How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[panzermartin]

I find it incredible that people are so hard on Germany on the war thing. "Common, sell more Leopards Fritz, can't you see the opportunity !" It's like those people haven't studied WW2 all their lives and the scariest wound that war left to this country. A country that was painstakingly rebuilt brick by brick by the people left behind. And chose instead of planning to avenge the former rival to build a new relation that seemed like the logical bond. 

Edited September 27, 2022 by panzermartin

[Bulletpoint]

5 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

That's a more moderate view of Europe's dysfunction and their collective reliance on the US to fix their problems.

Fixing problems by military intervention has not been in fashion here since WW2, and modern Europe is to a large degree designed in the USA.

A toothless Germany was just what you needed after the last big war. Now maybe you'd like the Germans to show a bit more fighting spirit, but that's been crushed out of them.

Europe is still terrified of its own shadow.

[billbindc]

6 minutes ago, Butschi said:

But I do, what will you do about it?

You also didn't get my point. I did not criticise the US for not sending M1s to Ukraine. I just asserted that they don't. I criticise people for singling out Germany despite no other country supplies MBTs and IFVs. And of course I can rightly ask why the US don't supply M1s or M2s. I just don't believe its only because "well we already send ton of other stuff". I believe the Biden administration doesn't do it for a concrete reason. Again, I don't criticise them for it, just saying that if others are allowed to not deliver that kind of equipment for their own reasons than so should Germany.

 

I will admonish, no more. But the above should be admonishment itself.

[Butschi]

Just now, Battlefront.com said:

IHowever, when they behave irrationally they tend to correct themselves fairly quickly because rational actors within the markets tend to calm things down.

Ok, I'm really no economist but generally what you say is only true in an ideal market. The energy sector, however, is more or less a cartel. Not necessarily in criminal way, you don't have to fix prices in a back room. The market is just very transparent. Fuel prices, for instance vary little from one gas station to another. And prices there are much higher than they would have to. In Germany at least, margins this year are way higher than last year. What's more, due to this merit order mechanism, prices for electricity are dominated by the most expensive supplier.

[The_MonkeyKing]

Just now, Bulletpoint said:

Fixing problems by military intervention has not been in fashion here since WW2, and modern Europe is to a large degree designed in the USA.

A toothless Germany was just what you needed after the last big war. Now maybe you'd like the Germans to show a bit more fighting spirit, but that's been crushed out of them.

Europe is still terrified of its own shadow.

Europe and especially Germany was not toothless 30 years ago.

[billbindc]

3 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

I find it incredible that people are so hard on Germany on the war thing. "Common, sell more Leopards Fritz, can't you the see the opportunity !" It's like those people haven't studied WW2 all their lives and the scariest wound that war left to this country. A country that was painstakingly rebuilt brick by brick by the people left behind. And chose instead of planning to revenge the former rival to build a new relationship that seemed like the logical bond. 

Which side was Ukraine on in that fracas, hmmmmm?

[Bulletpoint]

2 minutes ago, The_MonkeyKing said:

Europe and especially Germany was not toothless 30 years ago.

Why did we not act quicker in Yugoslavia then? It's not only about military spending but about culture. The losing countries of WW2 have big cultural taboos about using their armies abroad. Germany and Japan were to never become threats to others again.

[Huba]

6 minutes ago, The_MonkeyKing said:

• France and Germany largely handled the Minsk agreements. 
• Europe made the decisions not to sell weapons to Ukraine after 2014. (US did sell some)
• Europe chose its energy strategy against the wish and recommendation of the USA
• Europe chose to run down its military capability against the wish and recommendation of the USA

European policy lead us to where we are today. Policy that was often contested by the USA. But just like with US running its show in North America Europe runs its show in Europe and US respects. 

It is only fair that Europe carries the main burden. And US cannot do too much against the will of European countries. USA should not mail out Europe in this.

Can't agree more.

6 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

I find it incredible that people are so hard on Germany on the war thing. "Common, sell more Leopards Fritz, can't you the see the opportunity !" It's like those people haven't studied WW2 all their lives and the scariest wound that war left to this country. A country that was painstakingly rebuilt brick by brick by the people left behind. And chose instead of planning to revenge the former rival to build a new relationship that seemed like the logical bond. 

