Thoughts on the Russo-Ukranian War?

[BritinBritain]

Concerns are mounting that Belarusian troops could join Russia’s forces in Ukraine. But this course of action would be extremely risky – for both Putin and Lukashenka.

Putin is running out of conventional cards to play in Ukraine. The Ukrainian armed forces are liberating occupied territories and conducting sabotage operations against Russia-controlled targets – allegedly including Putin’s beloved Crimean bridge. The Russian armed forces have squandered their stocks of both missiles and professional military manpower. Beyond nuclear rhetoric, “dirty bomb” blackmail, and terrorising civilians, the Kremlin seems to be out of ideas. Its military commanders have tried ‘blitzkrieg’ and the ‘salami-slicing’ approach they honed in Syria, but to no avail. Now, the Russian regime is trying to mould a “second army of the world” from hundreds of thousands of undertrained civilian conscripts. It is too early to label this attempt a ‘failure’ but the expectations seem ambitious to say the least.

At the same time, Putin may still have one more card up his sleeve: the Belarusian army. Ever since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February, rumours have swirled about the imminent entry of Belarusian troops to the fighting. But they have so far remained steadfastly in Belarus. This has given rise to a creeping delusion in the West that Belarus’s leader, Alyaksandr Lukashenka, has some kind of mythical resistance to Putin’s pressure. It is more likely, however, that both Minsk and Moscow are quite happy with their current arrangement – or that they know they have no card to play.

 

[I3BrigPvSk]

France gives Ukraine their AMX-10 RC, Germany gives the Marder, and the US gives the Bradley. I think we are closing in for giving the Ukrainians western tanks. If NATO/West gives the Ukraine tanks, it most likely be Leo2 A4/A5

 

[lljadw]

At the end of last year 23 countries have sent military aid to Ukraine ( This is some 11% of all countries in the world ) ,of which 5 non European countries . Some 170 countries did not send military aid .
Non European countries are
Australia
Canada
NZLand
Turkey ( gave also military aid to Russia )
USA
European countries are
Belgium ( no ammo )
Croatia
Czech Republic ( mostly claims )
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France ( not important )
Germany (idem )
Greece ( idem )
Italy (undisclosed items )
Latvia
Lithuania ( undisclosed items )
Netherlands
Norway (not important )
Poland
Slovakia
Sweden
Latin American, African, Asian countries are conspicuously absent , this indicates that outside Europe there is little interest in this small European war .
China and India are using this opportunity to make money by trading with Russia .
Source : List of foreign aid to Ukraine during the Russo-Ukrainian War .

 

[MontyB]

Concerns are mounting that Belarusian troops could join Russia’s forces in Ukraine. But this course of action would be extremely risky – for both Putin and Lukashenka.

Putin is running out of conventional cards to play in Ukraine. The Ukrainian armed forces are liberating occupied territories and conducting sabotage operations against Russia-controlled targets – allegedly including Putin’s beloved Crimean bridge. The Russian armed forces have squandered their stocks of both missiles and professional military manpower. Beyond nuclear rhetoric, “dirty bomb” blackmail, and terrorising civilians, the Kremlin seems to be out of ideas. Its military commanders have tried ‘blitzkrieg’ and the ‘salami-slicing’ approach they honed in Syria, but to no avail. Now, the Russian regime is trying to mould a “second army of the world” from hundreds of thousands of undertrained civilian conscripts. It is too early to label this attempt a ‘failure’ but the expectations seem ambitious to say the least.

At the same time, Putin may still have one more card up his sleeve: the Belarusian army. Ever since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February, rumours have swirled about the imminent entry of Belarusian troops to the fighting. But they have so far remained steadfastly in Belarus. This has given rise to a creeping delusion in the West that Belarus’s leader, Alyaksandr Lukashenka, has some kind of mythical resistance to Putin’s pressure. It is more likely, however, that both Minsk and Moscow are quite happy with their current arrangement – or that they know they have no card to play.

Strangely I think Putin has overplayed his hand, his best chance to achieve his goals was to have come up with a negotiated peace in the early weeks when Ukraine and to some degree the west still thought this was a done deal, now Russia has become a bit of a joke internationally and it's campaign has degenerated into a 1917 artillery dual.

Putin can't now achieve a negotiated end because no one trusts him, we all know the plan, get a ceasefire under the guise of negotiations, delay any acceptable options until you have rebuilt your strength and start again, essentially Ukraine is correct when it says that the only ceasefire it can accept involves Russian troops leaving all of Ukraine first.

