront.com]

19 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

LNR Steve, obviously not anyone important, and besides, they aren't really Russians anyway. The article i linked in a post above, Russian attitudes to their colonized peoples, "brother peoples" are that they are inferior. They are "Russians", but there's a clear hierarchy of status that separates them. 

As long as Putin illustrates his absolute terror at mobilization of the general Russian population, I daresay Russians will regard these videos as looking at a far away war as long as nothing occurs against Russia itself. 

The opposition head of Echo Moscow, made a amazing point, 11 million Russian families have close relatives in Ukraine, or nearly 40 million with close ties, and yet this full scale invasion occurred, despite 40 million? 144 million is the population of Russia, nearly 25% of Russia's population has ties to Ukraine, and yet the full scale invasion of Ukraine was done. The idea proposed by the head of Echo Moscow, that these are traitors, and therefore, why Russia's invasion continues is just quite a match to my ears. 

 

Yup, the Russian population, as a whole, would fail some pretty basic tests of logic skills.  This is even beyond the disinformation they swim in every day.

What a Russian SHOULD get from this video is "well, if the people of Luhansk are so enthusiastic about fighting Ukrainian fascists, why do recruiters have to kidnap people picking up their kids?  And wait a sec, isn't that sort of tactic the thing Nazis do?  And we Russians are supporting this, so what does that make us?  And if our government condones this sort of behavior to our allies and blood brothers, might they try this on us?  And how would I feel about my husband/brother/son/friend being kidnapped?"

Yeah, I know this isn't how Russians think and there's no way they will any time soon.  Their critical thinking has been conditioned to be in the "off" position to a much larger extent than in Western countries.  It's going to take a couple of generations of better leadership to change that.  Hopefully the start time for it isn't that far off.

Steve

[Cederic]

2 hours ago, billbindc said:

Situations like this are driven, very directly, by the occupant of the Oval Office

The occupant of the Oval Office can't walk out of a room with assistance. Please stop pretending he even knows what's happening in Ukraine. He can't read a teleprompter properly, can't answer unscripted questions and keeps getting sent home to keep him out of the way.

If you want to thank the current US Government for their stance and actions on Ukraine, find the people making the decisions and telling Biden what to say, and thank them.

Sorry but the Afghan withdrawal was not controlled, was not properly planned, was not properly communicated to US allies and was as a result an unmitigated disaster. Yes, that failure absolutely did encourage Putin in thinking the US was weak and lacking in leadership, and yes, that has cost Ukraine dearly. A year later and the only winners are the US arms manufacturers, who got replace $80bn of equipment abandoned to terrorists, and as a result get massive sales to countries supporting Ukraine.

Biden? Does anybody anywhere on the planet seriously think he's currently compos mentis?

[sburke]

7 minutes ago, Cederic said:

The occupant of the Oval Office can't walk out of a room with assistance. Please stop pretending he even knows what's happening in Ukraine. He can't read a teleprompter properly, can't answer unscripted questions and keeps getting sent home to keep him out of the way.

If you want to thank the current US Government for their stance and actions on Ukraine, find the people making the decisions and telling Biden what to say, and thank them.

Sorry but the Afghan withdrawal was not controlled, was not properly planned, was not properly communicated to US allies and was as a result an unmitigated disaster. Yes, that failure absolutely did encourage Putin in thinking the US was weak and lacking in leadership, and yes, that has cost Ukraine dearly. A year later and the only winners are the US arms manufacturers, who got replace $80bn of equipment abandoned to terrorists, and as a result get massive sales to countries supporting Ukraine.

Biden? Does anybody anywhere on the planet seriously think he's currently compos mentis?

He's got issues, but I daresay the previous occupant makes those issues pale by comparison.  Face it.  We aren't good at picking the occupant of the oval office for either party.  Funny thing is, I generally vote dem, but if Liz runs, she'll get my vote.

[Calamine Waffles]

16 minutes ago, Cederic said:

 Does anybody anywhere on the planet seriously think he's currently compos mentis?

Uh yeah?

Quote

On July 1, Biden convened a meeting in the Situation Room with key advisers and Cabinet members to go over the intelligence and the strike plan. CIA Director William J. Burns, wearing a protective mask, sat to Biden’s right. On the table between them was a small wooden box, with metal latches on the sides and a handle on top, containing a tiny scale model of Zawahiri’s safe house.

