How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Butschi]

42 minutes ago, kraze said:

Of course Ukraine isn't a part of NATO - but if the West, as you say, pushes for giving territories to Russia in exchange for no nuclear attack - then it's a huge signal it's OK for the West to give away Baltics too. And why not? I mean "Russia will just occupy Ukraine and then they will be happy and stop. After all they just want their 'slavic union' and that's it." quickly transforms into "Russia will just occupy Baltics and then they will stop. After all USSR borders is all they want. So why not sacrifice 5% of EU to save 95%?" - once Russia threatens everyone with a nuclear holocaust over some "minor" Eastern Euro territories. It's like negotiating with terrorists instead of killing them: if nuclear threat works once - it will work ALWAYS. And then it's the end of NATO.

And afterwards what exactly will China lose? Nothing. After all no nuclear war happens. "Taiwan is just an island in the middle of nowhere, it's not like China will not keep trading with us. So your NVidia's GPU label will say "made in China" and not "made in Taiwan" - who cares? We made sure you aren't dying to radiation - be grateful for that"

And then you have DPRK. "One nuclear weapon is enough to open pandora's box. So maybe South Korea will find a way out on their own?"

Oh and you need not worry about DPRK not having enough nuclear weapons. They all get theirs from Russia anyway.

You are describing a logical chain that just doesn't exist. As you say yourself Ukraine is not part of NATO. That means, there is no legal obligation for NATO to defend Ukraine, much less risk or engage in nuclear war.

Constructing from that, that if NATO support for Ukraine has limits, there are also limits for the Baltics is flawed logic because the Baltics are in NATO and so every NATO member is under legal obligation to defend them. Of course that is no 100% guarantee, either. The NATO council could decide not to apply article 5 or a member could decide not to honor its obligations. But the consequences would be much more serious than not supporting Ukraine. And so Russia would have a much, much higher risk of nuclear annihilation if it attacked the Baltics.

There is also a difference between Ukraine and Taiwan: As far as I am aware, no western country gave military guarantees to Ukraine. The USA just did that for Taiwan. Same goes for South Korea, I think.

A harsh reality but there it is.

[FancyCat]

Eastern Europe has long seen trade offs between Western and Central Europe vs Russia occur with them as the punching bag. That’s why the investment by the Eastern flank of NATO in Ukraine is as significant as it is. If you think they won’t take lessons regarding future Russian conflict with NATO that suggests NATO isn’t strong enough to defend against Russia, then I’ll just point the amount of people in the Baltics and the amount of people in the Ukraine parts seized are the same.

[The_Capt]

1 hour ago, Bulletpoint said:

 

I just wrote a long reply that my computer then deleted because I pressed the wrong key. So instead of typing it all out again, I'll just say that we have different perspectives on this.

Gawd, I hate when that happens.

1 hour ago, kraze said:

Of course Ukraine isn't a part of NATO - but if the West, as you say, pushes for giving territories to Russia in exchange for no nuclear attack - then it's a huge signal it's OK for the West to give away Baltics too.

Ok, that is a major unsupported leap of logic, and frankly we are get way too many of these in the last 50 pages - at some point this is going to devolve this venture into the same rhetorical and propaganda spaces we see all over the internet, and at that point I will be lobbying to close the thread down because it is no longer keeping people informed, it will have become a dogmatic platform.

If Russia employs battlefield nuclear weapons, there will be a response, there must be.  However, let's say hypothetically that the West backs down and says "ok, well now it is getting real - let's negotiate an endstate".  Yes, it is not a good thing for the future risk the employment of nuclear weapons may have on imperialist expansion.  Russia will likely try the same game elsewhere; however what is missing between the Baltic nations and Ukraine is certainty. 

If Russia annexes, invades or attacks a Baltic nation, and IF that nation declares an article 5 then Russia is not getting handsie on some side hustle, it is declaring war on NATO.  "Oh, sure but who says NATO will actually do anything about it?" some say cynically - well 1) NATO nations sure as hell have done something about Ukraine and 2) NATO is too big to fail, and 3) if NATO does fail - and don't take this too personally - but we individually won't give two figs what happens in Baltics or the entirety of Eastern Europe, and even more bluntly in North America, we might not even really care too much about all of Europe anymore - at least as far as collective defence goes.

1) You know, a simple "thank you for having our backs" would go a long way once and awhile.  Instead we get "well what have you done for me lately" and "what do you mean you are not willing to risk nuclear escalation for Ukraine?!  How dare you!!"  I am very grateful that those voices are in the minority.  NATO has already committed to the defence of Ukraine, the question is how far will that will last in a nuclear exchange...good question, but I suspect it isn't to drop everything and declare unconditional surrender.  But we are not likely to be interested in a bottomless pit of cost and risk either.  And before anyone crawls on a morality high horse - take a long look at Africa and the Middle East, we have and will let places burn to the ground outside of our orbit/key interests or if risk/cost gets too high - "change the channel Marge."

