How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[The_Capt]

4 hours ago, FancyCat said:

To elaborate, I believe Russia would preferably back down in the face of Western escalation.

Ok, and what are you basing this belief in? Russia has spent coming up on 600k casualties, likely 100k dead. They keep throwing resources and men at this problem well past the point we ever would. So what Western escalation are you talking about? What evidence do you have Russia will “back down” in the face of it? Further, what evidence do you have Russia might not simply escalate further in the face of Western escalation?

I mean your theory of success appears to be to shorten this war and force Russia into a favourable peace (for us and Ukraine). The main way to do this is through accelerating Western escalation. Yet at the same time you highlight Russian escalation. So beyond a really dangerous game of strategic chicken, what exactly are you proposing? Your strategy feels like threading one helluva dangerous needle without any real substantive lines.

And there are other way here other than “doves”. The US and West appear to be pursuing a slow compressing and containing strategy. You clearly are not a fan of this strategy, you have made this clear repeatedly. So, ok, what are we talking about here? How do we escalate Russia out of this thing while 1) keeping this war in a box and not have it escalate out of control, 2) not outstrip our own political will, and 3) not have Russia completely implode? 

My position is that you can not employ a sudden shock escalation and keep all three of those strategic elements in balance or in our favour. We don’t know the Russian redlines,  or do we know when they will blink. Based on what they have demonstrated in willpower to prosecute this war we already know that this will take a lot more than a few more tanks, ATACMs or even strikes into Russia. What escalation can scare Russia into tapping out, yet at the same time not drive them into full national mobilization and what comes next?

What I have seen from you in the past is a lot of hand waving on the strategic risks. A lot of “poo poo” on any idea that Russia may just dig in harder or push back in an escalation response we cannot handle. You paint a picture that if we just did X, Russia would tap out and come to the negotiating table meekly. You need to stop the chest thumping and hand waving and spell out what that looks like.

[CHARLIE43]

Then there is the fact that all this aid doesn't mean a hill of beans if there isn't enough manpower to operate it all.

And then it just sits around.... but it's the thought that counts, right?

[danfrodo]

19 minutes ago, CHARLIE43 said:

Then there is the fact that all this aid doesn't mean a hill of beans if there isn't enough manpower to operate it all.

And then it just sits around.... but it's the thought that counts, right?

indeed, indeed, sadly.   Good point.

[ArmouredTopHat]

56 minutes ago, CHARLIE43 said:

Then there is the fact that all this aid doesn't mean a hill of beans if there isn't enough manpower to operate it all.

And then it just sits around.... but it's the thought that counts, right?

Considering a lot of Ukrainian units are reliant on literal civilian cars for a lot of roles in logistics and casevac, having 2k more Humvees will absolutely help. The manpower situation is bad but not -that- bad. Better equipment will save said lives to begin with. 

Edited October 19 by ArmouredTopHat

[dan/california]

 

Quote

 

https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/JIPA/Display/Article/3768401/tip-of-the-iceberg-okinawa-1945-and-lessons-for-island-battles/#:~:text=Over the course of three,lessons for planners and strategists.

Operation Iceberg, the successful invasion of Okinawa, unfolded from 1 April to 2 July 1945. It stands as the bloodiest encounter in the Pacific War and holds the distinction of being the largest sea-air-land battle in history. The operation involved more than 1,500 vessels of various types and 183,000 personnel from the US Tenth Army, later reinforced to over 250,000. Over the course of three months, US ground forces suffered 7,374 fatalities, 31,807 wounded, and 239 missing in action.

 

So I was poking around at different episodes in military history in the attempt to move the discussion beyond arguments that we are are having for the ninth time. I started poking at the battle for Okinawa for no particular reason. Figures are approximate, but bear with me, if you apply a ratio for the number of forces deployed, I used 250,000 for The U.S. at Okinawa, and 600,000 for the Number of Russians deployed to Ukraine, I get a daily rate of casualties per 100,000 troops deployed that is virtually identical. I used 82 days for the length of the operation on Okinawa. 