The president examined the model and asked questions about the strike plan. He also asked how officials were sure they’d positively identified Zawahiri. They walked the president through their analysis.

 

“He sought explanations of lighting, of weather, of construction materials, and of other factors that could influence the success of this operation and reduce the risk of civilian casualties,” the senior administration official said. Biden also asked for analysis on the ramifications, in the region and beyond, of launching a missile strike in the center of Kabul.

 

The president had a captive American on his mind as well — Mark Frerichs, a 60-year-old American civil engineer and Navy veteran who was kidnapped in Afghanistan in January 2020. The only known remaining American hostage in the country, he is believed to have been captured by the Haqqani network. Efforts to bring him home were underway, and Biden wanted to know how the strike might imperil his return as well as efforts to relocate Afghans who had helped U.S. forces when they were deployed in the country.

Sounds very much compos mentis to me? But hey, maybe the entire White House and political administration is in a conspiracy to hide that he has full-blown dementia and he's not really doing anything. Sure. And probably aliens are involved too.

Edited August 17, 2022 by Calamine Waffles

[FancyCat]

I will point out withdrawal where you are effectively abandoning thousands of people, and millions overall, there is no solution that you can salvage out a controlled, planned withdrawal that isn't effectively reinvading Afghanistan. How are you supposed to bolster a government that was collapsing that quickly in order to maintain evacuation routes? (A deal signed by Trump mind you) You can't, so you need to send in a significant force to secure the capital, except what about the rest of the major cities, now you have what, several tens of thousands of U.S personnel reinvading the major cities of Afghanistan? 

And obviously, you need to expand logistical footprint to ensure those thousands of U.S personnel are effectively supplied....

Afghanistan is surrounded by Iran on one side, Pakistan on the other, the central asian republics to the north, none of them have U.S bases to set up the logistics needed for U.S maintenance of long term presence in Afghanistan and i severely doubt any of them would be willing to allow it. 

Part of the deal was the withdrawal of U.S personnel, if the deal was violated, sure the U.S could relaunch air operations to reinforce the country but how would the U.S overfly these units? Pakistan? Sure, where did the Taliban leadership operate from until Kabul fell? Quetta. 

We all stare at Russia defending the west bank of the Dnieper, meanwhile we were trying to prop up a government that was land locked and surrounded by countries that are hostile to the U.S and would happily let the U.S burn itself forever in Afghanistan. 

No, i seriously doubt the evacuation could have turned into something of a "clean withdrawal", had we decided to "properly plan" it, all that would have resulted would be flooding it with thousands of troops against a insurgency about to achieve victory, I'm totally sure they would have sat down and let us retake their gains in the urban regions without a single American death....

In 2018, 70% of the country was already controlled or had active Taliban presence. 2015, nearing the end of the drawdown to about 15k NATO forces, this NYT article states that the UN considered half of the country's districts to have high or extreme violence threat levels, High or Extreme levels mean usual UN presence or movement is curtailed, half the country was off limits for the UN in 2015. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/12/world/asia/afghanistan-taliban-united-nations.html

Again, we absolutely tut tut at Russia thinking it could conquer a country of 44 million with only 200k troops, meanwhile you suggest keeping a country of 40 million under control with what? Only 10k-20k troops from collapse? Say only the urban areas, thats 10 million, not nearly enough either. 

Moving on from unrealistic notions, 

In a GUR controlled unit of the International Legion, serious allegations of abuse, violence, and failed leadership have arose, and this occurred despite higher levels of the Ukrainian government being informed. 

https://kyivindependent.com/investigations/suicide-missions-abuse-physical-threats-international-legion-fighters-speak-out-against-leaderships-misconduct

 

Edited August 17, 2022 by FancyCat

[sburke]

let's not get too sidetracked.  Zelensky, we need another high-profile strike to keep us focused please.

[Butschi]

2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Yes, exactly this.

My personal answer was that they would use the investment to pressure Ukraine into some concessions and, failing that, do a limited Donbas offensive with the large amounts of forces along the border threatening to widen the war.  The latter would not only tie down Ukrainian units, but it would also send a message to NATO "it could be worse, so tread carefully". 