2) In NATO and out of NATO is a very significant different state - kinda why we make such a big deal about entry.  By definition NATO is a collective defensive alliance, supported by a very complex and political treaty.  NATO is, in effect, the military power of the western world and the hard power that backs up the western rules-based order.  Without it, that order starts to unravel.  If Russia pushes the West into "well let us do what we want, and NATO collapses" situation, we are living in the End Times.  Russia, as immensely stupid as they have been, has yet to try and back the West into a corner, even though they themselves are being rammed into one.  Why?  Because the West would crush Russia beyond recognition to protect itself...and NATO is central to that equation.  I expect that NATO would accept nuclear exchange losses, leaving Russia a radioactive wasteland for a few centuries, before it is going to allow itself to fall apart through direct force.  Oddly enough,  Putin was on the right track to actually defeat NATO by continuing to support narratives that "NATO was irrelevant" - NATO could have evolved into something less than it is now, that would have given Russia more....wait for it...options space.  But then they did this useless war and pushed NATO in the exact opposite direction.  Maybe Russia needs NATO to be big and strong and scary so that it can hold itself together, but they even have to be smart enough to realize...they just made NATO big strong and scary.

3) If NATO collapses under direct pressure.  The whole edifice falls apart.  Then, and try not to be too hurt, we got much bigger problems than Ukraine, the Baltics or Russia to worry about.  We would likely see a series of new collective defensive bodies arise from the ashes, and a fair number of them can't even find Ukraine or the Baltics on the map.  The EU might hold together militarily but Europe has a bit of shaky history in that regard.  I suspect it may fall back on internal alignment, most of which won't care what happens in the Baltics.  The bigger players will likely try to hold it together, 5 EYES+ for example but even then, the most liberal humanist nations are going to start to contract back to their own borders and interests.  This will have economic repercussions as we no longer have unified collective military power to secure globalization. I expect China will be invading Taiwan the following Tues - at which point all of this Eastern Europe/Russia noise is going to fade to background while we hit a singularity decision point in Asia. 

So as bluntly as I can - The Baltics are more important to NATO and the West because  they are in NATO under the collective defence mechanism that affords.  We will take far fewer risks or BS from Russia in these countries because  they are within that framework.  I suspect that there are more than a few politicians that are quietly thanking whatever gods they pray to that Ukraine is not in NATO right now because we would not even have the option to pull back. 

That said, the issue of having Ukraine in NATO is likely largely settled at this point, so once this war is over, it will also come under that collective protection - for the love of god, just take the freakin win!  Russia nuclear deterrence is working in this war, that is why we are not Shock and Awing Moscow, Bagdad Style.  In this game of chicken Ukraine may lose - I personally do not think that is the most probable outcome but, dare we admit it and not get yelled at for 15 pages - it is a possibility.

Lastly, I am going to put out the question of "what are we doing here?"  On this thread?  If we are continuing the collective and distributed objective analysis and assessment of this war as it unfolds, then let's do that.  I think we are safe to say that we all agree Russia's war is illegal and immoral and they deserve everything they are getting.  However, if this is turning into a maximalist Pro-Ukrainian propaganda machine, I am out - lock it down and people can go elsewhere for their information.

Edited September 24, 2022 by The_Capt

[dan/california]

8 hours ago, panzermartin said:

This looks and sounds like a flying Honda moto cub. But seems suicide drones like that don't need to be particularly sophisticated to be effective. 

Rather the only sophistication is in the comm link. 

[Taranis]

"Major" influx of vehicles seeking to cross from Russia to Georgia

Quote

 

The Russian authorities recognized, on Saturday, a “significant” influx of cars seeking to go to Georgia, in full mobilization to fight in Ukraine, with some 2,300 vehicles counted at a single border post.

These vehicles "have arrived in the Republic of North Ossetia and (...) are queuing to cross the Verkhni Lars checkpoint", said the Ministry of the Interior of this Russian republic bordering Georgia. .

 

Source : Le Monde

[dan/california]

7 hours ago, hcrof said:

Seems like the US army is looking at my hunter concept already!!

https://youtu.be/aD6YhuU0id0

Video is worth  the watch. They don't talk about the single most important thing about it enough. It is an all electric drive train. The diesel just powers a BIG generator. That means the full electrical power output of the vehicle is available to run a laser or a VERY high powered jammer/radar/ect. The 35mmm cannon is just a place holder until something else is ready.

