User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 9:44:35 AM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: They really needed Abrams (300 at least) F16's (maybe 100) and ATACMS to succeed in retaking their territory. They/we have been saying this for over a year now and we/they are still waiting. We have sent them small arms, arty, Patriots, HMMV's and M113's all specifically to be of very limited use offensively. Need in one hand, shit in the other. We don't have 300 Abrams to hand over and they don't have 100 pilots. They did receive hundreds of tanks and hundreds of artillery pieces, including HIMARs. Most of that was very rapidly sent. I'm not really sure how that's "of limited use offensively", as that is exactly what has been maintaining the vast majority of their offensive capability. They haven't been able to conduct an offensive because they don't have the full combined arms breaching capability, which includes air defense and aviation as well to support. There also really isn't a solution on the table that we have been holding back either. What they need either we dont have or they cannot support...or both. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 10:46:33 AM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Need in one hand, shit in the other. We don't have 300 Abrams to hand over and they don't have 100 pilots. They did receive hundreds of tanks and hundreds of artillery pieces, including HIMARs. Most of that was very rapidly sent. I'm not really sure how that's "of limited use offensively", as that is exactly what has been maintaining the vast majority of their offensive capability. They haven't been able to conduct an offensive because they don't have the full combined arms breaching capability, which includes air defense and aviation as well to support. There also really isn't a solution on the table that we have been holding back either. What they need either we dont have or they cannot support...or both. I'd agree with that assessment. At this point in time, I'm hoping ATACMS will give them additional capability to breach Russian defenses and make some more significant gains. The window of opportunity is probably short before winter sets in. Once that happens, it's basically a stalemate until next spring and who knows what the world looks like by then. The longer it draws out, assuming Russia is willing to keep taking body blows, the worse it looks for the Ukrainian effort overall as the international community will slowly withdraw their support (that's my guess anyway) and Ukrainian infrastructure is destroyed. The Russians will, no doubt, resume their attacks on the Ukrainian energy grid in the winter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 10:54:02 AM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What will happen if they use a nuke/nukes in Ukraine? any NATO countries downwind would probably consider it an attack on them. (looking at you, Poland) and it would get interesting. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 10:55:10 AM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yet independent Ukraine isn't any real economic engine. They've only recently gotten out from under Russian Control. All the prior administrations were linked back to Russia. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 11:06:53 AM EST
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Most Taiwanese speak Chinese. It is their official language. Similarly, in substantial parts of Ukraine, Russian is the dominant language. There are reasons for this that we cannot ignore. Yes, Taiwan is the ousted Chinese government - ousted by the communists. Taiwain, perhaps rightfully, considers themselves to be the rightful China. Substantial parts of Ukraine speak Russian, because the Russians (former Soviets) deliberately displaced a large portion of the Ukrainian population with Russians brought in to legitimize the claim that they wanted to be part of the USSR. Totally the same thing. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 11:21:10 AM EST
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: More NATO countries is a net positive for Russia. NATO is weak and disproportionately drains us of a fuck load of money. The countries that joined have nothing to offer in terms of money, competent military or defense production. They are there to further leech off the USA tit. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/351853/IMG_6333_png-2958741.JPG That chart is misleading, given the US economy is larger than all those countries combined. The chart showing contributions as a percent of GDP is a better indication of support. 2% of a small GDP is going to be a small number. 2% of a large GDP is going to be a larger number. Raws dollars don't tell us anything. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 11:27:31 AM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Get back to me when you're glorious offensive can take more than 15km in very small areas Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I've said it before but here's my argument: Ukraine is winning this war. Russia's main goals were pretty obvious. They didn't send 200k men with 1200 tanks and hundreds of aircraft to simply make a feint at Kyiv with the elite dudes. You use the gomers, c list bands, and bench warmers for that. Seize Kyiv and then by default all of Ukraine. Install a puppet government. Annex the coast and create a rump state like Belarus. Go back home a Tsar to an adulating crowd because everyone loves a winner. And most of all? They thought they could do it in a few weeks with a few days of that being the war part and the rest being JBT'ing the civilians there (and undesirables like policemen, veterans, critics, etc). Heck, they declared victory on day 2 of the war while they were still making good advances and before getting bogged down outside Kyiv (the infamous 40 mile long convoy). Russia is the nuclear power. Ukraine is not. Ukraine is a much smaller nation. By all factors Putin should be sipping tea in Kyiv right now and his Rossguard and SOBR thugs ruffing up old ladies and dragging people to torture chambers and filtration camps. But none of that is happening except in