This is pretty much what Russia did in 2014 after Yanukovych was ousted.  Russia initially arrayed a large amount of forces around Ukraine then used a small portion of them to invade Crimea.  The rest were there to give Putin follow up options.

As I've said many times, my mistake was that I gave Putin too much credit.  I did not understand how detached from reality he was and/or how desperate he was to "resolve the Ukrainian question" in one go.  All the way up until about February 20th I still didn't think he was stupid enough to do a full scale invasion, but then the finally pieces of information fell into place and it became apparent that was what was going to happen.

Steve

But this is exactly the point: You didn't know before the actual invasion. You suspected that something was going to happen. This is what a major part of the discussion has been revolving around over the last few pages. Most people didn't know but nowadays everyone claims that everyone knew. Except the French and the Germans, of course, who were afraid of the consequences for their economy and denied to see what everyone saw.

I mention denial because contrary to your usually brilliant analyses, I think this part about German psychology was slightly oversimplified. Of course there is this element and it is especially strong in the boomer+ generation, a phenomenon similar to denial of climate change. But there is more. As I said before, we are quite sceptical of things a US government claims on the basis of some intelligence agency. Shame on you if you fool me once, shame on me if you fool me twice. Moreover, just an example, criticism about Nord Stream 2 from the US was, shall we say, less than genuine. It was all too clear that the Trump administration didn't care about Germany being overly dependent on Russia. They wanted to sell their own LNG. And the Polish government, to name just one, was also more interested in discrediting Getmany than reducing the Russian black mailing capacity. Other things: The SPD, while indeed having had too close connections to Putin also had a long tradition in negotiating with Russia - which did a lot to relax the situation during the Cold War. In didn't work this time, oh well.

When talking about people who suffered under Soviet rule, many seem to forget that Eastern Germany (aka former GDR) was no less under Soviet rule. Strangely though, support for Putin is especially strong in Eastern Germany. So there has to be more to it that just having suffered from the Soviets.

Anyway, sorry for the confusing mix of different topic in slightly "rant-ish" tone. Originally I just wanted to know whether Biden actually had proof beforehand, bluffed or just made a lucky prediction.

[Calamine Waffles]

Tom Cooper did an interview in Czech with a few interesting claims:

https://eurozpravy.cz/zahranicni/evropa/rozhovor-letecka-valka-na-ukrajine-ukazala-ze-vychvalovane-ruske-zbrane-maji-zasadni-slabiny-rika-letecky-historik-tom-cooper.18ddfd22/
 

Quote

An unsurprising result was seen during the Russian military intervention in Syria in 2015-2017. While earlier Russian generals boasted that their air force could win wars, similar to how the air forces of the Americans and their allies did in Iraq in 1991 and Kosovo in 1999, during the course of the conflict it became clear that this VKS could not. They lacked the necessary reconnaissance and targeting skills. Therefore, at the beginning of the re-invasion of Ukraine, they were not even tasked with destroying the Ukrainian air force, as it was clear that they would not be able to do it - even more so when the Ukrainians evacuated their planes to bases and airports in the south and west of the country before the beginning of the Russian invasion. The VKS thus launched the strike of the Russian army with glory, which also included the launch of dozens of ballistic missiles. They attacked dozens of airbases and airfields with cruise missiles, but hit very few, at most 6-7 Ukrainian fighter jets. Most of the Ukrainian air force survived the beginning of the war. Since then, the inability of the VKS - and the entire Russian armed forces - to eliminate the Ukrainian air force has not changed. They simply lack the equipment and training for the task.

Quote

VKS are administratively responsible for their units, but operationally they are always subordinate to the local strategic military district (SDM). In the case of Ukraine, it is OKS South with command in Rostov-on-Don. OKS South commands all air, ground and naval forces fighting against Ukraine through an automated tactical command system called Constellation. The constellation collects all information obtained by air, ground and naval reconnaissance and intelligence services to provide OKS commanders with all the necessary data for command and control, which is effectively remote control. Commanders then task the available units according to their capabilities. If the target lies beyond the range of the artillery or in an area where the artillery cannot move in the necessary time, the VKS are assigned. The orders are then passed on to the crew of one of the Il-20M flying command posts, which are supported by one, often two, Beriev A-50 SRDLO aircraft, i.e. early warning aircraft, which are primarily used in Russia to manage air operations.

