Thoughts on the Russo-Ukranian War?

[I3BrigPvSk]

It shows just how comically retarded the Russians are, it is very "Bond villianesque"

For a start there is very little chance a nuke would activate Yellowstone so the Americans would probably prefer Russians shoot at it rather than a populated city and secondly it really doesn't matter what the Russians fire one at, the response will involve a US retaliatory strike into western Russia wiping out 80% of the Russian population.





It seems the Germans are never going to send them MBTs so maybe UK and France should look to fill that role but I imagine ammunition is a priority, at some stage re-equipping the airforce is going to be needed as well.

I think he is wrong about negotiations though, there is no reason the fighting has to stop while negotiations are taking place but I agree a ceasefire while Russia is holding Ukrainian territory should be avoided.

Yes, the first time I heard the threat to ignite Yellowstone was in 2015. The Americans can threat Russia to ignite the Siberian Traps volcano.

It is really stupid to say something like that on TV.

The British could send their old Chieftain and the Challenger 1 even if these tanks don't have smoothbore main guns, which could be a logistical challenge when they can't use the same ammunition as the French Leclerc, if the French decide to send any of those to Ukraine

 

[MontyB]

Such nonsense is also told by western journalists :with as source the RUSI they said that Russia planned to conquer Ukraine in 10 days ,something everyone knows was impossible .
The imbeciles from our media are as stupid as the imbeciles from the Russian media .

To be fair this operation was meant to be concluded within a couple of weeks, I doubt they physically thought they could occupy Ukraine in that time but I think they believe Ukraine would capitulate in that time.

If one looks at the biography of Sivkov (the author of the stupid threats ),one knows enough :he was only looking for some publicity .
An other one ,Sergei Markov,proposed to nuke London ,also looking for publicity .

There are a lot of people making stupid comments on both sides but it seems the Russians jump straight to the extremes.

The reality that they have overlooked is that for all its absurdity Mutually Assured Destruction works.

 

[I3BrigPvSk]

To be fair this operation was meant to be concluded within a couple of weeks, I doubt they physically thought they could occupy Ukraine in that time but I think they believe Ukraine would capitulate in that time.



There are a lot of people making stupid comments on both sides but it seems the Russians jump straight to the extremes.

The reality that they have overlooked is that for all its absurdity Mutually Assured Destruction works.

And that's the reason why nuclear weapons have most likely prevented wars, but they aren't military weapons. Nukes are political weapons designed for deterrence.

 

[MontyB]

And that's the reason why nuclear weapons have most likely prevented wars, but they aren't military weapons. Nukes are political weapons designed for deterrence.

Indeed and it is why Russia's continuous threats can be ignored as no one is going to fire one unless they are invaded and defeated, they are a weapon of last resort or last stand and as no one is going to invade Russia they are nothing more than a hollow threat.

In terms of Ukraine it means the west can and should provide them with whatever they need to drive the Russians from their territory.
Russians seem to think their demented threats carry some weight in the west which is why they keep coming up with Bond like "evil" plans such as nuking a volcano or creating a nuclear tidal wave, I am not sure why they think they need to do this instead of just firing the nuke as the result will be the same and will precipitate a western counterstrike which will effectively wipe out the northern hemisphere (including Russia) and inevitably most life on earth.

 

[lljadw]

To be fair this operation was meant to be concluded within a couple of weeks, I doubt they physically thought they could occupy Ukraine in that time but I think they believe Ukraine would capitulate in that time.



There are a lot of people making stupid comments on both sides but it seems the Russians jump straight to the extremes.

They knew that with 200000 men they never could conquer Ukraine . They knew that with 500000 men (which they did not have ) they could not occupy and pacify Ukraine ,and that's why that they convinced themselves that they could do it with an artifice :they would eliminate the Ukrainian leadership and this would aid very strongly the attempt to eliminate the standing Ukrainian forces,so that the war would be over after two weeks . They would install a puppet regime that would safeguard the borders with Poland and Romania and as soon as possible the 200000 men would go back (Russia could not afford their presence in Ukraine ).There would be no occupation army, only a few thousand casualties (the more Ukrainians were killed and the bigger the destructions would be,the bigger would be the hostility to Russia ).
Their reasoning was : we will win because we must win . It was the same tactic an reasoning they used in 1979 when they invaded Afghanistan ,and there also it failed .

 

[George]

"Greater Russia". Been a while since it's come up, but I wonder if China remembers Port Arthur was part of it...

 

[lljadw]

It seems the Germans are never going to send them MBTs so maybe UK and France should look to fill that role but I imagine ammunition is a priority, at some stage re-equipping the airforce is going to be needed as well.

Germany has no MBTs to send to Ukraine : their new MBT (Puma ) is worthless :18 were used in an exercise and all 18 fell out . Cost price : 18 X 17 million Euro .
Nice .
The only thing the Bundeswehr has is the aged Marder tank .
I doubt that France will give tanks for free and it is unlikely that Britain has still somewhere a big reserve of operational tanks .
For the air force :most Russian aircraft losses are caused by drones and air defense, not by Ukrainian aircraft .