This is how DE actions can be explained, but not justified. DE is not the victim here. It wasn't in WW2, it wasn't during the rebuilding, and it isn't now. This whole WW2 trauma is DE to deal with, internally and in silence. Taking it out on anyone else and expecting understanding and special treatment, especially from Nazi victims in eastern Europe is absolutely despicable.

Edited September 27, 2022 by Huba

[panzermartin]

Deleted 

Edited September 27, 2022 by panzermartin
Double

[Holien]

3 minutes ago, billbindc said:

 

I will admonish, no more. But the above should be admonishment itself.

Both France and Germany should be ashamed and called out on this total lack of support...

The UK is in for a rough ride due to the current clowns not understanding how to run an economy but at least we do know it is worth supporting Ukraine with a decent amount of kit and training...

There are plenty of things France and Germany can do to help with the military aid.

[The_MonkeyKing]

2 minutes ago, billbindc said:

 

I will admonish, no more. But the above should be admonishment itself.

by % of GDP

Also Germany is one of the few who actively block export licenses

https://app.23degrees.io/view/F1tc2gv8QzFCs1ij-bar-stacked-horizontal-figure_3_4_csv_v2-1

Also all German support is public information. Many others not. So Germany looks better here than many others.

[Battlefront.com]

6 hours ago, CAZmaj said:

I was just referred to this tweet by Madi Kapparov.

Based on my studies of history and years of residing and working in Moscow, St. Peterburg, Budapest, Belgrade, Prague, Warsaw, and Podgorica, and traveled extensively in that region of Central and Eastern Europe, but also in Russian Federation Far East (Tomsk) and Kazakhstan, I would agree with most of Madi’s points in his tweet:

Nazism is mainstream in Russia.

What is Nazism? Abstract away from the distractions of economics and markets. Nazism is a form of fascism founded on the delusional belief of one group of people, generally based on ethnicity, being superior to another group of people. 1/

So too the Russians, who have been absorbed by the culture of their ethnic exceptionalism and historic revisionism promoting their ethnic superiority in all aspects, think that they are more privileged than any other ethnicity or nation. 2/

The Russians think that no rules apply to them. They think that they can do whatever they please because they are exceptional.

When the USSR collapsed the new Russian government fought very hard to become a successor state to the Soviet Union. 3/

Much like the USSR became a successor state to the original Russian empire, the Russian federation had to become a successor state to the USSR. Ideologically it was critical to them to preserve imperial continuity of exceptionalism and cultural and historical superiority. 4/

Without the succession, Russia would have had become equal to the former colonies, such as Ukraine, Kazakhstan, etc. That was simply unacceptable to the Russians. They also maintained their centuries-long militarism, as it all feeds into their Russian exceptionalism worldview. 5/

In the 1990s Russia was in dire economic straights and it was completely irrational to maintain a huge military and a large nuclear arsenal. But it was culturally and ideologically of an absolute necessity to the Russians. Why? It is part of their exceptionalism beliefs. 6/

Long before Putin, the war in Transnistria happened. The Russians then had no doubt in the necessity to protect ethnic Russian "separatists" in Moldova, whom the empire moved there over the years. However, just a few years later they went to war with Chechen separatists. 7/

Transnistria was acceptable, while Chechen separatism, a liberation movement, was unacceptable to the Russians. The Russians apply no rules to themselves. You see, they think they are special, exceptional, and superior to the rest of the world. 8/

Chechen independence was absolutely repugnant to the Russians. Negotiations with the Chechens were absolutely unacceptable for an average Russian, until major military defeats and economic strains in 1996. The Russians returned in 1999 to put the "savages" in their place. 9/

Any suggestions for Chechen independence from abroad faced an aggressive push back from the Russians. It is all driven by Russian exceptionalism deeply rooted in their culture. 10/

For the Russians, the protectionism of their empire and their imperial ambitions come naturally. They are an organic part of their individual and national psyche. 11/

Over the years, I have witnessed countless times how aggressively the Russians react to any attempts at an independent foreign policy by the former colonies. Typically, such attempts are called "ungrateful." 12/

The Russians expect their former colonies to be grateful. Grateful for what? In their perverted and revised historical view, they did "so much" for the former colonies, they "civilized" them. 13/