The rest depends on the type and distance of the target. If the target is within five kilometers of the front line, the Il-20M crew selects a pair or four Mi-28 or Ka-52 helicopters, or Su-25 aircraft, which are constantly on alert near the battlefield, supplies their crews with the coordinates of the target, and sends them to attack. They mostly use the "shoot and pray" tactic - they approach at a very low altitude and maximum speed, start a sharp climb at an angle of 30-40 degrees and from a distance of 2,000-3,000 meters they fire unguided missiles, usually S-8 caliber 80 millimeters, at the target.

If the target is more than five kilometers from the front line, the Russians must expect it to be well protected by Ukrainian air defenses. In such a case, a larger operation is required, including detailed preparation and significant support elements. Such operations are rarely ad-hoc, usually preceded by a thorough reconnaissance and briefing of the crews involved, approximately 12-24 hours after target identification. They include support, for example, in the form of Su-34s equipped with SAP-14 electronic warfare containers and Su-35s armed with Ch-59 anti-radar missiles, which try to "cross" the path for other Su-34s armed with Ch-58/58M missiles with electro -optical guidance. Cover from above is provided by Su-27SM, Su-30SM or MiG-31 aircraft. Subsequently, there is an attempt to suppress the Ukrainian air defenses so that the Su-34s can approach, launch their Ch-58s, and the Ukrainians were unable to shoot down these missiles.

That is a pretty long kill chain. I think the Coalition was managing better than that during Desert Storm 30 years ago.
 

Quote

Interviewer: Information from the Ukrainian battlefield is, of course, incomplete and, for understandable reasons, distorted. However, based on what we have, it appears that dogfights between Russian and Ukrainian fighters took place primarily in the early weeks of the conflict. Not much is heard of them now. What does this change consist of?

TC: Aerial battles have been taking place almost daily since the beginning of the war, and until now. However, their results are dismal, so neither party wants to brag about them too much. The primary reason is the lack of tactical training and especially realistic tactical training against a different enemy. In addition, the Russians are obsessed with the idea that their weapons are "the best in the world, no matter what," so they think that "every shot equals a thousand percent hit." Due to this, their pilots regularly attack every Ukrainian aircraft they detect with two to three R-77 missiles, or R-33 in the case of the MiG-31, from too far away, so they miss. For propaganda reasons, the Ministry of Defense in Moscow subsequently credits VKS pilots with "confirmed victories in air combat" and awards

it is, although it rarely has evidence of success—if it even bothers to review such claims. Due to lack of funds, the Ukrainians flew even fewer training hours than the Russians before the war. It was hardly enough to keep them qualified for the given types of machines, be it MiG-29 or Su-27. In addition, many older pilots lived in a sense of superiority stemming from greater experience. They flew in a style they had learned in the past, which led to disproportionately high casualties early in the war. A few younger pilots were given the opportunity before the war to participate in joint exercises with the Air Force of the United States and some NATO countries. Among other things, these exercises brought ideas like trying to ambush the Russians with low-flying MiG-29s and Su-27s in -EMCON mode, i.e. without active radars and transmitting any signals. The idea was to get close to the enemy behind orientation using signals from warning devices in front of his radar and then attack him with medium-range R-27ET missiles with infrared guidance. In theory, on paper, this looks good, but in practice it proved to be too dangerous, as in reality the R-27ET can be effectively guided at a much shorter distance than stated. Even so, several kills seem to have been achieved this way. In response, the Russians began operating in large formations, regularly countering a single Ukrainian MiG or Sukhoi with a dozen of their own fighters. Additionally, they maintain their disadvantage by putting them on the defensive through the barrage of multiple R-77 and R-33 missiles. When you're dodging two, three, five missiles coming your way, you're not thinking about how to attack yourself. Also, Russian fighters never cross the front line, so it's pointless to try to attack them. They are not in Ukrainian-controlled airspace, so the Ukrainians have effectively abandoned such attempts. Today, their MiG-29s and Su-27s are regularly deployed to combat Russian cruise missiles. And these operations are hindered by their obsolescence, complexity and insufficient ergonomics of weapon systems. It rarely happens that even a well-built fighter can shoot down more than one Ch-101 or Ch-59M missile during a mission. Not surprisingly, some pilots are frustrated enough to cross the front line in pursuit of Russian Su-25s, but to no avail.