occupied areas. Russia is still fighting in the east to conquer land and has absolutely no hope of taking Odesa, Kyiv, or creating a rump state in Ukraine. The 2 day war is now on day 573. Ukraine largely surviving intact is a victory. The sole goal Russia has been able to accomplish, create a land bridge to Crimea, is slowly becoming more and more a lost cause. Russia not taking the entire country is a defeat for them. The Russian highway to victory is a 1 lane road. Narrow and getting more and more narrow by the day. The Ukrainian highway to victory is i35 south of Itasca-wide open. Will Ukraine lost some territory? Probably. I don't think they will liberate Crimea. Will Russia win? Not at all. The question that needs to be asked is "Why can't Russia beat Ukraine?". A very uncomfortable question, indeed! Quoted: Just tell Russia they can have their port, and we won't let Ukraine join NATO. Then sell shitloads of weapons to Poland and Czech Republic. Damn, it isn't hard to figure out the solution when the Russians broadcast it on their nightly news. Also, Belarus has to let Ukraine kick them in the balls every February. Giving in to a bully only encourages more bullying. Poland and the Czech Republic are already buying a lot of our weapons and sending a lot to Ukraine. "Nato" is a boogeyman they use to justify the most horrific of crimes. It's obvious when they strip troops from military districts facing nato and send them to Ukraine. Get back to me when you're glorious offensive can take more than 15km in very small areas Doesn't this work both ways? Shouldn't the Winning side be gaining ground? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 11:35:09 AM EST
[#8]
If, as the article points out, it is a numbers game then yes, Ukrainians lose, and the Russian Empire invades more countries. We are going to be forced to spend, equip, and increase the manpower of our military. As we throw more allies under the bus, we will pay a greater price for our stupidity. Those who myopically support isolationism will find more and more threats to our freedom. I don't think they care but most of us do care. We like our freedom. The problem is not numbers for Russia, it is equipping them. That can't and it shows on the battlefield. A WWI rifle and a handful of ammo against Ukraine soldiers armed with the latest and greatest is not a winning strategy. Fighting with 60s-era tanks that are rusted hulks is not a winning hand either. Their training is 3rd world level if at all. The longer Russia continues this war the more depleted its military becomes in power. Russia can't even supply their allies much less themselves.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 11:37:23 AM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The UkeBros actually believe that any Russian regardless of what they actually do are spokesperson's for Putin Do you believe that Russia has a free and independent press? <- it is a yes or no question. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 11:46:22 AM EST
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Because they had only Russian nukes and gave them back to Russia. They don't know how to build nukes nor would the U.S. or the E.U. allow it. They BUILT the nukes for RUSSIA The missiles, guidance and other crucial components, including some of the equioment used in the actual manufacturing. They were one of the engineering and scientific hubs for USSR Even if they didn't assemble the actual warheads, they produced the people that could assemble them, the equipment to do so, and the scientists that know how. They already have nuclear power plants capable of producing weapons grade fissile material. Unless it was all destroyed, they also have the manufacturing base to make them. If it was dismantled or destroyed, they built the equipment in the first palce and have the engineer know-how to do so again. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 11:50:04 AM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You obviously don't know about the Soviet atomgrads. Yes, no nuclear weapons were made in Ukraine. https://panethos.wordpress.com/2020/05/06/soviet-era-atomgrads-part-1-nuclear-weapon-cities/ But they did do R&D that contributed to the development. They built the missiles, guidance systems and other equipment, plus machinery used in the Atomgrads. To say they lack the know how is absurd. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 11:52:04 AM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If, as the article points out, it is a numbers game then yes, Ukrainians lose, and the Russian Empire invades more countries. We are going to be forced to spend, equip, and increase the manpower of our military. As we throw more allies under the bus, we will pay a greater price for our stupidity. Those who myopically support isolationism will find more and more threats to our freedom. I don't think they care but most of us do care. We like our freedom. The problem is not numbers for Russia, it is equipping them. That can't and it shows on the battlefield. A WWI rifle and a handful of ammo against Ukraine soldiers armed with the latest and greatest is not a winning strategy. Fighting with 60s-era tanks that are rusted hulks is not a winning hand either. Their training is 3rd world level if at all. The longer Russia continues this war the more depleted its military becomes in power. Russia can't even supply their allies much less themselves. So Russia is crumbling the longer this goes on, but will win the longer this goes on, and will invade other countries also. And this will cost us our freedom. Ignoring all the Russian part, we are losing our freedoms here. And Russia doesn’t have anything to do with it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 12:11:20 PM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They BUILT the nukes for RUSSIA The missiles, guidance and other crucial components, including some of the equioment used in the actual manufacturing. They were one of the engineering and scientific hubs for USSR Even if they didn't assemble the actual warheads, they produced the people that could assemble them, the equipment to do so, and the scientists that know how. They already have nuclear power plants capable of producing weapons grade fissile material. Unless it was all destroyed, they also have the manufacturing base to make them. If it was dismantled or destroyed, they built the equipment in the first palce and have the engineer know-how to do so again. All that said, I do hope they are doing some clandestine R&D. They're gonna need it. This conflict still has plenty of room to get a LOT uglier in many ways. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 12:21:09 PM EST