[Butschi]

29 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Lastly, I am going to put out the question of "what are we doing here?"  On this thread?  If we are continuing the collective and distributed objective analysis and assessment of this war as it unfolds, then let's do that.  I think we are safe to say that we all agree Russia's war is illegal and immoral and they deserve everything they are getting.  However, if this is turning into a maximalist Pro-Ukrainian propaganda machine, I am out - lock it down and people can go elsewhere for their information.

This.

[dan/california]

4 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

Putin's plan A was that Ukraine would collapse immediately.

Plan B was that the UKR army would be defeated relatively fast.

Plan C was to concentrate all forces on taking eastern Ukraine.

Plan D was  to concentrate all forces on taking only the two "republics"

Plan E is now to not lose more of the land already captured. Annexation and conscription are the tools Putin hopes will be able to achieve this.

 

But I think we all expect this to fail, so what's Plan F?

 

With annexation, I don't see how he can really make any serious peace negotiations, giving up Crimea or the "republics". Declaring something part of Russia and then giving it away doesn't seem politically feasible.

I only really see two options. Either Putin just watches as his armies are routed out of Ukraine. Not politically feasible either. Or he makes a serious and specified ultimatum, saying if Ukraine does not withdraw to a certain line, Russia will employ a limited number of nuclear weapons against military targets inside Ukraine.

Tactical nuclear weapons might have a limited miltary use in modern war, but they do have political weight. Faced with this kind of ultimatum, Ukraine and NATO would have a real headache about how to respond.

Ukraine might be gung-ho, but they are still dependent on aid from their Western allies. Europe and USA could let Zelensky know that he had to back down. The war would end with an unease armistice, not a peace settlement, and Putin would get his off ramp.

 

3 hours ago, kraze said:

And then enjoy watching putin's nuclear ultimatum about Baltic states in 5 years.

And Chinese nuclear ultimatum about Taiwan in 2023.

And DPRK nuclear ultimatum about South Korea.

 

And the end of NATO.

 

If nukes make any country a fair game and excuse genocides - countries having them can occupy any non-nuclear neighbor without any consequences. Everybody thus will have to get nukes faster than their neighbour to survive. And eventually they will start going off everywhere.

Or a bunch can actually man up and own it for trying to be friends with russian empire in 1991.

We have to straight up tell Putin that if he goes nuclear NATO is all in, Starting with a full cruise missile/SEAD campaign in Ukraine, then boots on ground, then we let the Poles invade Belarus as they so badly want to. The magical nuclear stick can only lead to two places, Russias complete defeat, or the end of civilization. Russia has amply demonstrated what they do to conquered people, and I am a no on that.

Edited September 24, 2022 by dan/california

[Battlefront.com]

5 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

I think the majority of the population in any country just wants to be left alone and focus on the challenges of their own lives. It's a minority of people who want to keep up with politics and go out and actively demonstrate and protest and write angry letters to newspapers etc.

The difference in Russia is that the politically engaged part of the population has been systematically suppressed over decades, with most of the opposition leaders in exile or in jail.

That's the thing.  In a Western country the middle might not want to get involved, but they are better informed about events and what they mean.  They are likely to get upset earlier in the process.  For all the horrors that the West has put upon 3rd world countries over the years, the threshold for outrage by the the middle portion of the populace is vastly lower than it is in Russia.  With Russia the middle portion is disengaged from morality and ethical responsibility for their nation's actions to a massive degree.  So much so that active support for genocide and mass destruction is widespread. 

Still, the middle of Russian society does have their limits and those limits are being tested now.  Putin wasn't afraid of mobilization without good reason.  As the old saying goes, you're not paranoid if they really are out to get you!

Steve

[sross112]

1 hour ago, dan/california said:

This looks and sounds like a flying Honda moto cub.

A technical question for our AA guys:

Will MANPADS be able to defeat these? They appear to be slow enough that they should be detectable and engageable by the time they get to their target. I believe (not an AA expert) that most MANPADs target the heat source. Would a little two cylinder gas engine like that have a significant enough heat signature for them to engage it? Do the more modern systems have optical targeting like the Javelin?

Then also, wouldn't these be super vulnerable to kinetic systems like Gephard or Tunguska? I know way, way, way back there was talk about AA Radars and how they weren't good for little drones because of the small size and low speed but these look bigger and should be trackable, right?

Thanks in advance for your wisdom and knowledge.

Edited September 24, 2022 by sross112

[Battlefront.com]

6 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Our maps are better than their maps....

 

 

 

Ukraine's attack around Lyman was laid to waste by a military force that just abandoned 1/2 of its equipment and ran away.  But wait, it didn't run away, it "regrouped" and all the videos and images of dozens of abandoned tanks were actually Ukrainian.

Sometimes I wish I could be like this guy.  Cruising through life, making things up, not caring how it's going to look a day later when proven wrong, make up something new, rinse and repeat.  Must be so easy!

