How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Grigb]

Just in case - no major changes so far. UKR took a pause but probe aggressively both Kherson and Svatove. Both Kakhovka are near front line settlements now. On RU side Wagnerites continue to move slowly South of Bakhmut (Zaitseve village).

RUMINT: slowness of UKR is caused by need to bring men to fortify captured land.  

 

[billbindc]

13 minutes ago, Grigb said:

Yes, so far it looks like Prigozhin is the best bet for Putin. The other is candidate is Patrushev but publicly he is nobody and unlike Prigozhin he is a man of the System which is very unpopular now.

Don't ever underestimate the systema. 

That said, I have not seen any legit analysis of what forces would be available to who should a power struggle break out. I would guess that Putin retains a militarily significant and loyal force in Moscow who enjoy pay and privilege that they would be loath to give up to a bunch of ex-cons and frothing nazis from Wagner Group.  Figure out who can get *them* to flip and you know who the likeliest Putin successor will be.

Edited October 7, 2022 by billbindc

[akd]

More evidence that the so-called 3rd Army Corps was distributed in parts across multiple fronts.  Here the soldier speaks of his “72nd Brigade” (volunteer 72nd Separate Motor Rifle Brigade, 3rd Army Corps) being attached to the “69th Brigade” (69th Covering Brigade, 35th CAA) at Beryslav.

 

[Huba]

14 minutes ago, Grigb said:

Just in case - no major changes so far. UKR took a pause but probe aggressively both Kherson and Svatove. Both Kakhovka are near front line settlements now. On RU side Wagnerites continue to move slowly South of Bakhmut (Zaitseve village).

RUMINT: slowness of UKR is caused by need to bring men to fortify captured land.  

 

UA for sure prefers to be on the safe side with  their major offensive actions so far. They loose momentum and element of surprise this way, and give RU time to bring in reinforcements - which might suggest that the next big move will be made elsewhere...

Edited October 7, 2022 by Huba

[dan/california]

33 minutes ago, Der Zeitgeist said:

Since everyone seems to be going crazy about nukes these days, this article by Timothy Snyder about how the war might actually end is especially worth reading:

https://snyder.substack.com/p/how-does-the-russo-ukrainian-war

TLDR: It's probably not by nuclear war, but by a gradual shift in Russian perceptions about the war led both by setbacks on the battlefield and political crisis at home.

Great article, Ukraine needs to keep killing Russians and taking back territory. The more successfully it does that, the more likely the pressure on different factions in Russia will give them a reason to go home.

[Grigb]

3 minutes ago, billbindc said:

Don't ever underestimate the systema. 

That said, I have not seen any legit analysis of what forces would be available to who should a power struggle break out. I would guess that Putin retains a militarily significant and loyal force in Moscow who enjoy pay and privilege that they would be loath to give up to a bunch of ex-cons and frothing nazis from Wagner Group.  Figure out who can get *them* to flip and you know who the likeliest Putin successor will be.

Yes, siloviks will not accept Prigozhin unless forced with extreme force. He is a criminal, arrogant amateur and upstart who publicly called the military members of The System f*cktards. Conflict is inevitable.

However, we have another key player, general Zolotov with his Rosguard units. As far as I understand he is the guy with the most numerous internal forces in RU now (but due to the losses at Izum maybe already not). Neither Army nor Prigozhin have forces numerous enough inside RU to deal with Rosguardia.

And the thing is Zolotov is not army man. He is FSB man. But he is a general, and he is most likely uncomfortable with how the criminal is dealing with other generals. 

RU Game of Thrones. Dumb but with Nukes.

[Probus]

2 hours ago, Doc844 said:

I'm way behind on this thread again, work can suck at times, only on page 1485, but wanted to chip my 2 pence worth in on nukes and use of.  One thing to remember is that as people get older they move more away from the 'me' to their kids but even more importantly their grandkids.  They are their future, our future and humans are hardwired to that as part of the perpetuation of the species.  So yes you may have the man at the top, ala, Mr Putlin who may or may not give a ****, all is lost I'm gonna go the way of Hitler and take everyone with me.  But I can guarentee that most under him and even more so those who are further away from the levers of power do not agree and want a future for their families and relatives.  I strongly believe that if Putlin decides to drop a nuke there is a very high probability, even inevitability that someone will vacate his brain from his skull.