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Need in one hand, shit in the other. We don't have 300 Abrams to hand over and they don't have 100 pilots. They did receive hundreds of tanks and hundreds of artillery pieces, including HIMARs. Most of that was very rapidly sent. I'm not really sure how that's "of limited use offensively", as that is exactly what has been maintaining the vast majority of their offensive capability. They haven't been able to conduct an offensive because they don't have the full combined arms breaching capability, which includes air defense and aviation as well to support. There also really isn't a solution on the table that we have been holding back either. What they need either we dont have or they cannot support...or both. I beg to differ. The US Army has 6ooo Abrams tanks with about 2500 active. We have almost 1000 F-35s and producing 156 this year. Peak production won't be reached until 2024. How many Su-57s does Russia have? Ten, all pre-production models. Russia projects 12 more built over the next 24 months if they can find the parts. Tank production is at a halt. They are struggling to refurbish T-54 tanks. They are issuing WWI bolt action rifles with handfuls of bullets. Their Navy is shrinking and they can't afford to keep them in service much less in the Black Sea. Russia has a definite advantage in manpower but no means to equip them. They might as well be issued brooms. As for Ukraine, they have a pipeline of pilots waiting to get in the cockpit. They just need to get them trained. Yes, the Ukrainians don't have the numbers on the ground. That makes for a lot of tough choices. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 12:28:45 PM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I beg to differ. The US Army has 6ooo Abrams tanks with about 2500 active. We have almost 1000 F-35s and producing 156 this year. Peak production won't be reached until 2024. How many Su-57s does Russia have? Ten, all pre-production models. Russia projects 12 more built over the next 24 months if they can find the parts. Tank production is at a halt. They are struggling to refurbish T-54 tanks. They are issuing WWI bolt action rifles with handfuls of bullets. Their Navy is shrinking and they can't afford to keep them in service much less in the Black Sea. Russia has a definite advantage in manpower but no means to equip them. They might as well be issued brooms. As for Ukraine, they have a pipeline of pilots waiting to get in the cockpit. They just need to get them trained. Yes, the Ukrainians don't have the numbers on the ground. That makes for a lot of tough choices. Those 6000 are not approved for export for very real reasons. That's just reality. So no, we did not have 300 Abrams to give them. Ukraine does not and did not ever have enough pilots to give them 100 F16s. Beg to differ all you want but almost a year after the process started they will be lucky to have a half dozen. I don't think they have 100 pilots total, much less those with the aptitude to fly an F16. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 12:33:19 PM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If, as the article points out, it is a numbers game then yes, Ukrainians lose, and the Russian Empire invades more countries. We are going to be forced to spend, equip, and increase the manpower of our military. As we throw more allies under the bus, we will pay a greater price for our stupidity. Those who myopically support isolationism will find more and more threats to our freedom. I don't think they care but most of us do care. We like our freedom. The problem is not numbers for Russia, it is equipping them. That can't and it shows on the battlefield. A WWI rifle and a handful of ammo against Ukraine soldiers armed with the latest and greatest is not a winning strategy. Fighting with 60s-era tanks that are rusted hulks is not a winning hand either. Their training is 3rd world level if at all. The longer Russia continues this war the more depleted its military becomes in power. Russia can't even supply their allies much less themselves. What a delusional attitude. So you believe in the old JFK doctrine of "pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship"? 58,000 American lives were sacrificed to that doctrine in Vietnam before the dumbasses in Washington figured out that it doesn't work. Maybe you don't remember that. I do. This freedom you speak of. Is mortgaging our children's, grandchildren's, and great grandchildren's futures and reducing them to the level of serfdom to pay for these wars your idea of freedom? It is not mine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 12:40:43 PM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If, as the article points out, it is a numbers game then yes, Ukrainians lose, and the Russian Empire invades more countries. We are going to be forced to spend, equip, and increase the manpower of our military. As we throw more allies under the bus, we will pay a greater price for our stupidity. Those who myopically support isolationism will find more and more threats to our freedom. I don't think they care but most of us do care. We like our freedom. The problem is not numbers for Russia, it is equipping them. That can't and it shows on the battlefield. A WWI rifle and a handful of ammo against Ukraine soldiers armed with the latest and greatest is not a winning strategy. Fighting with 60s-era tanks that are rusted hulks is not a winning hand either. Their training is 3rd world level if at all. The longer Russia continues this war the more depleted its military becomes in power. Russia can't even supply their allies much less themselves. The longer this war