The above post is a perfect example of the difference between a pure propagandist and someone like Girkin or Rybar.  They lie and distort, but are basically grounded in reality (even if grudgingly).  No wonder they hate the propagandists.  They interfere with their messaging to their audiences, whereas we just laugh and ignore propagandists.  Well, unless they are propagandists on Western TV shows or in Western media... then we get grumpy.

Steve

[dan/california]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

Gawd, I hate when that happens.

Ok, that is a major unsupported leap of logic, and frankly we are get way too many of these in the last 50 pages - at some point this is going to devolve this venture into the same rhetorical and propaganda spaces we see all over the internet, and at that point I will be lobbying to close the thread down because it is no longer keeping people informed, it will have become a dogmatic platform.

If Russia employs battlefield nuclear weapons, there will be a response, there must be.  However, let's say hypothetically that the West backs down and says "ok, well now it is getting real - let's negotiate an endstate".  Yes, it is not a good thing for the future risk the employment of nuclear weapons may have on imperialist expansion.  Russia will likely try the same game elsewhere; however what is missing between the Baltic nations and Ukraine is certainty. 

If Russia annexes, invades or attacks a Baltic nation, and IF that nation declares an article 5 then Russia is not getting handsie on some side hustle, it is declaring war on NATO.  "Oh, sure but who says NATO will actually do anything about it?" some say cynically - well 1) NATO nations sure as hell have done something about Ukraine and 2) NATO is too big to fail, and 3) if NATO does fail - and don't take this too personally - but we individually won't give two figs what happens in Baltics or the entirety of Eastern Europe, and even more bluntly in North America, we might not even really care too much about all of Europe anymore - at least as far as collective defence goes.

1) You know, a simple "thank you for having our backs" would go a long way once and awhile.  Instead we get "well what have you done for me lately" and "what do you mean you are not willing to risk nuclear escalation for Ukraine?!  How dare you!!"  I am very grateful that those voices are in the minority.  NATO has already committed to the defence of Ukraine, the question is how far will that will last in a nuclear exchange...good question, but I suspect it isn't to drop everything and declare unconditional surrender.  But we are not likely to be interested in a bottomless pit of cost and risk either.  And before anyone crawls on a morality high horse - take a long look at Africa and the Middle East, we have and will let places burn to the ground outside of our orbit/key interests or if risk/cost gets too high - "change the channel Marge."

2) In NATO and out of NATO is a very significant different state - kinda why we make such a big deal about entry.  By definition NATO is a collective defensive alliance, supported by a very complex and political treaty.  NATO is, in effect, the military power of the western world and the hard power that backs up the western rules-based order.  Without it, that order starts to unravel.  If Russia pushes the West into "well let us do what we want, and NATO collapses" situation, we are living in the End Times.  Russia, as immensely stupid as they have been, has yet to try and back the West into a corner, even though they themselves are being rammed into one.  Why?  Because the West would crush Russia beyond recognition to protect itself...and NATO is central to that equation.  I expect that NATO would accept nuclear exchange losses, leaving Russia a radioactive wasteland for a few centuries, before it is going to allow itself to fall apart through direct force.  Oddly enough,  Putin was on the right track to actually defeat NATO by continuing to support narratives that "NATO was irrelevant" - NATO could have evolved into something less than it is now, that would have given Russia more....wait for it...options space.  But then they did this useless war and pushed NATO in the exact opposite direction.  Maybe Russia needs NATO to be big and strong and scary so that it can hold itself together, but they even have to be smart enough to realize...they just made NATO big strong and scary.

3) If NATO collapses under direct pressure.  The whole edifice falls apart.  Then, and try not to be too hurt, we got much bigger problems than Ukraine, the Baltics or Russia to worry about.  We would likely see a series of new collective defensive bodies arise from the ashes, and a fair number of them can't even find Ukraine or the Baltics on the map.  The EU might hold together militarily but Europe has a bit of shaky history in that regard.  I suspect it may fall back on internal alignment, most of which won't care what happens in the Baltics.  The bigger players will likely try to hold it together, 5 EYES+ for example but even then, the most liberal humanist nations are going to start to contract back to their own borders and interests.  This will have economic repercussions as we no longer have unified collective military power to secure globalization. I expect China will be invading Taiwan the following Tues - at which point all of this Eastern Europe/Russia noise is going to fade to background while we hit a singularity decision point in Asia. 

So as bluntly as I can - The Baltics are more important to NATO and the West because  they are in NATO under the collective defence mechanism that affords.  We will take far fewer risks or BS from Russia in these countries because  they are within that framework.  I suspect that there are more than a few politicians that are quietly thanking whatever gods they pray to that Ukraine is not in NATO right now because we would not even have the option to pull back. 