When the former colonies do something independently from Russia, the Russians feel betrayed. “How could they? We did so much for them.” Such Russian behavior is axiomatic. They will hold a grudge and retaliate when an opportunity presents itself. 14/

The reality is that the Russians demand the former colonies to be grateful for the misery, death, destruction, starvation, and sometimes assimilation. Such is the Russian way to “civilize” the “savages.” 15/

The Russians also demand the rest of the world to be grateful to them for the victory over Nazi Germany. In their worldview it is the ethnic Russians *alone* who defeated German Nazism in 1945. “The Great Patriotic War” became one of the pillars of Russian exceptionalism. 16/

Anyone who questions the victory in WW2 the ethnic Russians appropriated will face self-righteous anger and a flurry of insults from them. However, it is unclear why the world should be grateful to them: the USSR was allied to Germany till the very first day of Barbarossa. 17/

Should I even mention the brutal Russian occupation of Eastern Europe following the end of WW2? The Russians expect gratitude for that too. The Russians demand gratitude from the world and from the former colonies, they are special, they are exceptional. 18/

2014 was a point of no return. That year centuries long Russian chauvinism regressed into Russian Nazism. I will ignore Crimea. Russia manufactured oppression of Russian speakers in the Donbas and invaded with “separatists.” That is just a few years after the Chechen Wars. 19/

Again, Russian “separatism” is acceptable, Chechen separatism is unacceptable, because rules do not apply to the Russians. They are exceptional. They allow themselves to do what is unimaginable to them if others do it. That is the essence of Russian Nazism. 20/

I think there are no “good” or “bad” Russians. The distinction is meaningless. There are however sheepishly obedient Russians and zealous z-supporters, averaging out into a regular Russian Nazi. 21/

Germany was zombified by Nazi propaganda for 12 years. The Russians were on their path to Nazism for decades if not centuries. There are no easy fixes. There will be no protests. Changes in the Russian government would solve nothing. The road ahead will be long and difficult. 22/

However Nazi Germany was defeated. So too will be the current version of the Russian empire. Their Nazi worldviews will have to be shattered. The sooner the world realizes it is everyone’s problem, the better.

Ukraine will win as they have no other choice. 23/23

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1574051110654189569.html

This is a very good synopsis of the Russian imperialist mindset which, in today's political landscape, is generally thought of as fascist.

Breaking up of the Russian Federation will not make this problem go away.  Just like post 1991 Russia tried to regain pre 1991 territories, a post 2022 Russian state (likely to retain Russian Federation name) will try to regain its pre 2022 territory.  Especially problematic are all the fascist minded Russians living in the newly separated states.  It will be a massive mess.

From my perspective the breaking up of the Russian Federation is inevitable.  It is a multi-ethnic state held together by racist ideology, which is not a stable basis for a large nation.  While I don't think we're going to have a very happy time with the results of the breakup, eventually it has to happen.  Personally, I would like it to happen after this war is over instead of while it is going on.  I think the peoples of the Russian Federation could use some more time to contemplate how badly they were used and thrown away by the Kremlin for a completely unnecessary war.  A knee-jerk reaction to what is going on now might produce a more violent and disorganized breakup than might be possible after the war is over.

Steve

[Artkin]

5 hours ago, Butschi said:

Wait, what is that screenshot?

Ivan dawai dawai! Push those hulks off the road! Don't let the gamersharks see this! 

 

 

On the subject of new vehicles: Is that an Archer? 

 

[Butschi]

4 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Other countries have sent MBTs.  Hundreds of them.  It took Germany nearly 5 months to send a dozen AA vehicles.  Yes, I think Germany has earned being singled out.  Especially when you consider Germany's capacity to send equipment vs. what it has actually sent.

Steve

That's two things being mixed up. I agree, Germany could and should do more and I am upset about how Scholz or worse or defense secretary, are... well, scholzing. You can rightly single us out for that?

But which country has sent Western MBTs or IFVs? If it was about some kind of sharing the burden, than I'd be all in. But I have a very hard time believing the US, UK, France, Sweden, etc are not sending MBTs just because they are supplying all the other stuff and now it's Germany's turn.

Criticise us for not doing enough but criticising us for not doing something others aren't willing to do either is IMO unfair.

 

[Butschi]

14 minutes ago, billbindc said:

 

I will admonish, no more. But the above should be admonishment itself.

