How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[JonS]

4 hours ago, The_Capt said:

 The US/Western major mistakes were 1) trying to turn the UA into a western “mini-me”; that was not what won the battles for Kyiv, Kharkiv and Kherson.  The Ukrainians came up with organic solutions that worked but apparently we did not learn from that and instead tried to make them “fight like us”.  

You make it sound like the ANA debacle, barely 2 years later - equip a culturally different army with its own doctrine and its own tactical context kinda-sorta like us and expect them to fight like us, then stand around with pursed lips scratching your head when it all goes a bit pear shaped.

Edited December 5, 2023 by JonS

[LongLeftFlank]

1 hour ago, Yet said:

How long until we find Somali pirates in the trenches?

Try Norks. You think Russians have a 'cursed capacity for suffering', fuggedaboudit.

The Kim Dynasty has been renting young men out to do logging and mining jobs in harsh conditions in Kamchatka/Yakutia for Mother Russia ever since the Gulag ran short of zeks in the 1960s. It's one of the DPRK's biggest revenue earners; also keeps 'busy' surplus young Korean males who might otherwise prove refractory.

They're tough, tiny, obedient, used to short rations, and know how to field strip an AKM. And nobody will miss them (or ask where they went).

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2023/04/04/asia-pacific/north-koreans-trapped-slavery-russia/

It's far better to staff offices and factories in the DPRK with 'Excellent Horse-Like Ladies'.

...Who can later be married off mail-order to Chinese, or as domestic servants (same job duties, without the marital tie).

Edited December 5, 2023 by LongLeftFlank

[riptides]

The "fight like us" mantra being bandied about is just an excuse for the US cluelessness in how to deal with the situation.

 It serves no purpose other than giving us an excuse for the failure to address the Putin problem.

What exactly is the end game again? Oh yeah, they did not "fight like us".

 

 

 

[Zeleban]

A brief description of the events of the Ukrainian invasion of the Zaporizhzhia region by a pilot aerial reconnaissance of the mechanized battalion of the 47th brigade:

I think that both our allies and our command bear the responsibility for the failure. It is difficult to conduct strategic operations with 30-50% of the necessary equipment and no air superiority.

On the other hand, knowing your resources, you need to push away from them, and not scatter your already limited forces. There was indeed a plan for Tokmak in 3 days, but more on that later. Let's start from the beginning.

We went through all possible ranges, training, courses and headed south. We were forbidden to interact with anyone, so as not to give away our presence. Spoiler, two weeks before the start of the counteroffensive, the enemy already knew the location of each brigade, the number of equipment and personnel.

Were we aware of enemy forces, fortifications and minefields? Yes of course. The National Guard, which has been holding the front here for a year, knew every bush, every forest strip, and any ordinary soldier could show us firing points, enemy observation points on a map, and provide photos of minefields from copters.

A week before the offensive, night and day shootings are carried out on the fortified areas of the enemy, massive artillery strikes, which we adjust every day. There is practically no response, for 20 of our shots, 1 enemy projectile arrives. We were told that 82 and 120 mm are a lot, 155 mm is practically unlimited.

But still we were preparing for Forward Forward. Two days before the active phase, we receive a general plan from the command, which provides for an advance of 10 kilometers in the first 12 hours at best. At worst - 5 km.

In a day, we had to break through the enemy's first line of defense, bypass Robotyne and Novopokropivka, prepare a bridgehead for the next brigades that were to take Tokmak. We understood that the command wanted Kharkiv 2.0 Was it possible with our forces? As British intelligence thought 50/50.

To our question, "what's the plan if something goes wrong?" We were told "The corps command has a plan B." We had to interact with at least 5 more brigades that I know of, two brigades of the Assault Guard and three mechanized brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. We had to open a corridor for one more corps.

Spoiler - everything went wrong, spoiler - there was no plan B.