That said, the issue of having Ukraine in NATO is likely largely settled at this point, so once this war is over, it will also come under that collective protection - for the love of god, just take the freakin win!  Russia nuclear deterrence is working in this war, that is why we are not Shock and Awing Moscow, Bagdad Style.  In this game of chicken Ukraine may lose - I personally do not think that is the most probable outcome but, dare we admit it and not get yelled at for 15 pages - it is a possibility.

Lastly, I am going to put out the question of "what are we doing here?"  On this thread?  If we are continuing the collective and distributed objective analysis and assessment of this war as it unfolds, then let's do that.  I think we are safe to say that we all agree Russia's war is illegal and immoral and they deserve everything they are getting.  However, if this is turning into a maximalist Pro-Ukrainian propaganda machine, I am out - lock it down and people can go elsewhere for their information.

You are, as always, correct about a great many things. But let's play this out just a little further, before we try to get back to the supply of winter socks and Bradley IFVs to Ukraine. If Putin plays the nuclear card and wins, the nonproliferation regime is GONE. Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Iran, South Africa, Saudi Arabia, Poland, AND Ukraine will all be nuclear powers within a year. Who knows what other countries would follow along in three to five year timeline? Is there ANY way this doesn't lead to a large scale nuclear war within a decade or two? Malaysia and Indonesia would certainly, be along shortly. I don't know how much nuclear material Vietnam has on hand? Vietnam certainly does, though, any bets they haven't had a plan sitting in a drawer for decades?

Putin has put all of us in a place we DID NOT want to be. But on balance facing down Russia now while the whole country and military is provably, demonstrably, failing apart seems like the lower long term risk. If someone like Ghirkin gets put in charge they might be minimally competent for the next round, facing people with independently controlled nukes who have had a while to think about just how awful getting conquered is.

I will even concede that Crimea is a different case than trying to freeze that current battle lines, and with that I will attempt to move on. And if Russia can't hold the entrance to Crimea with conventional forces, we are closer to the loose nuke roundup, than the current Russian/Ukrainian war.

Edited September 24, 2022 by dan/california

[Battlefront.com]

2 hours ago, Zeleban said:

Most in this forum were sure that Putin would not attack Ukraine. After all, he is a master of non-standard moves.

You just made Bulletpoint's case for him   Few, including Ukrainians, thought Putin would be stupid enough to launch a full scale attack on Ukraine because it would fail and he'd be deposed (or at least attempted).  And yet Putin did exactly what rational analysis said was a really dumb and self defeating thing.

Can we trust that Putin is not dumb enough to try a tac nuke even though we have concluded it's a self defeating move?

I don't think we should be that complacent.  Which means we should proceed with the notion that nukes are on the table and take it into consideration when planning.

To continue with Bulletpoint's robber analogy, you're standing there with a gun in your face and you wonder if the gun is loaded.  You resist, he shoots you in the leg.  OK, loaded and he's also willing to shoot.  If 5 cops with drawn guns come around the corner, how sure are you that the robber is going to put down his gun and surrender instead of trying to shoot his way out of the bad situation?

While I don't think we should ease up on destroying Russia economically and militarily, I do think it is a very bad idea to do it without taking nukes into consideration.

Steve

[Zeleban]

14 minutes ago, sross112 said:

A technical question for our AA guys:

Will MANPADS be able to defeat these? They appear to be slow enough that they should be detectable and engageable by the time they get to their target. I believe (not an AA expert) that most MANPADs target the heat source. Would a little two cylinder gas engine like that have a significant enough heat signature for them to engage it? Do the more modern systems have optical targeting like the Javelin?

Then also, wouldn't these be super vulnerable to kinetic systems like Gephard or Tunguska? I know way, way, way back there was talk about AA Radars and how they weren't good for little drones because of the small size and low speed but these look bigger and should be trackable, right?

Thanks in advance for your wisdom and knowledge.

 

Such drones are easy targets for MANPADS, they are very noisy and slow. There is a video on Twitter of shooting down such a drone from a MANPADS, which means that its thermal signature allows the thermal homing head to capture. As for artillery systems with radar guidance (Gepard, Shilka), I can’t say.

[Battlefront.com]

On 9/23/2022 at 11:10 AM, Calamine Waffles said:

@Grigb this is the paper I mentioned I am writing on comparing the T-64BV 2017 and T-72B3M (2016): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DBBz-3MkZUoBLnvRX8qyFtMZmn8rKslAsgG4-8_Y1SM/edit
 

I need to update it to add more information about tank combat in Ukraine that has occurred since the Kyiv withdrawal in April (such as the information from Shawshank Redemption's channel and the interview with Roman Bahaiev etc.), but I'd welcome your feedback (and that of anyone else knowledgeable about Ukrainian and Russian armour).

Downloaded for light evening reading   Thanks!