 

If I recall correctly what I stated above was one of the main reasons why Kruschev de-escalated and brought the world back from the brink.  Not saying that this position should be used as a hail Mary plan but I could see that being the way it would pan out.

  Putlin -  "**** the west, they ruined my glorious plan, **** Ukraine they didnt roll over and die, press the red button".  Loud bang and the next thing he sees is Lucifer standing with a big grin saying welcome.

Well said! And there is no strategic value to using a tactical nuke. He would immediately lose the war and he knows it. All he can do is threaten and bluster. 

[Zeleban]

M113 action

[cesmonkey]

With Russia reinforcing their lines with thousands of under-equipped, under-trained, newly-mobilized soldiers, what is it that Ukraine most urgently needs at the moment?

Or as Secretary of Defense Austin says, providing Ukraine what it needs  "for the current fight"?

More artillery and ammunition?

Western tanks, APCs, and IFVs?

Easy-to-use and support attack aircraft?

[Der Zeitgeist]

1 minute ago, cesmonkey said:

With Russia reinforcing their lines with thousands of under-equipped, under-trained, newly-mobilized soldiers, what is it that Ukraine most urgently needs at the moment?

Or as Secretary of Defense Austin says, providing Ukraine what it needs  "for the current fight"?

More artillery and ammunition?

Western tanks, APCs, and IFVs?

Easy-to-use and support attack aircraft?

All of the above, plus massive support in training their newly mobilized soldiers.

[Probus]

2 minutes ago, cesmonkey said:

With Russia reinforcing their lines with thousands of under-equipped, under-trained, newly-mobilized soldiers, what is it that Ukraine most urgently needs at the moment?

Or as Secretary of Defense Austin says, providing Ukraine what it needs  "for the current fight"?

More artillery and ammunition?

Western tanks, APCs, and IFVs?

Easy-to-use and support attack aircraft?

I would think antipersonnel HIMARS. 

[Huba]

Just now, Probus said:

I would think antipersonnel HIMARS. 

I was wondering if FAE version of GMLRS would make sense, given the prevalence of trenches/ bunkers/ other fortified positions in this conflice?

[Zeleban]

This is what I was talking about. War is not only confrontation on the battlefield. Be that as it may, Putin remains a master of intrigue. Double whammy for Europe. Oil on one side and gas on the other

[Audgisil]

What Ukraine might really need soon is the logistics that allows them to serve warm meals close to the front. It's going to get cold soon. Not only does this help their own troops, but think of the potential for large scale surrenders come late November when a bunch of cold, tired, and very hungry Russians are told that they can come on over, surrender, and get a decent meal.

Edited October 7, 2022 by Audgisil
spelling

[JonS]

16 minutes ago, cesmonkey said:

More artillery and ammunition?

Western tanks, APCs, and IFVs?

Easy-to-use and support attack aircraft?

Pre-fab POW cages

[FancyCat]

3 minutes ago, Zeleban said:

This is what I was talking about. War is not only confrontation on the battlefield. Be that as it may, Putin remains a master of intrigue. Double whammy for Europe. Oil on one side and gas on the other

Nationalization of the American oil industry? Cause that's the only way to compete. End of the day, it's countries that have governments that directly control energy production vs our American industry looking for profits. Or maybe lots of subsidies. Neither is cheap. Also the implication that OPEC needs to bow to the U.S is quite foolish. Many of the OPEC members rely on higher oil pricing to fund their governments, so end of the day, it's just business. Never been fine with the implication that Saudi Arabia needs to bow down to us like a puppet.

[Harmon Rabb]

2 minutes ago, Audgisil said:

What Ukraine might really need soon is the logistics that allows them to serve warm meals close to the front. It's going to get cold soon. Not only does this help their own troops, but think of the potential for large scale surrenders come late November when a bunch of cold, tired, and very hungary Russians are told that they can come on over, surrender, and get a decent meal.

Do the Ukrainian equivalent of MREs come come with FRHs(Flameless ration heaters)? It would be nice to send some over. Something as simple as a warm meal can probably be helpful for troop morale on the battlefield when the cold kicks in.