continues the more depleted WE become. Europe is already toast, and Russia is already making major moves to switch to a wartime production based economy backed by their friends China and Iran. This war is not going to be won by tanks. That front is over until the spring, meaning Russia has time to dig in even deeper. Russian hybrid war conflict gave up on tactical level parity years ago. It's a deep fires/MDO attrition game now, and Russia absolutely has the upper hand there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 2:47:52 PM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The longer this war continues the more depleted WE become. Europe is already toast, and Russia is already making major moves to switch to a wartime production based economy backed by their friends China and Iran. This war is not going to be won by tanks. That front is over until the spring, meaning Russia has time to dig in even deeper. Russian hybrid war conflict gave up on tactical level parity years ago. It's a deep fires/MDO attrition game now, and Russia absolutely has the upper hand there. They do know about winning by attrition. There was always a question about the Russian population becoming dissatisfied with their leadership enough to make a difference, but the total control Russia exerts over the media along with draconian internal laws has all but squashed that. The Russian population continues to be satisfied with living in ever-decreasing circumstances - or it appears so at least. (Cue picture of the dog in hell going "This is fine"). There is a real problem for Ukraine too with the depletion of their population via war dead and people fleeing the country, as well as the destruction of their infrastructure. The longer this goes on the worse it is for Ukraine, although I could see them hold out for quite a while too. They've been fed a real shit sandwich and it's 100% Russia's fault. I still hope and pray that they come through this somehow and can rebuild. I also know that if Russia gets even a small victory then the bells will be ringing all over Russia, the population will continue to think they're invincible, the West will resume trade as soon as they can, and Russia will try again down the road, even if it takes quite a few years. Russia, short of some decisive defeat/acknowledgement of their misdeeds will once again be threat to world peace - eventually. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 4:43:53 PM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: They do know about winning by attrition. There was always a question about the Russian population becoming dissatisfied with their leadership enough to make a difference, but the total control Russia exerts over the media along with draconian internal laws has all but squashed that. The Russian population continues to be satisfied with living in ever-decreasing circumstances - or it appears so at least. (Cue picture of the dog in hell going "This is fine"). There is a real problem for Ukraine too with the depletion of their population via war dead and people fleeing the country, as well as the destruction of their infrastructure. The longer this goes on the worse it is for Ukraine, although I could see them hold out for quite a while too. They've been fed a real shit sandwich and it's 100% Russia's fault. I still hope and pray that they come through this somehow and can rebuild. I also know that if Russia gets even a small victory then the bells will be ringing all over Russia, the population will continue to think they're invincible, the West will resume trade as soon as they can, and Russia will try again down the road, even if it takes quite a few years. Russia, short of some decisive defeat/acknowledgement of their misdeeds will once again be threat to world peace - eventually. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The longer this war continues the more depleted WE become. Europe is already toast, and Russia is already making major moves to switch to a wartime production based economy backed by their friends China and Iran. This war is not going to be won by tanks. That front is over until the spring, meaning Russia has time to dig in even deeper. Russian hybrid war conflict gave up on tactical level parity years ago. It's a deep fires/MDO attrition game now, and Russia absolutely has the upper hand there. They do know about winning by attrition. There was always a question about the Russian population becoming dissatisfied with their leadership enough to make a difference, but the total control Russia exerts over the media along with draconian internal laws has all but squashed that. The Russian population continues to be satisfied with living in ever-decreasing circumstances - or it appears so at least. (Cue picture of the dog in hell going "This is fine"). There is a real problem for Ukraine too with the depletion of their population via war dead and people fleeing the country, as well as the destruction of their infrastructure. The longer this goes on the worse it is for Ukraine, although I could see them hold out for quite a while too. They've been fed a real shit sandwich and it's 100% Russia's fault. I still hope and pray that they come through this somehow and can rebuild. I also know that if Russia gets even a small victory then the bells will be ringing all over Russia, the population will continue to think they're invincible, the West will resume trade as soon as they can, and Russia will try again down the road, even if it takes quite a few years. Russia, short of some decisive defeat/acknowledgement of their misdeeds will once again be threat to world peace - eventually. Were you under the impression that the West was going to do something besides using Ukraine as means to kick the Russian can down the road? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 4:49:04 PM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What a delusional attitude. So you believe in the old JFK doctrine of "pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship"? 