Steve

[Grigb]

Mobilization Train wreck:

Just in case:

1. Military commissariat = enlistment office
2. Military commissar = voenkom = enlistment officer

Margo Symonian (yes, that Symonian)

Quote

Yesterday it was officially announced that the mobilization does not apply to full-time and part-time students.

Today, military enlistment offices say that 'it applies only to conscripts, not mobilized'.

It was said that privates are mobilized up to 35 years old. Summonses come to forty-year-olds.

Do [I need to] name specific [ID] numbers of military commissariats and names of military commissars, or is it not necessary yet?

They're pissing people off, on purpose, to anger [everybody]. As if they were sent by Kiev.

Rybar

Quote

The internal Russian front of the mobilization war — analysis of the Rybar

By the beginning of the fourth day, even we are forced to state that the partial mobilization announced by the Supreme Commander-in-Chief and the Minister of Defense continues to be implemented quite differently from what was stated by the top officials.

Western and Ukrainian media space pressure [us] at several points:

Discrediting the SMO and the military-political leadership of Russia

The key thesis: the leadership of the Russian Defense Ministry is not coping with SMO, Putin almost dismissed Shoigu, but he [Shoigu] allegedly promised to mobilize "without a hitch", and he was allegedly given the last chance.

[People from non-central] regions are being mobilized — and, moreover, [they take] mainly representatives of national minorities

The thesis is aimed at inciting ethnic hatred in the regions, hatred of the Minister of Defense as a representative of one of the national minorities and disruption of mobilization in the regions.

Recruits will be "thrown" to the front and used as cannon fodder

The thesis is aimed at discrediting combat training and logistics systems. They are not in the best condition as it is. But any attempts by the leadership of the training centers to train the mobilized, force them to go into a bayonet attack in [close] formation and teach [them useless] field manual discredit the very idea of partial mobilization.

These are the main, but not all, information [front] lines that are promoted in the global segment [of Internet].

Why are information attacks successful? What are the reasons for the partial failure of mobilization?

Lack of mastery of the situation

The military commissariats do not know the instructions of the General Staff, nor the words of the political leaders. They [words] do not reach them [commissariats], or they do not reach them in full. It seems that the public information policy of the Ministry of Defense (no matter how bad it is) [internal instructions] exist separately [of each other].

A military commissar is the only serviceman in the RMC [Regional Military Comissariat]. The rest are civilians, they cannot make decisions, they do not know either instructions, or regulatory framework.

  "Stick system"

In the subjects of the Russian Federation, there is a minimum number of people that military enlistment offices, according to the initial instructions, must provide. Bonuses, penalties, incentives and some positions depend on this number. They try to fulfill them by hook or by crook.

  Attempts to solve long-standing problems

At once they are trying to deal with the lack of normal accounting of the data of reservists. Therefore, in some regions, the number of subpoenas sent out exceeds 50 thousand (!) subpoenas per region.

People en masse, regardless of the VUS [MOS], are called to verify the data, and then [they are taken to] simply execute the plan. Not everyone is able to find a common language with the military commissar and the commission. Intimidated, disconnected from reality, humanitarians [soft polite men] are afraid to say an extra word...and they get a ticket to the training center.

Will they be of any use? The question is rhetorical.

This is not a complete list of the problems faced by the mobilization system of the Russian Federation. There are regions and military commissariats where there is a normal, human approach.

But due to the large number of problems, all this pales against the background of illiteracy of other departments. Local people, of course, do not read Telegram channels. They do not read anything at all — some instructions from higher headquarters are not brought to them. Everyone keeps in mind only the figures of the global plan, which must be fulfilled at all costs.

And at the top, probably, wise officials are sitting, who are filled with confidence that the people [plebs] will grumble but get used to. And smartphones will be taken away from the mobilized in the training centers, so no one will know anything.

It won't work like this.

Information attacks against the leadership of the Russian Federation will work. A plan to discredit the Russian Defense Ministry will work. A plan to incite ethnic hatred will work.

Probably, it is really necessary to present to each military commissar an "auditor" from the DVKR [Counter-intel dep], who will have his own "plan" for the number of identified screw ups. Hopefully this is how we will win — minus by minus, perhaps it will give [us] a plus.

 

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

Lastly, I am going to put out the question of "what are we doing here?"  On this thread?  If we are continuing the collective and distributed objective analysis and assessment of this war as it unfolds, then let's do that. 

Yeah, let's get back to this please

Steve

[dan/california]

12 minutes ago, Grigb said:

Mobilization Train wreck:

Just in case:

1. Military commissariat = enlistment office
2. Military commissar = voenkom = enlistment officer

Margo Symonian (yes, that Symonian)

Rybar

 

What are the odds that this complete cluster bleep had a little Ukrainian help? Could the SBU have hacked the primary database for the mobilization and turned the chaos up to 11? I mean propaganda mouthpieces of various pieces of the Russian state are declaring this thing to be bleeped by the start of day four. 