So if ratioing the U.S. force deployed to Okinawa to match the size of the Russian deployment In Ukraine. It works out to 1050 casualties per day. That is shockingly close to the actual Russian casualty rate. Does this reveal some deep limiting factor in military operations that applies across even even VERY different wars, or is just a random coincidence?

Edit: I don't think the Japanese figures are all that relevant between actual suicides and the fact they had no where to retreat to.

Edited October 19 by dan/california

[CHARLIE43]

21 minutes ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

Considering a lot of Ukrainian units are reliant on literal civilian cars for a lot of roles in logistics and casevac, having 2k more Humvees will absolutely help. The manpower situation is bad but not -that- bad. Better equipment will save said lives to begin with. 

I suppose so. Maybe what 150 and the rest in parts to keep them in operable condition? Even the gifted M1A1's are at the end of their service life, and even at the early/mid points of that they were maintenance intensive. Those PMCS manuals they come with the size of some of the thread's dissertations aren't just there to keep one occupied till the shooting starts. Even if they do have the manpower, I can say from first hand experience that there is no way the Ukrainians are gonna just jump into them and do some Ride of the Valkyries type operation to slay the Russian aggressors. They'll probably get some use out of a few of them, and I hope they do, but realistically they'd probably be better off scrapping them and selling parts, in order to get something else that actually becomes a force multiplier. Like more Heavenly Drones of Death! lol

Edited October 19 by CHARLIE43

[dan/california]

 

Quote

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/16/world/asia/north-korea-ukraine-russia.html?unlocked_article_code=1.TU4.k9-u.MivCezHq9J22&smid=url-share

NYT take on North Korean troops in Ukraine. Link should work for everybody, I think.

[ArmouredTopHat]

https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1g6lodt/ukrainian_drone_destroys_robotic_ground_platform/

Begun the drone wars have. (Again)

[LongLeftFlank]

8 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Well you were 2 1/2 years late. (The one in Jun was a wild @ss guess). But gotta give the points to the nutjob when they are due.

There is a nice story of a political prophet in Munich in 1928, who was asked to prophesy what would be happening to the burghers of his city in five, fifteen, twenty and forty years' time.

He began: 'I prophesy that in five years' time, in 1933, Munich will be part of a Germany that has just suffered 5 million unemployed and that is ruled by a dictator with a certifiable mental illness who will proceed to murder 6 million Jews.'

His audience said: 'Ah, then you must think that in fifteen years' time we will be in a sad plight.'

'No,' replied the prophet, 'I prophesy that in 1943 Munich will be part of a Greater Germany whose flag will fly from Volga to Bordeaux, from northern Norway to the Sahara.'

'Ah, then you must think that in twenty years' time, we will be mighty indeed.'

'No, my guess is that in 1948 Munich will be part of a Germany that stretches only from the Elbe to the Rhine, and whose ruined cities will recently have seen production down to only 10 per cent of the 1928 level.'

'So you think we face black ruin in forty years' time?'

'No, by 1968 I prophesy that real income per head in Munich will be four times greater than now, and that in the year after that 90 per cent of German adults will sit looking at a box in a corner of their drawing rooms, which will show live pictures of a man walking upon the moon.'

They locked him up as a madman, of course.”

- General Hackett

[Battlefront.com]

A while ago we brought up the defense sector companies not necessarily being interested in providing its customers with the best product at a fair price.  Well, Raytheon just agreed to pay a fine of nearly $1 billion USD for defrauding and bribery.  Ouch.

https://thehill.com/homenews/4942259-raytheon-qatar-corruption-fraud-bribes/

Anybody that thinks the defense sector, as a whole, is interested finding out their weapons aren't useful or that the solutions are cheap... well... I have a bridge in Qatar I can sell you real cheap.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

57 minutes ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1g6lodt/ukrainian_drone_destroys_robotic_ground_platform/

Begun the drone wars have. (Again)

Ah, one of Russia's resupply UGVs we've seen mentioned.  First one I can think of seeing getting destroyed, though there's been some shots of them after being destroyed.