This means that we have up to 10 brigades that must quickly break through the front to a depth of 20-30 kilometers. Most of the brigades are newly created. Equipment and transport, mainly western. Fighters are motivated, and most of them are trained. However, this time the God of War turned his back on us, and things did not go according to plan.

 

Edited December 5, 2023 by Zeleban

[Battlefront.com]

9 minutes ago, riptides said:

The "fight like us" mantra being bandied about is just an excuse for the US cluelessness in how to deal with the situation.

Since this war started the West has tried to reassure itself that this war is not indicative of how a NATO standard force would fare under similar circumstances.  There's a lot of justification for that attitude, reinforced by the effects we've seen of Western weapons in action (see previous posted tungsten strike, Javelin, Storm Shadow, etc.).  So I'm not quite as quick to suggest that a NATO force couldn't have done much better with a counter-offensive in the south than Ukraine did.  I think they could have done significantly better.  However, I also think the friendly losses would have been too high and the gains too slow/minimal for those losses.

Currently the only thing I'm sure about with Western approach is that if it goes all in with a Desert Shield/Storm type approach, I don't think there's any nation on Earth (except *maybe* China) that would survive intact enough to mount a meaningful mechanized resistance after.  After that things get really dicey because we've seen Fallujah and Helmand Province operations and they weren't pretty at all.  Picturing those situations with Russian capabilities... not good.

Steve

[Carolus]

Bradley was captured by Ruskis.

This account is very "rah rah" pro-Ukrainian but I felt it deserves to state its case for claimed Russian casualty numbers.

(I generally think Ukrainian numbers are inflated, while some Western estimates are overly conservative, but I have also zero qualifications on this topic, so I can be happy in my ignorance).

[Zeleban]

 

Morocco has signed an agreement with the United States for the free supply of 500 M2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicles, in addition to the M1A2 SEPv3 tanks purchased from the USA

[Battlefront.com]

24 minutes ago, Zeleban said:

A brief description of the events of the Ukrainian invasion of the Zaporizhzhia region by a pilot aerial reconnaissance of the mechanized battalion of the 47th brigade:

That was a useful account.  Thanks.  However, this part appears to be wrong:

23 minutes ago, Zeleban said:

Spoiler - everything went wrong, spoiler - there was no plan B.

There was and it was implemented very quickly after it became clear that mechanized assaults were not going to work.  Specifically, Ukraine reverted to the "nibble and hold" strategy that it has been using since last year.  Small groups of mostly dismounted infantry fighting for very specific and limited objectives, taking them, holding them against counter attacks, then repeating the process.

The speed at which the Ukrainians switched over to this strategy suggests that it was always considered to be a Plan B.

The shortcoming of this Plan B was it likely would never produce the desired results of Plan A.  If there were any doubts, by August it should have been very clear that no breakthroughs were possible using Plan B.

This, in turn, should have forced a strategic reevaluation of the entire counter-offensive.  Maybe that happened and it was concluded continuing with Plan B was preferable to other options.  We really don't know.

Steve

[hcrof]

56 minutes ago, Carolus said:

Bradley was captured by Ruskis.

This account is very "rah rah" pro-Ukrainian but I felt it deserves to state its case for claimed Russian casualty numbers.

(I generally think Ukrainian numbers are inflated, while some Western estimates are overly conservative, but I have also zero qualifications on this topic, so I can be happy in my ignorance).

Interesting, but I flat out don't believe those figures are KIA only. I read them as "non-recoverable losses". Still, it does suggest that Moscow has taken an eye-watering number of casualties in this war.

[Fernando]

56 minutes ago, Zeleban said:

 

Morocco has signed an agreement with the United States for the free supply of 500 M2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicles, in addition to the M1A2 SEPv3 tanks purchased from the USA

Thank you very much United States (and Israel). By arming Morocco with state-of-the-art weapons, you are incubating a war in North Africa. Morocco's enemies can only be Spain and Algeria.