Ukraine is now in a position where it believes it can achieve its goals (and I think it can achieve 90% of them but I still believe Crimea is a bridge too far) and Russia is in a position where it can't lose (because Kiev can't drive to Moscow and make it surrender) but it is just so incompetent it can't win without receiving a staggering level of casualties, meanwhile for a fraction of the wests defence budgets the Russian military and economy is slowly ground down.

 

[I3BrigPvSk]

Strangely I think Putin has overplayed his hand, his best chance to achieve his goals was to have come up with a negotiated peace in the early weeks when Ukraine and to some degree the west still thought this was a done deal, now Russia has become a bit of a joke internationally and it's campaign has degenerated into a 1917 artillery dual.

Putin can't now achieve a negotiated end because no one trusts him, we all know the plan, get a ceasefire under the guise of negotiations, delay any acceptable options until you have rebuilt your strength and start again, essentially Ukraine is correct when it says that the only ceasefire it can accept involves Russian troops leaving all of Ukraine first.

Ukraine is now in a position where it believes it can achieve its goals (and I think it can achieve 90% of them but I still believe Crimea is a bridge too far) and Russia is in a position where it can't lose (because Kiev can't drive to Moscow and make it surrender) but it is just so incompetent it can't win without receiving a staggering level of casualties, meanwhile for a fraction of the wests defence budgets the Russian military and economy is slowly ground down.

I think Ukraine can take Crimea back. The Ukrainian armed forces are better trained, more motivated, and have better systems. Especially when they get western equipment. There are two strain of thoughts here. The Ukrainians can attack the bridge again to impeding the Russian logistiks. If the Ukrainians do that and the bridge is closed or destroyed. It will isolate the Russians on the peninsula and the only way out is by ships. The other strain of thoughts is; keep the bridge so the Russian can use it when they must flee from Crimea, but their supply lines will be intact.

 

[MontyB]

At the end of last year 23 countries have sent military aid to Ukraine ( This is some 11% of all countries in the world ) ,of which 5 non European countries . Some 170 countries did not send military aid .
Non European countries are
Australia
Canada
NZLand
Turkey ( gave also military aid to Russia )
USA
European countries are
Belgium ( no ammo )
Croatia
Czech Republic ( mostly claims )
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France ( not important )
Germany (idem )
Greece ( idem )
Italy (undisclosed items )
Latvia
Lithuania ( undisclosed items )
Netherlands
Norway (not important )
Poland
Slovakia
Sweden
Latin American, African, Asian countries are conspicuously absent , this indicates that outside Europe there is little interest in this small European war .
China and India are using this opportunity to make money by trading with Russia .
Source : List of foreign aid to Ukraine during the Russo-Ukrainian War .

To be fair how many Asian, African and Latin American countries have equipment they can spare and ship.
It also fails to take into account that a number of countries not on that list are refilling the armouries of the countries that are for example South Korea, Romania and Bulgaria have ramped up manufacturing and are selling ammunition to countries on that list (I read that Bulgaria has sold a billion dollars worth a152mm ammo to Poland in the last 7 months).

Found this interesting:

Ukrainian Force Generation

 

[I3BrigPvSk]

To be fair how many Asian, African and Latin American countries have equipment they can spare and ship.
It also fails to take into account that a number of countries not on that list are refilling the armouries of the countries that are for example South Korea, Romania and Bulgaria have ramped up manufacturing and are selling ammunition to countries on that list (I read that Bulgaria has sold a billion dollars worth a152mm ammo to Poland in the last 7 months).

Found this interesting:

Ukrainian Force Generation

South Korea's defense industry has golden days now when the defense spendings are increasing. Their K2 Black Panther is an interesting tank. It can fire the KSTAM munition, a rather interesting type of munition

 

[lljadw]

To be fair how many Asian, African and Latin American countries have equipment they can spare and ship.
It also fails to take into account that a number of countries not on that list are refilling the armouries of the countries that are for example South Korea, Romania and Bulgaria have ramped up manufacturing and are selling ammunition to countries on that list (I read that Bulgaria has sold a billion dollars worth a152mm ammo to Poland in the last 7 months).

Found this interesting:

Ukrainian Force Generation

That Bulgaria has SOLD ammo to Poland,is not benefiting Ukraine, unless there are proofs that Poland has given this ammo to Ukraine .
The same for SK and Romania .
Politico has attacked Bulgaria for its pro-Russian attitude ''Welcome to Bulgaria where the Ukraine war is Nato's fault ''.
That SK,Romania and Bulgaria have sold weapons to allies of Ukraine is maybe caused by the fact that they could not sell weapons to Russia . It makes them not allies of Ukraine .
Other points :
Bulgaria sold also weapons in 2016/2017 to the fighting parties in Libya,Yemen and Syria.
The weapons and ammo Bulgaria is secretly selling are Soviet era weapons and ammo .
The conclusion is that the Bulgarian state remains neutral,while the biggest part of the population is still pro Russian .