 

[MontyB]

Germany has no MBTs to send to Ukraine : their new MBT (Puma ) is worthless :18 were used in an exercise and all 18 fell out . Cost price : 18 X 17 million Euro .
Nice .
The only thing the Bundeswehr has is the aged Marder tank .
I doubt that France will give tanks for free and it is unlikely that Britain has still somewhere a big reserve of operational tanks .
For the air force :most Russian aircraft losses are caused by drones and air defense, not by Ukrainian aircraft .

Not entirely accurate, it is true Germany seemingly couldn't organize a putsch in a Munich beer hall these days there are a large number of Leopard 2s in reserves around the world that could be transfered.

The reason the Ukrainian airforce isn't doing well in air to air is that they are outdated and are forced to fight in close hence the reason they need newer generation aircraft.

I would also point out that despite its age the Marder is an excellent alternative to be able to fall back on while the Puma is sorted or replaced.

 

[BritinBritain]

Ukraine should do a deal with South Africa for their SAAB Grippen aircraft, as they dont have affirmative action pilots qualified to fly them. All the pilots qualified on the aeroplane took a golden handshake because of idiotic aforementioned affirmative action, putting idiots in charge.

 

[lljadw]

Not entirely accurate, it is true Germany seemingly couldn't organize a putsch in a Munich beer hall these days there are a large number of Leopard 2s in reserves around the world that could be transfered.

The reason the Ukrainian airforce isn't doing well in air to air is that they are outdated and are forced to fight in close hence the reason they need newer generation aircraft.

I would also point out that despite its age the Marder is an excellent alternative to be able to fall back on while the Puma is sorted or replaced.

1 Could be transferred depends on the willingness of these countries to give them away :KSA ans Qatar have Leopard 2 tanks, but will they give them to Ukraine ?.The development of the Leopard 2 started in 1970 and the first one was delivered in 1979 ,43 years ago .This raises the problem of maintenance and spare parts and training :how many are operational and how many drivers can use them ? How long would it take to train the crew of a Leopard 2 ?
The Marder, older than the Leopard 2, is an IFV, Germany has 390 of them ,how many operational ? and proposed to give 100 of them to Ukraine . A small number .
Why not all ?Probably because only 100 are still operational .And the same training, maintenance and spare parts problem exists also for the Marder .
2 For the Ukrainian air force : one should not exaggerate the importance of air to air fighting and, if it is not doing well,is the reason the quality of the aircraft or is it the quality of the pilots .
Here also the introduction of a new generation of aircraft would raise the problems of training ( how long would it take to train the pilots ?a year ? more ? ),maintenance, spare parts, ammunition .
And I doubt that a less Russian air superiority would help Ukraine .

 

[lljadw]

Russia lost some 50 aircraft and helicopters ,Ukraine some 70 .Not all by enemy aircraft .The Battle of Britain is the past .So are the aces .
UAVs are not included .
120 losses in 10 months is not very high .

 

[MontyB]

Russia lost some 50 aircraft and helicopters ,Ukraine some 70 .Not all by enemy aircraft .The Battle of Britain is the past .So are the aces .
UAVs are not included .
120 losses in 10 months is not very high .

Losses are largely unimportant, the ability to replace material losses and aircrew is the deciding factor and Russian production and training figures are far from impressive.

Ukraine needs combat aircraft for reasons other than air to air combat, it also needs them to combat drones and cruise missiles.

 

[MontyB]

Ukraine should do a deal with South Africa for their SAAB Grippen aircraft, as they dont have affirmative action pilots qualified to fly them. All the pilots qualified on the aeroplane took a golden handshake because of idiotic aforementioned affirmative action, putting idiots in charge.

The problem with that is still Swedens ability to provide replacements, training and parts.
I think the Grippen is the right aircraft (South Africa has 29 C and D models) but it would take a lot of work to make it a robust operational system.

 

[I3BrigPvSk]

The problem with that is still Swedens ability to provide replacements, training and parts.
I think the Grippen is the right aircraft (South Africa has 29 C and D models) but it would take a lot of work to make it a robust operational system.

Or maybe give them F-16s. Several countries have F-16s in storage now when they get the F-35.

There are steps to provide Ukraine with Leopard 2A4 and A5. There are more than 2000 Leo2s in storage, more than half of these tanks are A4 and A5. How long will it take to train the Ukrainians to use them? To take four civilians and make them tankers take minimum a year. To take Ukrainian tankers to train them to use Leo2 takes maybe a month or two.

 

[lljadw]

Losses are largely unimportant, the ability to replace material losses and aircrew is the deciding factor and Russian production and training figures are far from impressive.

Ukraine needs combat aircraft for reasons other than air to air combat, it also needs them to combat drones and cruise missiles.

I think that it is an illusion to say that combat aircraft can be a deciding factor in the defense against drones and cruise missiles .
Anti-aircraft guns are more apt to do this .
If the enemy launches 100 suicide drones and 20 cruise missiles, combat aircraft will be powerless .If he launches 10 suicide drones and 2 cruise missiles, the situation will not be better, because to eliminate them, you must first find them .And drones and missiles can be longer operational than combat aircraft .