58,000 American lives were sacrificed to that doctrine in Vietnam before the dumbasses in Washington figured out that it doesn't work. Maybe you don't remember that. I do. This freedom you speak of. Is mortgaging our children's, grandchildren's, and great grandchildren's futures and reducing them to the level of serfdom to pay for these wars your idea of freedom? It is not mine. Then start learning Chinese Mandarin. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 4:53:08 PM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The longer this war continues the more depleted WE become. Europe is already toast, and Russia is already making major moves to switch to a wartime production based economy backed by their friends China and Iran. This war is not going to be won by tanks. That front is over until the spring, meaning Russia has time to dig in even deeper. Russian hybrid war conflict gave up on tactical level parity years ago. It's a deep fires/MDO attrition game now, and Russia absolutely has the upper hand there. So what weapons are they going to be issued, rocks and sticks? Are those going to be serial-numbered? You give up too easily. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 4:56:52 PM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Those 6000 are not approved for export for very real reasons. That's just reality. So no, we did not have 300 Abrams to give them. Ukraine does not and did not ever have enough pilots to give them 100 F16s. Beg to differ all you want but almost a year after the process started they will be lucky to have a half dozen. I don't think they have 100 pilots total, much less those with the aptitude to fly an F16. A stroke of a pen and they are approved for export. We have plenty of F-16s too. Might as well give them to Ukraine, according to you we will never use them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 5:14:43 PM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A stroke of a pen and they are approved for export. We have plenty of F-16s too. Might as well give them to Ukraine, according to you we will never use them. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Those 6000 are not approved for export for very real reasons. That's just reality. So no, we did not have 300 Abrams to give them. Ukraine does not and did not ever have enough pilots to give them 100 F16s. Beg to differ all you want but almost a year after the process started they will be lucky to have a half dozen. I don't think they have 100 pilots total, much less those with the aptitude to fly an F16. A stroke of a pen and they are approved for export. We have plenty of F-16s too. Might as well give them to Ukraine, according to you we will never use them. Do you actually believe anything other than those in active service are anywhere near Code A condition? Or we even have the parts on hand to bring any significant number to a useable condition? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 5:36:41 PM EST
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So what weapons are they going to be issued, rocks and sticks? Are those going to be serial-numbered? You give up too easily. Quote HistoryQuoted: So what weapons are they going to be issued, rocks and sticks? Are those going to be serial-numbered? You give up too easily. You have unrealistic expectations. Learn to balance those against reality and you won't be so upset all the time. Quoted: A stroke of a pen and they are approved for export. We have plenty of F-16s too. Might as well give them to Ukraine, according to you we will never use them. Why would we export them? As I said there's a reason they are unavailable. A third party conflict does not suddenly alleviate those concerns. I'm not sure where I apparently said we would never use F16's, but it doesn't do any good if they can't fly them either due to maintenance or training issues. We could give them space shuttles that would have the same net result. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 7:28:51 PM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Then start learning Chinese Mandarin. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: What a delusional attitude. So you believe in the old JFK doctrine of "pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship"? 58,000 American lives were sacrificed to that doctrine in Vietnam before the dumbasses in Washington figured out that it doesn't work. Maybe you don't remember that. I do. This freedom you speak of. Is mortgaging our children's, grandchildren's, and great grandchildren's futures and reducing them to the level of serfdom to pay for these wars your idea of freedom? It is not mine. Then start learning Chinese Mandarin. I”ll keep an eye out for that Chinese invasion fleet crossing the Pacific. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 7:29:33 PM EST
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Were you under the impression that the West was going to do something besides using Ukraine as means to kick the Russian can down the road? At this point in time, I would say "not anymore" - which is a shame, because I think the West had the opportunity to rub Russia's nose in it. But maybe a victory (even a semi-victory) for Ukraine was always a bridge too far. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 7:40:09 PM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Then start learning Chinese Mandarin. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: What a delusional attitude. So you believe in the old JFK doctrine of "pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship"? 58,000 American lives were sacrificed to that doctrine in Vietnam before the dumbasses in Washington figured out that it doesn't work. Maybe you don't remember that. I do. This freedom you speak of. Is mortgaging our children's, grandchildren's, and great grandchildren's futures and reducing them to the level of serfdom to pay for these wars your idea of freedom? It is not mine. Then start learning Chinese Mandarin. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 7:41:13 PM EST
[#28]
It's going to end up as a stalemate. Everyone should have known that from the start. Very little change, except a lot of people dead.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 8:33:20 PM EST