 

[MontyB]

That Bulgaria has SOLD ammo to Poland,is not benefiting Ukraine, unless there are proofs that Poland has given this ammo to Ukraine .
The same for SK and Romania .
Politico has attacked Bulgaria for its pro-Russian attitude ''Welcome to Bulgaria where the Ukraine war is Nato's fault ''.
That SK,Romania and Bulgaria have sold weapons to allies of Ukraine is maybe caused by the fact that they could not sell weapons to Russia . It makes them not allies of Ukraine .
Other points :
Bulgaria sold also weapons in 2016/2017 to the fighting parties in Libya,Yemen and Syria.
The weapons and ammo Bulgaria is secretly selling are Soviet era weapons and ammo .
The conclusion is that the Bulgarian state remains neutral,while the biggest part of the population is still pro Russian .

There was a reason I added the video as they included Bulgarian markings on ammunition in Ukraine and I doubt that Bulgaria wouldn't have known or at least suspected where the ammunition would end up.
This is simply a way of giving them plausible deniability and I doubt Ukrainian gunners care greatly where their ammunition comes from.

 

[MontyB]

South Korea's defense industry has golden days now when the defense spendings are increasing. Their K2 Black Panther is an interesting tank. It can fire the KSTAM munition, a rather interesting type of munition

Which reminds me, what ever happened to the Tungsten bolt round being tested?

 

[I3BrigPvSk]

Which reminds me, what ever happened to the Tungsten bolt round being tested?

I don't know if there was a problem or any issues with Tungsten bolts, but I think they works perfectly. Tungsten is used as armor piercing rounds and is replacing depleted uranium as armor piercing rounds. Volfram is also used as Sabot rounds

 

[BritinBritain]

There's a chap I knew in South Africa, he was a police dog handler, who use to visit my gun shop for a coffee and a yarn. On one visit he mentioned the rime he fought in the Border War with Angola, he stated the time he was really scared (he don't scare easily) was when his unit was attacked by Soviet built Mil Mi-24 helicopters which as we kmow were heavily armed.

Although he never spoke at length about the border war, talking to ex soldiers (including 32 battalion) who were there, it was quite nasty.

 

[MontyB]

There's a chap I knew in South Africa, he was a police dog handler, who use to visit my gun shop for a coffee and a yarn. On one visit he mentioned the rime he fought in the Border War with Angola, he stated the time he was really scared (he don't scare easily) was when his unit was attacked by Soviet built Mil Mi-24 helicopters which as we kmow were heavily armed.

Although he never spoke at length about the border war, talking to ex soldiers (including 32 battalion) who were there, it was quite nasty.

A guy I used to work with was in the South African army and also fought in Angola, he didn't say a lot about it but one day we had a very long discussion on mines and booby traps.

I don't know if there was a problem or any issues with Tungsten bolts, but I think they works perfectly. Tungsten is used as armor piercing rounds and is replacing depleted uranium as armor piercing rounds. Volfram is also used as Sabot rounds

Well after a bit of searching it seems that despite Tungsten having a higher density to depleted Uranium it isn't as good and mushrooms on impact giving it less penetration...

As explained in the video at about 10:30 seconds...

The insane engineering of the A10

 

[lljadw]

There was a reason I added the video as they included Bulgarian markings on ammunition in Ukraine and I doubt that Bulgaria wouldn't have known or at least suspected where the ammunition would end up.
This is simply a way of giving them plausible deniability and I doubt Ukrainian gunners care greatly where their ammunition comes from.