 

[MontyB]

I think that it is an illusion to say that combat aircraft can be a deciding factor in the defense against drones and cruise missiles .
Anti-aircraft guns are more apt to do this .
If the enemy launches 100 suicide drones and 20 cruise missiles, combat aircraft will be powerless .If he launches 10 suicide drones and 2 cruise missiles, the situation will not be better, because to eliminate them, you must first find them .And drones and missiles can be longer operational than combat aircraft .

Umm I never said they were a deciding factor in the defence against drones or missiles I indicated that it was another use for combat aircraft.
If this war is to continue for another year or more and we are serious about our support for Ukraine then they need to be converted over time into a western fighting force with all the equipment that it entails, if for no other reason than logistics as it is the kit we can get our hands on readily.

 

[lljadw]

Umm I never said they were a deciding factor in the defence against drones or missiles I indicated that it was another use for combat aircraft.
If this war is to continue for another year or more and we are serious about our support for Ukraine then they need to be converted over time into a western fighting force with all the equipment that it entails, if for no other reason than logistics as it is the kit we can get our hands on readily.

'We '' are serious ?
Except for the US and a few of its allies, the world is not concerned,not interested about a war between 2 countries who are not members of the EU and of NATO .
Even Turkey, a NATO member,is almost openly evading the US sanctions against Russia .
And why should the Ukrainian army be converted in a US army,as the US never fought against the Russians and as the results of the US weapons deliveries are not very brilliant .
Most of the Ukrainian aircraft are Russian made aircraft ,suitable for a fight against other Russian aircraft .
The use of US equipment (western is only an euphemism ) would demand enormous time for the Ukrainians and I like to see proofs ( claims are not proofs ) that the West can get its hands on them readily .
Germany has 390 Marders ,no one knows how many are still operational after all these years . Germany has promised 100 Marders to Ukraine, only 100 . But no one knows how many have arrived at the front in Ukraine .And a big question remains unanswered : why has Germany promised 100 IFV who are 40 years old and are IFV still useful?After 40 years wars have changed .
The Patriot missiles : one can argue that ,when they arrive and that can take a long time,they will protect the Ukrainian energy installations, but, they will not help the Ukrainian ground forces .

 

[MontyB]

Again you under value logistics, the west can not continue to supply Ukraine with old Soviet weapons as such they need to be (and are being) converted to western equipment so that we can continue to supply them.

 

[lljadw]

Again you under value logistics, the west can not continue to supply Ukraine with old Soviet weapons as such they need to be (and are being) converted to western equipment so that we can continue to supply them.

That is not the point .
The point is : what is better for Ukraine, not :what is better for Lockheed Martin .
What is better for Ukraine ?100 Marders ,whose arrival and use will last a long time,and whose use will be handicapped by the shortage of spare parts ?
Or maybe 100 former Russian IFV ?
For the average Ukrainian soldier Western weapons are as alien as the weapons of the invading Martians .
Tens of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers are transferred to Britain and Germany to receive an instruction from German and British instructors who do not speak Ukrainian ,while the Ukrainian soldiers do not understand German or English .
100 Patriots will be transported to Ukraine to protect Kiev and other cities .When will they arrive ?Who will handle them ?
English is not the Lingua Franca in Eastern Europe, it is German, to a limited extent .The most spoken foreign language in Eastern Europe is Russian ,
Three years ago Ukraine was on the 29th place of 33 European countries in the knowledge of English .
The reason is that the knowledge of English is not very useful in Ukraine .
As in Germany,most American films have not subtitles but are dubbed.The reason is obvious : most people do not understand English .

 

[MontyB]

That is not the point .
The point is : what is better for Ukraine, not :what is better for Lockheed Martin .
What is better for Ukraine ?100 Marders ,whose arrival and use will last a long time,and whose use will be handicapped by the shortage of spare parts ?
Or maybe 100 former Russian IFV ?
For the average Ukrainian soldier Western weapons are as alien as the weapons of the invading Martians .
Tens of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers are transferred to Britain and Germany to receive an instruction from German and British instructors who do not speak Ukrainian ,while the Ukrainian soldiers do not understand German or English .
100 Patriots will be transported to Ukraine to protect Kiev and other cities .When will they arrive ?Who will handle them ?
English is not the Lingua Franca in Eastern Europe, it is German, to a limited extent .The most spoken foreign language in Eastern Europe is Russian ,
Three years ago Ukraine was on the 29th place of 33 European countries in the knowledge of English .
The reason is that the knowledge of English is not very useful in Ukraine .
As in Germany,most American films have not subtitles but are dubbed.The reason is obvious : most people do not understand English .

I am not sure ringing JSC Kurganmashzavod and asking them for 100 BMP-1s or putting in an order with Splav State Research and Production for 50000 122mm rocketswill be met with the positive response you would hope.
The simple reality is that there isn't an endless supply of old Soviet crap lying around the west that can be shipped and the Russians arent taking orders from Ukraine currently hence the need for western equipment.

I have no idea why speaking English is all that important, I have spent a fair bit of time in England and found I couldn't understand a sizable portion of the English I met.