This demonstrates the benefits of such a UGV.  Yeah, it was probably a total loss (not certain, but probable as fire ≠ good), but how much did this cost compared to a small truck?  And no casualties either.

Again, if militaries want to play this game (and they should) then they need to produce LOTS of these on the presumption that they're going to lose a lot of them on a regular basis.

Steve

[cesmonkey]

 

 

[Carolus]

9 hours ago, CHARLIE43 said:

Then there is the fact that all this aid doesn't mean a hill of beans if there isn't enough manpower to operate it all.

And then it just sits around.... but it's the thought that counts, right?

There are about 70.000 Ukrainian troops that severely lack motorisation as per Tataragami, so while what you say is true, what Ukraine still wants is definitely more metal.

[Holien]

9 hours ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

The manpower situation is bad but not -that- bad.

Interested to know how we know that?

While having 12 more days of free "meat" from NK is a drop in the ocean, if the 1,000 per day casualty rate is true for Russia.

We have to keep in mind Ukraine has to convince folk by normal means to keep fighting and dying for their freedom.

That isn't an easy task and those fed into this horrific meat grinder see snippets of news and get demoralised. We see it here.

So Russia has a "win" in the media which hits Ukrainian morale.

The West need to help Ukraine sustain it's manpower and morale perhaps more than hardware?

If Ukrainians give up all the Western kit means squat. 

I hope you are right that they have enough man/woman power to keep fighting until Russia gives up.

[The_Capt]

8 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

There is a nice story of a political prophet in Munich in 1928, who was asked to prophesy what would be happening to the burghers of his city in five, fifteen, twenty and forty years' time.

He began: 'I prophesy that in five years' time, in 1933, Munich will be part of a Germany that has just suffered 5 million unemployed and that is ruled by a dictator with a certifiable mental illness who will proceed to murder 6 million Jews.'

His audience said: 'Ah, then you must think that in fifteen years' time we will be in a sad plight.'

'No,' replied the prophet, 'I prophesy that in 1943 Munich will be part of a Greater Germany whose flag will fly from Volga to Bordeaux, from northern Norway to the Sahara.'

'Ah, then you must think that in twenty years' time, we will be mighty indeed.'

'No, my guess is that in 1948 Munich will be part of a Germany that stretches only from the Elbe to the Rhine, and whose ruined cities will recently have seen production down to only 10 per cent of the 1928 level.'

'So you think we face black ruin in forty years' time?'

'No, by 1968 I prophesy that real income per head in Munich will be four times greater than now, and that in the year after that 90 per cent of German adults will sit looking at a box in a corner of their drawing rooms, which will show live pictures of a man walking upon the moon.'

They locked him up as a madman, of course.”

- General Hackett

I knew there would be no living with him now…

 

[The_Capt]

10 hours ago, dan/california said:

Edit: I don't think the Japanese figures are all that relevant between actual suicides and the fact they had no where to retreat to.

Whoa, whoa…hold on a minute here. The Japanese figures are very relevant as they outline the level of sacrifice Japan as an entire people were willing to make, even when faced with near certain defeat. 

[Yet]

38 minutes ago, Holien said:

While having 12 more days of free "meat" from NK is a drop in the ocean,

It could make sense, but why are we so sure that the North Koreans are meat? They could as well manage backfield things to free up 12000 Russians. Wouldnt it make sense for NK to send engineers, logistics etc. ? or to man the sleepy parts of the front? Id say RU might be desperate enough to agree with it, it gives RU army knowlegde and experience that they dont have anymore (they sent it to the meatgrinder) and gives NK field experience. 

 

[photon]

10 hours ago, dan/california said:

Does this reveal some deep limiting factor in military operations that applies across even even VERY different wars, or is just a random coincidence?

I think that's a random coincidence. Looking at the same metric for some other campaigns in the Pacific (quick and dirty numbers that I can refine if desired):

Guadalcanal (Ground; 6 months)

US: 136 per 100k per day

Japan: 291 per 100k per day

Tarawa (3 days)

US: 5,700 per 100k per day (!)