Yes, but ,1 billion USD of weapons ,ammo,war material sounds great, but it does not give us the military value of these deliveries .It is perfectly possible that 0,5 billion USD deliveries were more aiding Ukraine .
Other point : we can't use what the Bulgarians said : first they denied that they delivered weapons to Ukraine, than they said the opposite .
If they first lied, maybe they tell us now the truth ,but the opposite is also possible,or they lied twice or they said twice the truth .
A few years ago,they sold weapons to KSA and the UAE ,when these weapons appeared in the possession of ISIS, Bulgaria said that it knew nothing .Maybe the truth is that Bulgaria did not want to know the truth .
When Obama gave weapons to the anti Assad Coalition, the result that one could expect, was that a lot of these weapons came in the hands of ISIS,and ..the White House said that it knew nothing but that it would investigate the whole thing .And nothing happened .
Bulgaria has not the possibility to say : we sell weapons to dictator X,but not to dictator Y.If you have scruples,chose an other profession .
It is very possible that Bulgaria is also selling weapons to Russia ,as did France and Germany and Austria,etc ..after the first Russian invasion but, as the Bulgarians, they denied the truth ,but that does not make them allies of Russia.
Three days ago Macron said that France would give AMX tanks to Ukraine, of course without specifying the date of the deliveries and the number of tanks . Thus,we can throw his promise under the bus .
The truth is that for a lot of the 23 countries I have listed,we know only the money value of the deliveries,not their military value, not only for the US, we also don't know
the amount of weapons, war material, ammo that has been delivered and is operational today and we don't know the military results of the use of these weapons .Ukraine has received 350 howitzers,of which 120 do not work.What would be the result if these weapons were not delivered ?Better for Russia ,better for Ukraine ?
Ukraine said that the Russians lost 3000 tanks/that they had destroyed 3000 Russian tanks ( there is a big difference between both ),Oryx said that it was 1600 tanks .
If Ukraine /Oryx were right ,what is the importance of this loss for the outcome of the war ? If the Russians had not lost 3000/1600 tanks, what would be the present military situation ? No one knows .The only thing we know is that Russia failed in the decisive period (March ) and that in March,the Western support for Ukraine was very low, compared to the present support .

 

[MontyB]

Yes, but ,1 billion USD of weapons ,ammo,war material sounds great, but it does not give us the military value of these deliveries .It is perfectly possible that 0,5 billion USD deliveries were more aiding Ukraine .
Other point : we can't use what the Bulgarians said : first they denied that they delivered weapons to Ukraine, than they said the opposite .
If they first lied, maybe they tell us now the truth ,but the opposite is also possible,or they lied twice or they said twice the truth .
A few years ago,they sold weapons to KSA and the UAE ,when these weapons appeared in the possession of ISIS, Bulgaria said that it knew nothing .Maybe the truth is that Bulgaria did not want to know the truth .
When Obama gave weapons to the anti Assad Coalition, the result that one could expect, was that a lot of these weapons came in the hands of ISIS,and ..the White House said that it knew nothing but that it would investigate the whole thing .And nothing happened .
Bulgaria has not the possibility to say : we sell weapons to dictator X,but not to dictator Y.If you have scruples,chose an other profession .
It is very possible that Bulgaria is also selling weapons to Russia ,as did France and Germany and Austria,etc ..after the first Russian invasion but, as the Bulgarians, they denied the truth ,but that does not make them allies of Russia.
Three days ago Macron said that France would give AMX tanks to Ukraine, of course without specifying the date of the deliveries and the number of tanks . Thus,we can throw his promise under the bus .
The truth is that for a lot of the 23 countries I have listed,we know only the money value of the deliveries,not their military value, not only for the US, we also don't know
the amount of weapons, war material, ammo that has been delivered and is operational today and we don't know the military results of the use of these weapons .Ukraine has received 350 howitzers,of which 120 do not work.What would be the result if these weapons were not delivered ?Better for Russia ,better for Ukraine ?
Ukraine said that the Russians lost 3000 tanks/that they had destroyed 3000 Russian tanks ( there is a big difference between both ),Oryx said that it was 1600 tanks .
If Ukraine /Oryx were right ,what is the importance of this loss for the outcome of the war ? If the Russians had not lost 3000/1600 tanks, what would be the present military situation ? No one knows .The only thing we know is that Russia failed in the decisive period (March ) and that in March,the Western support for Ukraine was very low, compared to the present support .

I think too much value is being placed on statistics at this point in the war, I doubt Ukraine cares how many tanks it has killed at this point it just cares that it is killing them, it doesn't matter how many javelins it takes to kill a tank as long as they are killing tanks and there are enough of them.

Results matter now, statistics matter later when there is time to correlate them ie after the war.

 

[lljadw]

I think too much value is being placed on statistics at this point in the war, I doubt Ukraine cares how many tanks it has killed at this point it just cares that it is killing them, it doesn't matter how many javelins it takes to kill a tank as long as they are killing tanks and there are enough of them.

Results matter now, statistics matter later when there is time to correlate them ie after the war.

Maybe,but there are 3 questions ''our '' media and ''our'' politicians are not only avoiding ,but refuse to discuss them .
1 Is Ukraine doomed to lose without Western support or not ?
2 Will Ukraine ''win ''with Western support or not ?
3 Why are ''our''politicians giving our money to the military-industrial complex or in other words :why do we support Ukraine ?Is the fall of Ukraine a threat to our interests ?
And this is the only reason for helping Ukraine,as the PM of Britain, of Germany, the presidents of France and the US are not the president of Ukraine and have thus no obligation to support Ukraine .
Would the West have aided Yugoslavia if it was attacked by the USSR after its secession in 1948 ?
Were there any serious sanctions against the USSR when it invaded Afghanistan ? Or against Russia when it invaded Ukraine in 2014 ?