You still didn't get my point. It is not about "how much" but about "what". Also, see answer to Steve.

Edited September 27, 2022 by Butschi

[panzermartin]

Germany is like France in WW2. Pourquoi mourir pour Danzig(Ukraine) ? 

And France was actually invaded. The truth is that cynically they suffered the least from all the nations involved. Maybe Germany hopes for the same.... 

[billbindc]

6 minutes ago, Butschi said:

You still didn't get my point. It is not about "how much" but about "what". Also, see answer to Steve.

If Germany was keeping up in the "how much" department the "what" question would be far less salient. It's doing neither and worse the German government is managing to be smug about it.

[Butschi]

1 minute ago, billbindc said:

If Germany was keeping up in the "how much" department the "what" question would be far less salient. It's doing neither and worse the German government is managing to be smug about it.

Ok, I can't disagree with that.

[Battlefront.com]

13 minutes ago, Butschi said:

That's two things being mixed up. I agree, Germany could and should do more and I am upset about how Scholz or worse or defense secretary, are... well, scholzing. You can rightly single us out for that?

But which country has sent Western MBTs or IFVs? If it was about some kind of sharing the burden, than I'd be all in. But I have a very hard time believing the US, UK, France, Sweden, etc are not sending MBTs just because they are supplying all the other stuff and now it's Germany's turn.

Criticise us for not doing enough but criticising us for not doing something others aren't willing to do either is IMO unfair.

Nations should send what they have available.  Germany has mothballed Marders and even Leo1s, so far nothing has been sent.  The Leo2 argument is a variation on this and, in some ways, I am sympathetic to holding them back.  Mostly because I don't think Ukraine is capable of keeping them running.  Maintenance problems is exactly why Poland switched to the Abrams platform, as I understand it.

Steve

[Edit - billbindc just ninja'd me!  We're saying the same thing.  If Germany had sent 100x Marders and 50x Leo1s months ago when Ukraine asked for them, I don't think anybody would be bashing Germany about Leo2s today]

[Vet 0369]

21 hours ago, Letter from Prague said:

 

 

Apologies if I’m late to the dance on this one, I’ve been giving my old eyes a rest break and am now trying to catch up. If this is true, it’s great news! If he’s a Russian citizen, he can be mobilized and sent to the front! Nobody likes a Turncoat.

[kraze]

2 hours ago, FancyCat said:

Kraze, forgive me if you explained already, how are we supposed to take apart Russia or control their government when they have nukes?

Russia will take itself apart if it completely loses this war - e.g. no "middle ground" (aka temporary armistice) that Scholz, Orban and Co push for so hard.

All you'll have to do is just talk to multiple governments instead of one.

Thinking that nukes somehow end up in unpredictable hands is pointless - because they already are.

[Lethaface]

Just now, Battlefront.com said:

Here is a perspective to consider...

The US learned something from the breakup of Yugoslavia... the Europeans will ignore something right on their doorstep, even something equal to the horrors of WW2, right up until the point in which the US can't, then the US comes in and does what Europe should have done long before.  European support will not come close to matching, not to mention exceeding, what the US contributes.

The Europeans will be divided between those who quietly are thankful for US intervention and those who are outright resentful of it.  The US knows this is the European pattern and yet it still comes to the aid of Europe because, pragmatically, it is in the US' best interests to do so.

That's a more moderate view of Europe's dysfunction and their collective reliance on the US to fix their problems.  And yes, Ukraine is Europe's problem because it is on their border, not the US'.  The US has interests there, but there is no rational argument to suggest that the US must be the one to shoulder the majority of the responsibility.  Other than the US can and Europe can't due to years of not taking the Russian threat more seriously (i.e. inadequate defense spending).

Steve

 

Maybe it's mainly a semantic thing, because we agree on Europe's dysfunction / reliance on US for security issues and that that's a problem for Europe/EU. On that note it is good to also realize (which I'm sure you do) that the EU != Europe. 

However on the 'soft power' scale the USA has had more irons in the fire in Ukraine than any other European country. After UK there was probably very limited involvement from European countries.
I happen to remember a certain US political figure having been recorded saying '**** the EU' with regards to developments in Ukraine around maidan. 
Summarizing the USA had interests in the way Ukraine developed itself and acted on that interests before and after the war. I think it's incomplete to look at this whole subject just from the geographical perspective, as I think that Ukraines relationship with Russia played quite a large role in the way that the USA saw it's interest in Ukraine, if you get what I mean.