[JonS]

1 hour ago, Fernando said:

Morocco's enemies can only be Spain and Algeria.

Unless they get into expeditionary warfare? Applying your logic generally would suggest that the US is preparing to invade Canada and/or Mexico  which  ... actually ... maybe?

Or that the UK is gearing up to invade France. And, yeah, ok. That one is historically plausible.

[acrashb]

Since we're been talking about the efficacy of sanctions, here is an eye-watering example of evasion. Sanctions have an effect, and they need to be enforced.  Looks like some people are going to jail.

 

https://www.thedefensepost.com/2023/12/05/finnish-firms-smuggling-drones-russia/

 

 

 

[Bearstronaut]

3 hours ago, JonS said:

You make it sound like the ANA debacle, barely 2 years later - equip a culturally different army with its own doctrine and its own tactical context kinda-sorta like us and expect them to fight like us, then stand around with pursed lips scratching your head when it all goes a bit pear shaped.

Apparently we never learn. Before the ANA it was the ARVN. Before the ARVN it was the ROKA. Although we stayed in South Korea long enough that the ROKs were able to develop their own successful military industrial complex and would likely be successful in a war (at extremely high cost) against the DPRK without us. That would not have been true had we dipped out of the ROK back in say, the 1970s.

[Fernando]

18 minutes ago, JonS said:

Unless they get into expeditionary warfare? Applying your logic generally would suggest that the US is preparing to invade Canada and/or Mexico  which  ... actually ... maybe?

Or that the UK is gearing up to invade France. And, yeah, ok. That one is historically plausible.

Expeditionary warfare? Morocco? Are you kidding?
PULS? HIMARS? Bradleys? Late model Abrams? Gliding bombs? SPY-X drones? AGM154C JSOW?
Most of those system have  pushed Mororcan capabilities hundred of miles forward. Morocco is able to attack lots of Spanish cities now if they want, with little danger to be retaliated

[JonS]

Well, they've sent expeditions to Angola, Somalia, Cambodia, Yugoslavia, CAR, Congo, and Yemen. They're also working towards NATO membership which would implicitly mean being expected to be capable of sending an expedition to eastern Europe, at least.

So, no. I'm not kidding.

But let's flip this around; why does Spain need a defence force - who're you planning to invade? Portugal? France? Andorra? Great Britain? Morocco?

Edited December 5, 2023 by JonS

[Anthony P.]

49 minutes ago, Bearstronaut said:

Apparently we never learn. Before the ANA it was the ARVN. Before the ARVN it was the ROKA. Although we stayed in South Korea long enough that the ROKs were able to develop their own successful military industrial complex and would likely be successful in a war (at extremely high cost) against the DPRK without us. That would not have been true had we dipped out of the ROK back in say, the 1970s.

The difference is that South Korea actually had the chance to develop: military efficiency is fundamentally enabled and to a large degree a byproduct of social and political development.

War is a major detriment to a country's social and political development. Nascent states like South Vietnam and Afghanistan were doomed to fail regardless of what military support other countries could've thrown at them short of indefinite military campaigns.

[Haiduk]

Russian Su-24M, which tried to strike Odesa oblast likely with gliding bombs was shot down by UKR AD near Zmiinyi island. The bomber was covered by Su-30M. Destiny of pilots is unknown, Russian resque An-26 is flying in crash zone, but in cold winter sea chances is almost zero, if pilots wasn't captured by Zmiiny garrison.  

Fighterbomber TG already confirmed. 

[Fernando]

1 hour ago, JonS said:

Well, they've sent expeditions to Angola, Somalia, Cambodia, Yugoslavia, CAR, Congo, and Yemen. They're also working towards NATO membership which would implicitly mean being expected to be capable of sending an expedition to eastern Europe, at least.

But let's flip this around - why does Spain need a defence force? Who're you planning to invade? Portugal? France? Andorra?