 

[MontyB]

Maybe,but there are 3 questions ''our '' media and ''our'' politicians are not only avoiding ,but refuse to discuss them .
1 Is Ukraine doomed to lose without Western support or not ?
2 Will Ukraine ''win ''with Western support or not ?
3 Why are ''our''politicians giving our money to the military-industrial complex or in other words :why do we support Ukraine ?Is the fall of Ukraine a threat to our interests ?
And this is the only reason for helping Ukraine,as the PM of Britain, of Germany, the presidents of France and the US are not the president of Ukraine and have thus no obligation to support Ukraine .
Would the West have aided Yugoslavia if it was attacked by the USSR after its secession in 1948 ?
Were there any serious sanctions against the USSR when it invaded Afghanistan ? Or against Russia when it invaded Ukraine in 2014 ?

I think it is relatively straight forward:
1. Yes primarily due to lack of supply, I believe western support is leveling the playing field.

2. Maybe, define winning?
If you mean militarily defeating Russia an forcing them to give in, no as Ukraine can't bring Russia to its knees.
If you mean pushing Russia back to its start point and inflicting enough casualties and damage on the Russians to keep them on their side of the border for a couple of years, then yes.

3. Because for the west it is a cheap war, a fraction of our defence budgets and no casualties, it is a politicians dream. On top of this it is from the western point of view the right thing to do in supporting Ukraine.

 

[BritinBritain]

I have just read that Putin is calling up another 500,000 troops, of which how many are green recruits and never wore military uniform or fired a rifle before?

I wonder at what stage will the Russian people say ''ENOUGH''? Or simply carry on as normal. Stalin called the Russian people, ''Useful idiots''. It seems Putin is of the same mindset.

 

[MontyB]

I have just read that Putin is calling up another 500,000 troops, of which how many are green recruits and never wore military uniform or fired a rifle before?

I wonder at what stage will the Russian people say ''ENOUGH''? Or simply carry on as normal. Stalin called the Russian people, ''Useful idiots''. It seems Stalin is of the same mindset.

Look at the history of Russia and you will see that it has always been a country of sheep, I can't think of a time when the powerless masses haven't been being brutalized by a rich minority.

They will never say enough because Stalin was right, they will march off over the minefield and die in their thousands while those who sent them are stealing what possessions they left behind, they are useful idiots.

 

[lljadw]

I think it is relatively straight forward:
1. Yes primarily due to lack of supply, I believe western support is leveling the playing field.

2. Maybe, define winning?
If you mean militarily defeating Russia an forcing them to give in, no as Ukraine can't bring Russia to its knees.
If you mean pushing Russia back to its start point and inflicting enough casualties and damage on the Russians to keep them on their side of the border for a couple of years, then yes.

3. Because for the west it is a cheap war, a fraction of our defence budgets and no casualties, it is a politicians dream. On top of this it is from the western point of view the right thing to do in supporting Ukraine.

1 I disagree : the outcome of the war was decided in March 2022,when,without any significant Western aid for Ukraine, Russia failed to force Ukraine to give up .
2 In December 2022,while Ukraine had received a lot of Western support, support that the Lockheed Martin ,etc media qualified as decisive , Ukraine is still failing to obtain a decisive victory against Russia .
3 It is not a cheap war for the populations of Europe ,as they pay ,not for the war, but for the stupid decisions of their governments :dozens of millions of people have become impoverished, have lost almost everything they possessed,because of the interventionist decisions of their government and the electoral consequences wil be catastrophic for the ruling establishment : look at what happened in Italy and in France . Look at the electoral forecasts in Germany : SPD 18 % , AfD 15 % .
There are millions of casualties in Europe and the US .
People outside Russia are more hurt by the war,the aid to Ukraine, the sanctions against Russia than people in Russia .
The panic in Germany is that great that some politicians propose to buy gas from Iran . The European politicians are now licking the boots of the rulers of Qatar to have some gas and when it leaked out that socialist members of the European Parliament received bribe money from Qatar, initially the media ,searching for an other successful story,were doing a lot of blabla, but when Qatar warned that it would stop to export gas to Europe, immediately ''our ''media became silent .All this is happening while the European economy is still very harsh hurt by and fails to recover from the governmental Covid measures which have almost destroyed the European economy .