Edit: How long until Shoigu falls out a window?

Edited September 24, 2022 by dan/california

[Battlefront.com]

10 minutes ago, Grigb said:

Mobilization Train wreck:

Just in case:

1. Military commissariat = enlistment office
2. Military commissar = voenkom = enlistment officer

Margo Symonian (yes, that Symonian)

I think her account was hacked

10 minutes ago, Grigb said:

Rybar

 

Wow, that was... something.

OK, the common theme between the two is that Russia is f'n up mobilization and it's going to produce crappy military results while at the same time pissing off the bulk of the population, especially in the targeted ethnic regions.  In other words, exceptional Kremlin technique for ensuring they get the worst result for their efforts.

What's interesting to see is that both Symonian and Rybar are explicitly stating that nefarious forces are deliberately screwing up mobilization in order to deliberately turn public opinion against the war.  That's... interesting.  It shows that they both believe that this mobilization policy is going to wind up creating major social unrest and that this is the deliberate intention of the people carrying it out.

I think they are correct that it is deliberate, but incorrect that the motivation is to harm the Russian Federation and/or the war in Ukraine.  I think the MoD figured the quickest way to get a revolution going was to attempt mobilization of white, ethnic Russians evenly and fairly.  In other words, mobilizing large chunks of St. Petersburg, Moscow, Kursk, etc.  But they have quotas to fill and those "sticks" have to come from somewhere.  Less risky is going to ethnic areas and grabbing them first.  They are already 2nd class citizens, so the local thug police will keep them inline.

Steve

 

[Grigb]

6 minutes ago, dan/california said:

What are the odds that this complete cluster bleep had a little Ukrainian help? Could the SBU have hacked the primary database for the mobilization and turned the chaos up to 11? I mean propaganda mouthpieces of various pieces of the Russian state are declaring this thing to be bleeped by the start of day four. 

 

What you call cluster beep is the system itself. This is how it works. This is how everything in RU army works. You can actually see it yourself - there is classic RU comedy DMB. It is renowned for accurate depiction of RU conscription process and army internal functioning.

(239) DEMOBBED HQ (DMB, "ДМБ" 2000) comedy about Russian army with English subtitles. - YouTube

Well, translation of the name is bit off - I would translate it as [Destined for] DMB.

Do not get me wrong UKR Info Ops are active, but they are mostly limited to spreading false rumors (Yesterday they fooled my relative who decided to stay in RU). However, these rumors are just icing on the cake.

There is a certain RU rumor that cluster beep was enhanced by an anti-Putin group from inside. But I do not have anything to prove it.

 

6 minutes ago, dan/california said:

Edit: How long until Shoigu falls out a window?

Shoigu case is complicated. Shoigu is PR clown and placeholder for Putin himself. Blaming him for all the failures is simply unjust. It is not Shoigu who built the System (it is USSR creation). And it is not Shoigu who failed to reform it - you cannot blame your puppet for your own faults.

On top of that Shoigu is an old Putin loyalist. Killing him unjustly will send shock waves through all Putin loyalists. That is more dangerous than not punishing him publicly. Maybe Putin will decide to relieve him at some point but that will be it. obviously, it is just my opinion.

[The_Capt]

55 minutes ago, dan/california said:

If Putin plays the nuclear card and wins, the nonproliferation regime is GONE.

I am not sure about "gone" but man we would drive ourselves nuts trying to salvage it.  It also depends on the context of use.  If Russia had tried it while on the offensive and it led to them getting what they want - yep, all bets off and Heaven is on fire.

If Russia does it in "self-defence" of regions or partial that they basically stole in order to put the brakes on the UA rolling over them...gets a little more grey...and frankly, we will be desperate for grey at that point.  It is ambiguous warfare, worse it is ambiguous nuclear warfare - ok, take a minute, we are actually talking about this in 2022.... - ok, and we are back.  

Hypothetically, let's say Russia uses a few battlefield nuclear weapons at the choke point in Crimea.  A Bn of UA gets wiped out...ok.   Well first thing is that there definitely will be an escalation and reaction - let's play DIME:

Diplomatic - I expect that Russia will join NK in the bleacher seats within the international community.  Out of UNSC and any other influential bodies...the murmurs for that have already started.  The US is very likely to get more aggressive about boxing Russia up until Putin is gone.  I suspect China and India will back way off support for Russia as it becomes way too toxic.  Iran will probably still talk to them but Russia will likely become a hermit nation diplomatically, holding its near abroad like tatters around its cold naked body.