Japan: 30k per 100k per day (!)

Phillipines (Ground Campaign; 3 months)

US: 53 per 100k per day

Japan: 672 per 100k per day

It's worth noting that Tarawa in particular is an outlier reflecting an inter service disagreement about casualty shaping: the Marines favored short violent operations and were comfortable with commensurately higher casualties-per-day while the army favored a more methodical approach that reduced casualties-per-day but took more time to execute.

Several factors make these difficult to compare to other operational contexts.

First, neither combatant was limited by manpower force generation. Both the United States and Japan could field more manpower than they could equip or bring to the line of contact. Rather, the size of the forces was shaped by the logistic requirements of moving forces across the vast distances of the Pacific ocean.

Second, because of total United States air and naval superiority by 1943, the Japanese ground forces fought in isolated pockets with no expectation of resupply, relief, or withdrawal. Each unit was (by doctrine!) expected to fight until totally annihilated.

Third, the insular nature of most of the battles means the the area of contact was very small, which denied most US army doctrinal methods of attack (there is no armored maneuver when the line of contact is bounded on all sides by ocean.

I will confess that the Russian willingness to suffer shocking casualties -- it's one thing to spike to 1k per day for a high tempo operation like an island assault, it's another thing to do that every day for months on end -- does remind me of the sort of sacrifice the Japanese were comfortable with. And it took the US reducing their economy to a pre-industrial state, imposing mass starvation conditions on the civilian population, burning down most of their cities, and nuking them twice to break the will of the leaders to continue.

If the Russian tolerance for casualties is a signal of that sort of will, we're all in trouble. But I hope that it's not? It seems like it's more apathy than fanaticism driving the Russian tolerance for mass suffering?

[Kraft]

The main purpose of NKs will be to die in Kursk, conserving the precious conscripts that would actually matter and would need to be deployed there to throw out the current occupation, without further rus mobilisation.

One of the benefits of moving into russian land has thus been mostly negated as these will now grind themselfs and the ZSU units there and no new mobilisation needs to happen on the russian side, unlike the perpetual drafting that is happening elsewhere.

And while the usual voices try to spin this as the usual russia running out of men (again22, again again23, againagainagain24), using useless prisoners, low skill workers from the poorest regions in the east, african mercenaries, akhmat, forced migrant workers, muslim minorities, DNR/LNR conscripts and now North Koreans, does in fact not show weakness but an ability to circumvent the most impactful cost that has been paid in full by Ukraine for nearly 3 years, where professors, computer scientists,  accountants and healthcare workers die in battles against the lowest of the russian lifeforms.

There is already talk that western politicians are pressuring about drafting 18-25 years old, while russia throws in another batch of low lifes, that dont matter to the future function of society.

---------

Btw I suspect the NKs are far more fanatical than even the most motivated Z worm, something that counts for more than purely military skills when all they have to do is run across a field and try not to die in the process.

Edited October 19 by Kraft

[The_Capt]

37 minutes ago, photon said:

If the Russian tolerance for casualties is a signal of that sort of will, we're all in trouble. But I hope that it's not? It seems like it's more apathy than fanaticism driving the Russian tolerance for mass suffering?

This really is the question of this war. Why is Ukraine so important that 100k Russians were willing to die for it? Another 500k were wounded, many of them with life altering injuries. Ukraine has been an independent nation outside the Soviet bubble since '91? It has been a recognizable state entity since the end of WW1. This means for most of the 20-30 year old Russians dying in this war, Ukraine has always been another independent nation. 

So what changed? I mean I get the whole Near Abroad thing, and fears of NATO boogiemen. But why did that suddenly turn into "hey lets get 100k men killed!" Pulling it back to previous (and old) argument, this is why I am not sure if we could ever end this war quickly. I cannot see a scenario where enough western hardware, software or even overt pressure was going to break Russia and drag it to the negotiations table. Short of WW3 and a full on NATO intervention on a scope and scale that we are simply not prepared for, there was no quick and easy win on this one.