Quote

Interviewer: Russia has lost a significant number of its most modern aircraft. The losses of Su-34 fighter-bombers are particularly striking. What is the reason? The fact that even modern Russian aircraft operating over Ukraine are not armed with precision-guided munitions is often mentioned, forcing pilots to fly low, making them targets for shoulder-fired anti-aircraft weapons. Is the explanation that simple, or is the problem more complex?

TC: It is a combination of the already mentioned aspects with the illusion of the superiority of one's own weapons and abilities as well as poor planning. For example, the Russian SAP-14 electronic warfare container has been much praised. It was said that one Su-34 equipped with this container can disrupt more than four (American, editor's note) EF-18G Growler machines. The problem is that electronic warfare uses a lot of electricity. So much so that the onboard systems of the Su-34 do not allow the full use of the theoretical capabilities of its Leninets V-004 main radar. It is not surprising that the aircraft cannot fully utilize the SAP-14 either.

In addition, the container is very heavy, so if the Su-34 carries it, in most cases it is armed only with a pair of R-73 air-to-air missiles for self-defense. As a result, the SAP-14 is used for remote jamming, but the Su-34 never carries it when attacking ground targets. Many of them were shot down even by such outdated systems as the Osa-AKM and Strela-10, which the Ukrainians use very masterfully. The fact that it went so far as to shoot down Su-34s equipped with SAP-14s with these surface-to-air missiles, understandably from a long distance, suggests poor planning.

It is therefore not surprising that most of the Su-34s were lost at the start of the war, when they were flown in at the behest of an Il-20M pilot whose crew did not have sufficient situational awareness to recognize potential threats. No Su-34s have been targeted by the Ukrainians since the practice ceased - one was lost in an incident in late July when it accidentally flew through a "shower" of M31A1 missiles fired from the M142 HIMARS system.

Quote

Interviewer: Heavy losses are also recorded by fighters on both sides, especially Su-25 machines. Does it reflect the wrong way of their deployment, or rather the current nature of the Ukrainian conflict?

TC: Both. Pilot tactics on both sides are bad. At the beginning of the war, they repeatedly attacked the same target, circling at relatively low speeds in sight of the target. In a modern war, when the battlefield is full of anti-aircraft systems like in Ukraine, it was like shouting "Take me down, just take me down!" Tactics haven't improved much yet. Currently, 99% of airstrikes by Russian and Ukrainian Su-25s lead to the launch of unguided 80-millimeter missiles, based on the "shoot and pray" principle. In other words, they try to imitate the effect of ground-based rocket launchers BM-21 and, as a rule, due to imprecise guidance, they miss in 99.9% of cases. Ukrainians at least use much heavier 240 millimeter S-24 unguided rockets. It is a very powerful weapon with a much wider range of destruction.

Quote

Interviewer: In recent weeks, US officials have hinted that Ukraine could eventually acquire Western fighter jets, although their supply was strictly ruled out in the early months of the conflict. Could the deployment of, say, fourth-generation fighter jets, such as the F-16, significantly change the course of the war and the situation on the battlefield?

TC: I hardly see the "usefulness" of such ideas, and that was true even long before Putin's re-invasion of Ukraine. It is not that the Ukrainians cannot learn to operate and operate machines like the Fairchild A-10 Thunderbolt II or the Lockheed-Martin F-16C extremely quickly. These are other factors that can basically be summed up as "better tactical overview".

Even if, say, the supplier and Ukraine find a way to solve all the infrastructure problems necessary to operate Western-origin fighter jets in Ukraine, the fundamental fact remains that American and Western European fighter jets are so effective because the West has always deployed them as one of the elements integrated air combat system - they are supported by Lockheed-Martin U-2 reconnaissance aircraft, Boeing RC-135 and E-3 Sentries tankers, Boeing EF-18G Growler electronic warfare aircraft, they have recognition systems and the like. All this gives their pilots and crews a significantly better overview of the situation compared to the enemy. The Ukrainians have extreme courage and are quick learners, but they have none of the previous, which also applies to the support infrastructure necessary to operate Western aircraft.

Moreover, it seems that one of the "problems" of Ukrainian pilots is their readiness to sacrifice for their country. That is noble, but useless in a war as such, which will be so long and which brings massive casualties. Ukrainians do not need dead heroes, but people capable of surviving and letting their opponents die for their country.

