Lostconfused posted:

https://twitter.com/NOELreports/status/1597670324900073472

January 6 Survivor posted:

"lmao the russkies are issued AK74s made in the 80s without optics this is le epic cringe fail and not epic bacon keanu at all!"

January 6 Survivor posted:

Ukraine flags on twitter : "lmao the russkies are issued AK74s made in the 80s without optics this is le epic cringe fail and not epic bacon keanu at all!"
the same people literally 5 minutes later "wow so cool the based Ukrainians are getting some sick FALs battle rifles! based and slava ukrainipilled!"

(if you are going to say that the FAL is somehow better than an actual small caliber high velocity rifle please save your typing fingers some efforts and just don't post something objectively wrong)

CODChimera posted:

what is a Patriot Missile Defence System and if Ukraine was given them what would that mean?

Lostconfused posted:

sum posted:

It's literally some bloody stretchers and vests, there's not even a human in any of the photos. You're in a thread about a war.

sum posted:

I've been ignoring most news out of Bakhmut since it's been mired in a grinding positional battle for like literally half the war, but it seems like the latest round of combat has been more intense than usual. This pro-Ukraine account claims that the AFU suffered 500 dead (not casualties, dead) 500 wounded (I switched around cargo 200 and cargo 300 on accident) in Bakhmut Saturday and Sunday alone.

V. Illych L. posted:

the pro-russian side keeps getting excited about bakhmut, and apparently the russians have been inching forward south of the town. the wagner guy claims that what they're trying to do is to maximise ukrainian casualties - since ukraine really wants to defend bakhmut, the russians can force them into unfavourable engagements. this does not seem to me like a good strategy and could be an excuse for slow progress, but it's a claim being made.

i think that bakhmut's going to have to be abandoned by the ukrainians early next year (before march, let's say). the russians have good supply lines and good positions, and it's a less critical position for the ukrainians than it used to be. i don't think it's going to lead to any kind of a general breakthrough.

Z the IVth posted:

Fancy way of saying 'missile'.

V. Illych L. posted:

the pro-russian side keeps getting excited about bakhmut, and apparently the russians have been inching forward south of the town. the wagner guy claims that what they're trying to do is to maximise ukrainian casualties - since ukraine really wants to defend bakhmut, the russians can force them into unfavourable engagements. this does not seem to me like a good strategy and could be an excuse for slow progress, but it's a claim being made.

speng31b posted:

I don't understand why both sides are so dug in on bakhmut. by most accounts it's strategically unimportant to both sides but they're both committed to insanely high losses around it, with varying excuses for why

speng31b posted:

I don't understand why both sides are so dug in on bakhmut. by most accounts it's strategically unimportant to both sides but they're both committed to insanely high losses around it, with varying excuses for why

Homeless Friend posted:

president zelenskyy: the west must provide more phoenix downs in our fight against the russian occupier

OctaMurk posted:

I remember a while back, all the rage on popular mechanics was offshore nuclear powerplants for third world countries. Rosatom was I think the closest to making that 'a thing' along with some American company

CODChimera posted:

what is a Patriot Missile Defence System and if Ukraine was given them what would that mean?

V. Illych L. posted:

the pro-russian side keeps getting excited about bakhmut, and apparently the russians have been inching forward south of the town. the wagner guy claims that what they're trying to do is to maximise ukrainian casualties - since ukraine really wants to defend bakhmut, the russians can force them into unfavourable engagements. this does not seem to me like a good strategy and could be an excuse for slow progress, but it's a claim being made.

i think that bakhmut's going to have to be abandoned by the ukrainians early next year (before march, let's say). the russians have good supply lines and good positions, and it's a less critical position for the ukrainians than it used to be. i don't think it's going to lead to any kind of a general breakthrough.

quote:

Russia’s strategy in Bakhmut is reminiscent of its seizure of the eastern cities of Sievierodonetsk and Lysychansk in June. There, Russian troops relied on superior artillery fire to overpower Ukrainian forces and gain ground. But the Ukrainian forces they faced then were short of both shells and Western-supplied artillery — something that is no longer as pressing, especially in Bakhmut.

“In the six months that I’ve been in Bakhmut, I have never seen our artillery working like this,” said a Ukrainian soldier in the city, referring to the volume of Ukrainian shells fired. He spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media.

But at this point in the war both armies may find the pace of bombardment hard to sustain. The Russians are reportedly trying to buy munitions from North Korea and Iran. And Ukraine continues to ask for more artillery shells from NATO and other donor countries, even though those nations’ stockpiles are dwindling.

One of the Pentagon’s frequent concerns is that the Ukrainians are firing ammunition at an unsustainable rate — especially in places like Bakhmut — under the false assumption that the West’s supply of ordnance is unlimited, said the U.S. defense official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive information.

As Bakhmut — shelled continually by the Russians since July — devolves into a battle of attrition, its strategic significance has changed, too. Even if Russia’s hopes of expanding its territory here have dwindled, it can still make the city a resource-intensive black hole for Kyiv, taking troops from other Ukrainian priorities, potentially including future offensives.

“Battles like Bakhmut consume forces that could be used elsewhere,” Mr. Kofman said, adding that Russian forces are using people they deem “expendable,” but even so, they cannot afford to waste that much artillery.

Frosted Flake posted:

e: Canada has a huge stockpile of Lee-Enfields the government is supposed to liquidate over the next two years, I look forward to the comments on twitter if they end up there.

GlassElephant posted:

Especially since they don't have the overwhelming advantage in artillery any more.

CODChimera posted:

what is a Patriot Missile Defence System and if Ukraine was given them what would that mean?

GlassElephant posted:

NYT
"But at this point in the war both armies may find the pace of bombardment hard to sustain. The Russians are reportedly trying to buy munitions from North Korea and Iran. And Ukraine continues to ask for more artillery shells from NATO and other donor countries, even though those nations’ stockpiles are dwindling."

euphronius posted:

pls don’t post gore

Calibanibal posted:

My Childhood Friend Can't Be An Orc!

Weka posted:

Marenghi posted:

https://twitter.com/kielar_robert/status/1597693308255363073

That's quite the reply. I've noticed the same people who support Rhodesia and Apartheid South Africa have an affinity to Ukraine.

Frosted Flake posted:

The same deal as the M101 howitzers: I understand FALs were in storage, and they’re fine, but what happened to all the FNCs?

There are missing generations of stockpiled weapons.

e: Canada has a huge stockpile of Lee-Enfields the government is supposed to liquidate over the next two years, I look forward to the comments on twitter if they end up there.