Anyway I do think it would be in Europe's best interest to solve the security issue and in some way or form produce a joint security policy, from soft to hard power (so not only an army). And yes peace in the whole of Europe should be part of the strategic goals of that power.

Long story short: Europe is divided. Divided we will NEVER be able to match US on a concentrated effort in most subjects even apart from defense. So obviously all little brothers can't match big brother ;-).

At the same time being big brother is probably part of USA's global strategy to remain the defacto leader (which I personally support, the alternative is China and no thanks). So there's various US interests involved in this whole matter as well, one of which is to be the leader in the suppor for Ukraine which it want's to be and defacto is.

Anyway, I'm not saying USA should be the one to shoulder this (for the majority). I was mainly reacting against others stating that Germany / Europe has 'broken it' and now must pay up.

To be frank I think 'this' should be a cooperation, which until now works quite well imo. And of course the future of Europe's defense policy should also be a subject on the table at the EU, especially post Ukraine. But that shouldn't be in the way of the current support operation.

And if anything I think Ukraine should be happy with the support they are getting. I'm all for it, but it isn't 'automatic' nor was there any obligation for anyone to do so. 

Not that long ago we had discussions on this forums that modern wars are 'come as you are', while Ukraine has certainly been able to trump that and have improved their army while fighting a large scale war against a numerical superior enemy.

[Battlefront.com]

OK, back to the military situation

It looks like the hastily organized Russian second line of defense against the Kharkiv offensive is rapidly headed towards a conclusion.  Ukraine is making advances in at least 4 areas right now:

• Towards the Russian border in the north of Luhansk.  It looks like they are about to completely clip logistics from Belgorod.
• What appears to be a pincer move towards Savatove from Kupyansk and the bulge east of Izyum.  This cleans up a lot of territory fast, even if it doesn't net a lot of prisoners and equipment.
• Movement south of the bulge to cut off Lyman from retreat to the north.
• Move northward from Bilohorvika river crossing to Kremminna, cutting off Lyman from its main supply route.  Combined with the previous move, this could net a lot of prisoners.

There are other actions, such as pressure on Lyman and Yampil, but they aren't in the same category as the above maneuver based attacks.

Here is a nice, clean map from yesterday:

What do we know about the forces fighting in this area?  From what we're seeing these are a mix of forces that are severely outclassed by what the Ukrainians are fielding.  There has to be at least a couple thousand Russian led forces in the area for them to have held out as long as they have.  Now that they are doomed we'll have to see how many of them continue to fight, how many try running away, and how many surrender.  My guess is it will be split fairly evenly with several hundred probably winding up as prisoners, several hundred getting away, and several hundred dying in place.

We also appear to be seeing the first large deployment of Mobiks.  These guys are going to surrender as quickly as they are encountered.  The more Russia puts into the area, the more prisoners we'll see.  I wonder if mass surrender events will cause Russia to rethink it's strategy or if that's already been baked into their planning.  Given how desperate and out of touch senior command is, I really don't know what to expect.

Steve

[Grigb]

Map update

• As I suspected there was Southern UKR push (right bottom corner). Rybar claims road is under UKR fire and cannot be used by RU any more
• Also, UKR pushed their light mobile forces/recon to Yampil and Torske
• According to Rybar there is only one road left for Lyman defenders - Lyman-Terny-Makiivka-Svatove
• UKR continue to push South from Nove (center)
• UKR push North at Maliivka and Vyshne Solone most probably happens closer to the river - UKR claim they captured Pisky-Radkivsky. Given RU claims they control Borova most likely this is where the push is aimed
• No update regarding UKR push to Makiivka or Borova-Svatove highway

 

[Lethaface]

48 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

It is, of course, more complicated than that.  Germany's opposition to doing anything to seriously punish Russia for past aggression is well documented.  There is some moral culpability there, for sure, even if Russia would have done the same thing even with a more punitive German foreign policy.

Steve

Agreed, a sort of combination of naivety and or guilt in certain parts of German politics. Although combined with people not being naive when it comes to making money for themselves.

But unfortunately there is plenty of the same thing going around all over the world. Saudi Arabia, etc.