The major problem we have in western society, and you can definitely see it on this very thread, is that we got high on our own supply. Quick wars and military dominance became the accepted norm - with the exception of all those dirty little wars in places no one really cares about...we don't count them. So Russia and Putin should be like Saddam and Iraq! Why are we pussyfooting around here?!

Russia and Putin are definitely Iraq in '91 or '03, and we need to manage our own expectations. The old Red Gods are back in the driver seat on this one. No fancy footwork or magic "shock and awe". This is a grinding slugfest to the finish...no bones about it.

I can recall back in '14 when I first moved over to SOF, I got into a conversation with an operator. He was all on about how he loved combat and warfare. I told him straight up - "You love one small narrow type of combat and warfare; the type where you have complete overmatch and are basically hunting humans. Real war is something you have no exposure to." Needless to say that did not go over well but it was true. This is a real conventional war. Attritional and a test of collective will. Say what we will about Russians...and man they have a baffling ability to screw things up, but you cannot fault them for willpower. Their level of investment in this bloody quagmire, one that broke the RA and is going to cripple them economically, is frankly baffling.   

[Carolus]

 

Interview with a Finnish speaking man who fought on the Russian side and was captured. He does not have Finnish citizenship, spent some time in prison in Russia due to drug crime and then volunteered. Speaks about the conditions. Lost over 30kg of weight while on deployment because of lack of supply. The penal units / straf battalions sound truly hellish. 

[photon]

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Say what we will about Russians...and man they have a baffling ability to screw things up, but you cannot fault them for willpower.

Seeing the "Z" armband on the Finn reminds me a bit of World War Z (the rather interesting book, not the bad movie of the same name). In particular, one of the interviews with a soldier contains an exchange about will - our whole way of war was based on fighting an enemy whose morale could be broken. But that theory broke down in the face of the zombies, who, having no morale, could not be broken, leading to the development of the RTK ratio - resources to kills - and a grinding, attritional style of warfare.

We've (i.e. the West) hypothesized various levers and metrics that would break the collective Russian will to continue the war - the big ones being casualties, material depletion, and economic strangulation - and calibrated our escalation to those. But we've blown way past all the metrics I would have thought would cause a collapse. So either our theory of collapse is wrong, or we've badly misjudged the size of the effects needed to bring it about.

The question then becomes, "is there a magnitude of effect that will cause a Russian military collapse without also producing total war or a total societal disintegration?"

Two years ago I would have said "definitely yes", and put the magnitude way below 1k casualties per day.

A year ago I would have said "definitely yes", and put the magnitude at 1k casualties per day plus material degradation and strategic hits on key economic infrastructure.

I was wrong about both of those. Now I'm not sure how I'd answer that question.

[Carolus]

An interview done within Russia with a Russian civilian which I found interesting because of its frankness. 

 

[ArmouredTopHat]

5 hours ago, Holien said:

Interested to know how we know that?

We know it because we literally have crowdfunding initiatives that tries to raise the funds for AFU personnel who need transportation. Its frequently cited by AFU sources on TG that they never have enough vehicles for what they want to do. 
 

7 hours ago, Carolus said:

There are about 70.000 Ukrainian troops that severely lack motorisation as per Tataragami, so while what you say is true, what Ukraine still wants is definitely more metal.

Exactly my point. Ukraine is very much in the situation of needing metal. Manpower is an issue, but some brigades have literally had to be delisted as mechanised because they lack the equipment. TDF units are the worst effected here.

Hence why an injection of 2k Humvees is so important, as it means a major shift of equipment. Better units can replace their civilian vehicles / soviet stuff with the humvees, which the TDF units can then get when they previously had nothing. Its a universal win for the AFU. 

[Holien]

16 hours ago, ArmouredTopHat said:

The manpower situation is bad but not -that- bad.

You do realise that your answer above did not address how do we know that Ukrainian man power situation is not that bad?