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: At this point in time, I would say "not anymore" - which is a shame, because I think the West had the opportunity to rub Russia's nose in it. But maybe a victory (even a semi-victory) for Ukraine was always a bridge too far. Ukraine has been handed a land component similar to what we took Baghdad with. There is no singular system that would change any outcomes through timeline or employment. There seems to be a very large misconception that this war is based on tanks and rifles facing off when it is actually much broader. This is full on joint force multi-domain operations and at the end of the day for all their failures Russia has played Ukraine and the west like a fiddle, capitalizing on our refusal to acknowledge their ability to employ those domains asymmetrically. Basically there have been a lot of failures but the type of tank we gave them is at the very bottom of that list. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 8:42:16 PM EST
[#30]
This has all been very interesting and I appreciate your doses of reality daemon734. I'm wondering if it turns out the impact of IO in the real world is minimal and even counter productive when those stories begin to be accepted as reality by the wrong people (expectations become unrealistically high, appraisals of one's own capabilities become unreliable, etc.). I'd appreciate your thoughts on this some time if you have any.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 8:49:35 PM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Ukraine has been handed a land component similar to what we took Baghdad with. There is no singular system that would change any outcomes through timeline or employment. There seems to be a very large misconception that this war is based on tanks and rifles facing off when it is actually much broader. This is full on joint force multi-domain operations and at the end of the day for all their failures Russia has played Ukraine and the west like a fiddle, capitalizing on our refusal to acknowledge their ability to employ those domains asymmetrically. Basically there have been a lot of failures but the type of tank we gave them is at the very bottom of that list. But if it's THAT bleak, why haven't the Russians sealed the deal already? I can accept the fact that we may not have a full picture of Ukrainian losses, but the Russians have taken some serious blows. If they have such an overwhleming advantage, I would have expected them to have more to show for it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 9:26:09 PM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Ukraine was shocked to find out they had nuclear weapons on their territory in the first place. Also, that was a generation ago. So much has changed. You could not walk into a nuclear facility from 60 years ago and just start cranking out weapons. Yes, they have the smarts to do it, but they'd be starting from basically ground zero (so to speak). There has been NO nuclear weapons production in Ukraine or by any Ukrainian in more than a generation. Talking about what Ukrainians did for Russian industry 50 years ago means nothing today. All that said, I do hope they are doing some clandestine R&D. They're gonna need it. This conflict still has plenty of room to get a LOT uglier in many ways. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: They BUILT the nukes for RUSSIA The missiles, guidance and other crucial components, including some of the equioment used in the actual manufacturing. They were one of the engineering and scientific hubs for USSR Even if they didn't assemble the actual warheads, they produced the people that could assemble them, the equipment to do so, and the scientists that know how. They already have nuclear power plants capable of producing weapons grade fissile material. Unless it was all destroyed, they also have the manufacturing base to make them. If it was dismantled or destroyed, they built the equipment in the first palce and have the engineer know-how to do so again. Ukraine was shocked to find out they had nuclear weapons on their territory in the first place. Also, that was a generation ago. So much has changed. You could not walk into a nuclear facility from 60 years ago and just start cranking out weapons. Yes, they have the smarts to do it, but they'd be starting from basically ground zero (so to speak). There has been NO nuclear weapons production in Ukraine or by any Ukrainian in more than a generation. Talking about what Ukrainians did for Russian industry 50 years ago means nothing today. All that said, I do hope they are doing some clandestine R&D. They're gonna need it. This conflict still has plenty of room to get a LOT uglier in many ways. All of the delivery system and operational control for nuclear weapons in Ukraine was run by the Russians. Manned by Russians. Ukrainians hosted it and did the general upkeep and maintenance for it. They had no capacity to employ the missiles since Russia controlled all of the launch codes for the nuclear capability in Ukraine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 9:29:00 PM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: But if it's THAT bleak, why haven't the Russians sealed the deal already? I can accept the fact that we may not have a full picture of Ukrainian losses, but the Russians have taken some serious blows. If they have such an overwhleming advantage, I would have expected them to have more to show for it. You are misunderstanding my intent. Asymmetric successes we were unprepared for don't equate outright victory. However they do substantially alter the estimated glide path of the conflict and set conditions for the long term stalemate were seeing now. A stalemate that as you have already identified, is fundamentally better for Russia in the long run. I believe a stalemate would be lengthy even with fully maintained support. We are already seeing a waning desire for support politically from all nations involved, and increased operational considerations outside of this conflict. Time is definitely not Ukraine's friend. They have been following the model of executing high risk/median payoff operations simply to feed a hungry IO monster but that just kicks the can, it doesn't solve the problem and what we don't see are the losses inherently tied to this methodology. They aren't really fighting for strategic gains at this point, they are fighting to maintain a positive narrative. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 10:24:13 PM EST