Finally, the Ukrainians do not have a fundamental problem with keeping the VKS in check. On the other hand, they have a huge problem with Russian artillery guided by drones. Drones like the Orlan-10 are small, easy to "print" in bulk, and hard to counter. In fact, there is now no single system that can effectively counter them, if we take into account the economic factor and the high cost of each shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missile, which costs about ten times as much as a single Orlan-10. In combination with a large concentration of MSTA-S self-propelled howitzers of 152 millimeters, not to mention BM-27 and BM-30 rocket launchers just behind the front line, they literally grind whole battalions of the Ukrainian army to dust. This is the main factor why Ukraine is still so far from winning this war. It needs weapons that will inflict similar losses on the Russians.

At the moment, its artillery is still not that strong, and the air force cannot change everything in a conflict where the tonnage of explosives fired at the enemy matters most. Therefore, I am in favor of equipping the Ukrainians with a much larger number of drones, including drones capable of searching for and destroying enemy drones, and many pieces of artillery - in the order of hundreds - that can be protected by mobile anti-aircraft systems capable of countering not only aircraft and surface-to-air missiles, but also fire from rocket launchers.

 

[dan/california]

28 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

I will point out withdrawal where you are effectively abandoning thousands of people, and millions overall, there is no solution that you can salvage out a controlled, planned withdrawal that isn't effectively reinvading Afghanistan. How are you supposed to bolster a government that was collapsing that quickly in order to maintain evacuation routes? (A deal signed by Trump mind you) You can't, so you need to send in a significant force to secure the capital, except what about the rest of the major cities, now you have what, several tens of thousands of U.S personnel reinvading the major cities of Afghanistan? 

And obviously, you need to expand logistical footprint to ensure those thousands of U.S personnel are effectively supplied....

Afghanistan is surrounded by Iran on one side, Pakistan on the other, the central asian republics to the north, none of them have U.S bases to set up the logistics needed for U.S maintenance of long term presence in Afghanistan and i severely doubt any of them would be willing to allow it. 

Part of the deal was the withdrawal of U.S personnel, if the deal was violated, sure the U.S could relaunch air operations to reinforce the country but how would the U.S overfly these units? Pakistan? Sure, where did the Taliban leadership operate from until Kabul fell? Quetta. 

We all stare at Russia defending the west bank of the Dnieper, meanwhile we were trying to prop up a government that was land locked and surrounded by countries that are hostile to the U.S and would happily let the U.S burn itself forever in Afghanistan. 

No, i seriously doubt the evacuation could have turned into something of a "clean withdrawal", had we decided to "properly plan" it, all that would have resulted would be flooding it with thousands of troops against a insurgency about to achieve victory, I'm totally sure they would have sat down and let us retake their gains in the urban regions without a single American death....

In 2018, 70% of the country was already controlled or had active Taliban presence. 2015, nearing the end of the drawdown to about 15k NATO forces, this NYT article states that the UN considered half of the country's districts to have high or extreme violence threat levels, High or Extreme levels mean usual UN presence or movement is curtailed, half the country was off limits for the UN in 2015. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/12/world/asia/afghanistan-taliban-united-nations.html

Again, we absolutely tut tut at Russia thinking it could conquer a country of 44 million with only 200k troops, meanwhile you suggest keeping a country of 40 million under control with what? Only 10k-20k troops from collapse? Say only the urban areas, thats 10 million, not nearly enough either. 

Moving on from unrealistic notions, 

In a GUR controlled unit of the International Legion, serious allegations of abuse, violence, and failed leadership have arose, and this occurred despite higher levels of the Ukrainian government being informed. 

https://kyivindependent.com/investigations/suicide-missions-abuse-physical-threats-international-legion-fighters-speak-out-against-leaderships-misconduct

 

What he said...

 

[Butschi]

1 hour ago, Cederic said:

Sorry but the Afghan withdrawal was not controlled, was not properly planned, was not properly communicated to US allies

That is my feeling, too. While I don't buy into all the other Biden slurs, that is just Trump propaganda and generally Biden does a good job, the withdrawal looked too bad to be the brilliant, deliberate maneuver that freed up US ressources for the support of Ukraine that was sure to be needed the next year. But as I said, I'm just curious and if I'm wrong I'll gladly give the man or the administration all the credit they deserve.