Information - see Diplomatic.  Worried about Russian information warfare...well still worry but the western security apparatus will kick into high gear. Further, in this space I have zero doubt will switch from integrated deterrence to active integrated deterrence - which is just code for political warfare.  So things like support to resistance within Russia itself are on the table, along with all sorts of stuff we hold back on because we are worried about escalation.

Military - Oh my...oh my.  We discussed this before, but I am not sure we would automatically lob nuclear weapons back as that is on the nuclear escalation ladder.  We will start doing a lot of stuff in the region and abroad.  We talked about opening up a Pacific deterrence front.  Kalingrad etc.  Ukraine will likely get more conventional support but defensive if we want them to slow down, include higher tech AD and BMD.  You could see a US/NATO carrier battlegroup in the Black Sea and other penning Russia in.  A no-fly zone might be on the table, direct SOF support...the list goes on.  NATO will be funded until at least D+30 after the Second Coming of Christ.

Economic - forget it.  Russia is in the penalty box until it is destitute and we can force them to cough up the nukes...again North Korea.  Sanctions and isolation.  To the point China and India might jump in - crazy is bad for their business too.

Now here is the thing - we could do all that and still ask the UA to put the brakes on in the scenario we are talking about.  You see from above we are quickly getting to the "Russia has nothing left to lose" point, and that is very dangerous - especially with a deluded 70 year old rabid nationalist who manages to keep his stubby fingers on the button by this point.

Could we stop the war and draw new lines and live with?...I think, yes, but it is conditions based.  After Russia puts the gun down, we would then go crazy re-affirming nuclear security in those nervous nations.  I would tell my son to get into the BMD game because it is going to go crazy.  We will be parking those things everywhere...SDI would likely come back, an oldie but a goldie...maybe the original Journey would come back too.  Would some nations go "nope", don't buy it, time for my own nukes?  Very likely?  Could we keep the nuclear club from becoming a rave - maybe, if we can reaffirm the security of the status quo.

I think you can start to see why I expect pressure on Ukraine will start well before we get anywhere near close to this scenario.  However, if that pressure does not come, I would take it as a clear sign that we know Putin is full of crap...which would also be wonderful.

This is all incredibly scary and unpredictable space - and it blows my mind that it is on the table in 2022.  You are absolutely correct, it could break C-WMD, I am not sold it is automatic but it would be on the table as well.  It is what makes this war so incredibly dangerous.  

 So back to "are tanks dead?"...?  

 

[Grigb]

33 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

I think they are correct that it is deliberate, but incorrect that the motivation is to harm the Russian Federation and/or the war in Ukraine.  I think the MoD figured the quickest way to get a revolution going was to attempt mobilization of white, ethnic Russians evenly and fairly.  In other words, mobilizing large chunks of St. Petersburg, Moscow, Kursk, etc.  But they have quotas to fill and those "sticks" have to come from somewhere.  Less risky is going to ethnic areas and grabbing them first.  They are already 2nd class citizens, so the local thug police will keep them inline.

Steve

Yes, I believe so as well. They just want as many sticks as possible without social unrest in the Center of RU. There are rumors that thug guard is especially blood thirsty against anti-war protesters because they do not want to go to UKR themselves again. Safer to beat up protesters and fill in meat wagon with a new cannon fodder. 

[TheVulture]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-63021117

Dmitry Bulgakov: Putin fires deputy defence chief amid supply failures

 

Sorry for the text size - can't edit it on mobile. 

Edited September 24, 2022 by TheVulture

[Grigb]

People demand blood and Kremlin tries to give them something

Quote

Mizintsev replaced Bulgakov as Deputy Minister of Defense of Russia
Moscow. September 24. INTERFAX.EN - Mikhail Mizintsev has been appointed to the post of Deputy Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation, who oversees the rear; Dmitry Bulgakov has been dismissed from the post of Deputy Minister of Defense in connection with the transition to another job, the Russian military department announced on Saturday.

"Colonel-General Mikhail Mizintsev has been appointed to the post of Deputy Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation responsible for logistics of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation," the Russian Defense Ministry said in a statement.

 

[Grigb]

Apart from RU native workforce these morons managed to scare away migrants too.

Quote

But there are positive sides to partial mobilization — with all the flaws and reservations.

Against the background of the initiative announced by Kirill Kabanov  a few days ago, who proposed to oblige migrants to undergo military service under a contract and perform tasks in the zone of SMO, a massive outflow of representatives of the Kyrgyz diaspora is taking place in the capital region.

People are quitting catering events, fleeing construction sites and returning home en masse.

What the opponents of business-lobbied migration/the actual replacement of the Russian population by immigrants from Central Asia could not achieve for years, representatives of the Ministry of Defense managed to implement in four days.

Have you ever wondered how did RU Empire manage to screw itself in to 1917? Well, you are about to spectate it.