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You are misunderstanding my intent. Asymmetric successes we were unprepared for don't equate outright victory. However they do substantially alter the estimated glide path of the conflict and set conditions for the long term stalemate were seeing now. A stalemate that as you have already identified, is fundamentally better for Russia in the long run. I believe a stalemate would be lengthy even with fully maintained support. We are already seeing a waning desire for support politically from all nations involved, and increased operational considerations outside of this conflict. Time is definitely not Ukraine's friend. They have been following the model of executing high risk/median payoff operations simply to feed a hungry IO monster but that just kicks the can, it doesn't solve the problem and what we don't see are the losses inherently tied to this methodology. They aren't really fighting for strategic gains at this point, they are fighting to maintain a positive narrative. Gotcha. Thanks for the clarification. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 10:27:18 PM EST
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Is something going on in Ukraine? Zelensky gotta get to Israel so Ukraine isn't dropping from the news cycle. The entire world revolves around what we see on our phones. lol |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 10:48:56 PM EST
[#36]
NATO has basically stopped Russia right where it wanted to, far away in the East. I think the reason why Ukraine is not getting more advanced offensive weapons is not because they are not capable of operating them or export controls, but because the US is worried about escalation. Russian pilots flew Mig-17s in North Korea and Mig-21s in Vietnam. The precedent is established, foreign pilots are fair game. The US also dropped napalm on Chinese troops in the Korean war. If NATO wanted to escalate, there would be a way.
Sevastopol is one of only three federal cities in Russia. It was a closed city in the USSR, home of the Black Sea fleet. Nobody in the West wants to support a bloody offensive to retake it. I'm willing to bet not many people in Kyiv want to die for it either. Putin, on the other hand, will happily sacrifice hundreds of thousands if that means he will be remembered for retaking the city founded by Catherine the Great. The rest of the land occupied by Russia is basically already a wasteland. Putin will walk away with a victory if he gets to keep Crimea and the land bridge. NATO will also walk away with a victory if Russia is stopped and Ukraine survives as an independent country. Both sides are fine with the way things are right now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2023 11:02:55 PM EST
[#37]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2023 3:01:54 AM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Anyone that ever thought Ukraine would be able to beat Russia (if it was truly determined), is a god damn fool. Russia has a ton of people, Cold War stockpiles to burn up, and plenty of oil and gas to export to places like China that have an ever-increasing demand for it. The only side being weakened by this is NATO. Don't fool yourself. I'm not sure you noticed but Russia has failed at every single goal they set for themselves which they exposed early on when they declared victory. They're getting the brakes beaten off them by a minor regional power. 604 days now into the 2 day war. Nato is sending equipment. Russia is losing hundreds of thousands of men and trillions worth of equipment. The black sea fleet has lost almost a dozen surface vessels and even a sub in a land war. That's not exactly winning. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/9/2023 6:10:20 AM EST
[#39]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/5/2023 7:34:26 AM EST
[#40]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/5/2023 8:20:09 AM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryThis has been pretty common knowledge once you divest yourself from over-saturation of one side's propaganda. Every condition and outcome that was presented by truly objective people on this board has come to fruition. - Ukraine is at a stalemate slanted against them - Defense production has essentially gone nowhere - Europe is not only completely tapped out but essentially defenseless themselves - Russian industrial base and wartime economy is rapidly expanding - inflation is exceeding replenishment earmarks - US troops find themselves in need of weapons we gave away As it turns out idealism, willful ignorance, and the power of positive thought didn't actually solve these problems. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/5/2023 9:52:10 AM EST
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This has been pretty common knowledge once you divest yourself from over-saturation of one side's propaganda. Every condition and outcome that was presented by truly objective people on this board has come to fruition. - Ukraine is at a stalemate slanted against them - Defense production has essentially gone nowhere - Europe is not only completely tapped out but essentially defenseless themselves - Russian industrial base and wartime economy is rapidly expanding - inflation is exceeding replenishment earmarks - US troops find themselves in need of weapons we gave away As it turns out idealism, willful ignorance, and the power of positive thought didn't actually solve these problems. It was indeed a very sobering article, but not totally surprising as the writing has been on the wall for a while. After Ukraine's successful counteroffensive last year, hopes were high that the same sort of breakout could be achieved but it never happened due to several factors: 1) Ukraine's refusal to attack earlier in April, giving Russia the ability to build fortifications. 2) Ukraine not using a one-pronged approach in favor of attacking on three fronts 3) To a smaller degree, the US waffling on ammunition like DPICM. Some other items that I noted after reading both parts:
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/5/2023 10:06:38 AM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It was indeed a very sobering article, but not totally surprising as the writing has been on the wall for a while. After Ukraine's successful counteroffensive last year, hopes were high that the same sort of breakout could be achieved but it never happened due to several factors: 1) Ukraine's refusal to attack earlier in April, giving Russia the ability to build fortifications. 2) Ukraine not using a one-pronged approach in favor of attacking on three fronts 3) To a smaller degree, the US waffling on ammunition like DPICM. Some other items that I noted after reading both parts:
https://breakingdefense.com/2023/12/amid-ukraine-and-israel-conflicts-pentagon-acquisition-chief-sees-counter-drone-crisis/?amp=1 |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/5/2023 10:31:10 AM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryDrone warfare went from "I bet it's a possibility that these will be used in a future conflict" to "HOLY SHIT - WE MUST HAVE A COMPLETELY NEW WARFIGHTING CAPABILITY IN 6 MONTHS!" Armies the world over are going into overdrive in all things drone warfare no doubt. In regards to the shortage of 155 artillery shells: I suppose that we don't have as many as we used to, but I also can't imagine that the US itself will be embroiled in a war any time in the foreseeable future that will depend heavily on artillery shells. I make that assertion not having any military experience so take it FWIW. It's just based on the idea that lugging artillery over to the far east for a ground conflict seems really unlikely to me - at least for many years. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/5/2023 10:37:25 AM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Drone warfare went from "I bet it's a possibility that these will be used in a future conflict" to "HOLY SHIT - WE MUST HAVE A COMPLETELY NEW WARFIGHTING CAPABILITY IN 6 MONTHS!" Armies the world over are going into overdrive in all things drone warfare no doubt. In regards to the shortage of 155 artillery shells: I suppose that we don't have as many as we used to, but I also can't imagine that the US itself will be embroiled in a war any time in the foreseeable future that will depend heavily on artillery shells. I make that assertion not having any military experience so take it FWIW. It's just based on the idea that lugging artillery over to the far east for a ground conflict seems really unlikely to me - at least for many years. Korean Peninsula and Iran are still in play |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/5/2023 10:47:52 AM EST
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: But if it's THAT bleak, why haven't the Russians sealed the deal already? I can accept the fact that we may not have a full picture of Ukrainian losses, but the Russians have taken some serious blows. If they have such an overwhleming advantage, I would have expected them to have more to show for it. It's cheaper to hide behind fortifications and force the Ukraine to fight on the offensive. Once their manpower is sufficiently depleted you force the concessions you want in a negotiated peace. Even if they could take the land they want to this is a cheaper alternative. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/5/2023 11:47:17 AM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't know if I agree with the assessment that US troops are lacking for weapons due to what we gave away but other than that: Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't know if I agree with the assessment that US troops are lacking for weapons due to what we gave away but other than that: Fair enough, but the troops all over CENTCOM that have been having large Iranian OWA drones raining down on them every day disagree with the thought that giving all our short range air defense to Ukraine was a good idea. Quoted: Drone warfare went from "I bet it's a possibility that these will be used in a future conflict" to "HOLY SHIT - WE MUST HAVE A COMPLETELY NEW WARFIGHTING CAPABILITY IN 6 MONTHS!" Armies the world over are going into overdrive in all things drone warfare no doubt. In regards to the shortage of 155 artillery shells: I suppose that we don't have as many as we used to, but I also can't imagine that the US itself will be embroiled in a war any time in the foreseeable future that will depend heavily on artillery shells. I make that assertion not having any military experience so take it FWIW. It's just based on the idea that lugging artillery over to the far east for a ground conflict seems really unlikely to me - at least for many years. Since when would war in Korea not need a bazillion artillery shells? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/5/2023 11:57:05 AM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's cheaper to hide behind fortifications and force the Ukraine to fight on the offensive. Once their manpower is sufficiently depleted you force the concessions you want in a negotiated peace. Even if they could take the land they want to this is a cheaper alternative. Dragging it out to deplete the west of cash and critical parts of their military capabilities is also a feature, not a bug. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/5/2023 12:02:36 PM EST
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Since when would war in Korea not need a bazillion artillery shells? Oh it would - I'm just speculating that this scenario won't happen. Of course, I might be wrong. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/5/2023 12:03:42 PM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Fair enough, but the troops all over CENTCOM that have been having large Iranian OWA drones raining down on them every day disagree with the thought that giving all our short range air defense to Ukraine was a good idea. Since when would war in Korea not need a bazillion artillery shells? Words matter. Precision matters. You are embellishing for effect here. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File
Attached File