1. It doesn't make sense for Morocco to be a NATO member. Please read articles 5 and 6 of the NATO Treaty
2. If you want to sent a few hundred soldier on peace missions, why you need HIMARS and other offensive weapons able to hit objetives 150 or 300 km away?
3. Spain must defend the Canary Islands, Ceuta and Melilla, Canary Islands are under the NATO umbrella, but Ceuta and Melilla are not.

4. We have been at war with Morocco lots of times. The last time in 1957-58 and we had an armed incident in 2002.

5. You are going to defend your country even if it screws it up

Edited December 5, 2023 by Fernando

[Beleg85]

2 hours ago, Fernando said:

Thank you very much United States (and Israel). By arming Morocco with state-of-the-art weapons, you are incubating a war in North Africa. Morocco's enemies can only be Spain and Algeria.

Most probably on Sahrawis, albeit they keep quiet in last years and heavy IFV's are potentiall liabaility there. But Marocco king always go big on money and various gigantomaniac projects, despite part of his population living in relative poverty.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moroccan_Western_Sahara_Wall

Btw. a fascinating piece of fortification, idea to simply sorround desert with long wall (and mann it  with soldiers and modern surveillance tech) against bedouins is mix of so old with so new in one piece.

 

It seems today's conference in DC regarding Ukraine will need to be postponned. It's sign of something bad or normal part of negatiations in Senate?

 

Edited December 5, 2023 by Beleg85

[kimbosbread]

I mean, my bingo cards for big new wars prior to 2022 was Turkey vs Greece and Egypt + Sudan vs Ethiopia. Spain vs Morocco? I had no idea!

[Harmon Rabb]

20 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

Russian Su-24M, which tried to strike Odesa oblast likely with gliding bombs was shot down by UKR AD near Zmiinyi island. The bomber was covered by Su-30M. Destiny of pilots is unknown, Russian resque An-26 is flying in crash zone, but in cold winter sea chances is almost zero, if pilots wasn't captured by Zmiiny garrison.  

Fighterbomber TG already confirmed. 

President Zelenskyy mentions this news.

[sburke]

1 hour ago, Fernando said:

Expeditionary warfare? Morocco? Are you kidding?
PULS? HIMARS? Bradleys? Late model Abrams? Gliding bombs? SPY-X drones? AGM154C JSOW?
Most of those system have  pushed Mororcan capabilities hundred of miles forward. Morocco is able to attack lots of Spanish cities now if they want, with little danger to be retaliated

So Morocco is now preparing to take on NATO?  Dang when I was there they seemed more worried about their own population.

[The_Capt]

55 minutes ago, Fernando said:

1. It doesn't make sense for Morocco to be a NATO member. Please read articles 5 and 6 of the NATO Treaty
2. If you want to sent a few hundred soldier on peace missions, why you need HIMARS and other offensive weapons able to hit objetives 150 or 300 km away?
3. Spain must defend the Canary Islands, Ceuta and Melilla, Canary Islands are under the NATO umbrella, but Ceuta and Melilla are not.

4. We have been at war with Morocco lots of times. The last time in 1957-58 and we had an armed incident in 2002.

5. You are going to defend your country even if it screws it up

Huh? Don’t really have a dog in this fight but Morocco is “North of the Tropic of Cancer”…no?

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm
 

[The_Capt]

5 hours ago, JonS said:

You make it sound like the ANA debacle, barely 2 years later - equip a culturally different army with its own doctrine and its own tactical context kinda-sorta like us and expect them to fight like us, then stand around with pursed lips scratching your head when it all goes a bit pear shaped.

You nasty little b#tch…why you gotta be like that?!  I mean our balls are still stinging and you go right below the belt for a second shot…not cool man.  

At least we didn’t give the ANA HIMARs…

[JonS]

Jayzus - imagine if the ANA had been given Patriot. All the countries *around* Afghanistan would be no-fly zones for commercial traffic.