[FancyCat]

 

[Zeleban]

3 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

Nationalization of the American oil industry? Cause that's the only way to compete. End of the day, it's countries that have governments that directly control energy production vs our American industry looking for profits. Or maybe lots of subsidies. Neither is cheap. Also the implication that OPEC needs to bow to the U.S is quite foolish. Many of the OPEC members rely on higher oil pricing to fund their governments, so end of the day, it's just business. Never been fine with the implication that Saudi Arabia needs to bow down to us like a puppet.

I don't think business interests are the main factor in this case.

[womble]

6 minutes ago, JonS said:

Pre-fab POW cages

Anyone know what the Rules of War say about handing off your immense POW problem to friendly, uninvolved neighbours/allies? Could the USA say to UKR "We'll handle those POWs," fly them to the States and intern them til hostilities cease? Saves shipping anything prefabbed very far from its desert holding compounds...

[Grigb]

6 minutes ago, cesmonkey said:

With Russia reinforcing their lines with thousands of under-equipped, under-trained, newly-mobilized soldiers, what is it that Ukraine most urgently needs at the moment?

Or as Secretary of Defense Austin says, providing Ukraine what it needs  "for the current fight"?

More artillery and ammunition?

Western tanks, APCs, and IFVs?

Easy-to-use and support attack aircraft?

Yes.

Long answer - mobile AA, more tubes, CB radars and more ammo. That's always needed. Next, they are in permanent crisis with armored transports, and they suffer attrition. So, they need anything that drives and has armor. Even if it just drives it will do.

Western tanks are good to have but it is not easy as UKR army is geared toward Soviet tanks. Attack aircraft will be target for RU VKS (it is being held back to preserve strength but as soon as there are easy targets RU will throw everything at them to show they are fighting as well) and omnipresent RU AD.  

[sburke]

Teen uses dating app to get Russians to reveal their positions (msn.com)

[danfrodo]

4 hours ago, Beleg85 said:

Also, for a little bit of humour, perhaps wasn't posted here yet:

 

 

Thanks for sharing these guys, Beleg, they are hilarious.  Some very smart humor.  

And I am glad to see my 2nd favorite ancient history expert is well and back on the forum again.  (sorry, my #1 ancient historian is neighbor here, town full of professors.  He keeps scolding me for reading greek/roman historical fiction when I haven't finished Herodotus or Plutarch)

But the comedy bit above does really hit a lot of very accurate points.  The maps are a good analogy to how Putin is changing the story of this war continuously, trying to find new justifications & moving the goalposts.  And the last bit is a good analogy about how this war is going to cost everyone in russia, whether it's through soldiers at the front or living in an economy well on its way back to 1970.

[acrashb]

1 hour ago, Zeleban said:

M113 action

And we were told that these were only suitable as battle taxis, certain death in a modern battlefield during combat.

It appears that, if the enemy's anti-tank capability is seriously degraded, the venerable M113 can still fight

54 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

Nationalization of the American oil industry? Cause that's the only way to compete.

That's so wrong on so many levels.  Let's take a high-level look.  Until recently, the US was (for the first time in a long time) energy self-sufficient and had the option to improve energy flows from its friendly, democratic neighbour - Canada.

Now, the US faces shortages that have driven up energy costs, disproportionally impacting the poor; is going to reduce sanctions on a brutal autocracy and strategic competitor - Venezuela - to reduce the cost of energy; has been gravely depleting strategic reserves to reduce the pump cost; is considering blocking off-shore drilling; and so is once again at the mercy of OPEC.

Sounds kind of like - not an exact parallel - Germany, and we all know where that has led.  

Love fossil fuels, hate them, either way they are necessary in the mid term, and no solution that includes confiscation of corporations and/or their assets - that's what nationalization means - to put them in the hands of disinterested government controllers is going to improve things.  If anyone think nationalization works, the most recent blindingly obvious counter-example is ... Venezuela, which is now a living hell.

 

2 hours ago, Der Zeitgeist said:

Since everyone seems to be going crazy about nukes these days, this article by Timothy Snyder about how the war might actually end is especially worth reading:

And yet, President Biden just mooted exactly that: https://nationalpost.com/news/biden-nuclear-armageddon-risk-highest-since-62-crisis

I don't know if it's strategic messaging or just a gaffe.

 

Edited October 7, 2022 by acrashb

[akd]

Government is not currently restraining short-term oil production in the U.S.