|
A little update from Girkin, he is his usual positive self. https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1619987711934496768 Also thanks Cinci for your service, you kept this thread good. Sad to see you go.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 13:21 |
|
|
# ? May 27, 2024 03:56 |
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:Back on topic, BoJo is saying that Putin threatened him with “I don't want to hurt you, but with a missile, it would only take a minute”. A literal alleway gopnik. https://news.sky.com/story/boris-jo...kraine-12798288 This is like the Unstoppable Force vs Immovable Object of pathological liars, but for the first time in my life I actually think the Kremlin's side is more plausible.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 13:24 |
|
He 100% won't do that. There's about 48 F-16 in Polish Airforce, and they represent all of full capability airpower. I barely consider early version Mig-29 as capable, and they are A2A only. Unless it's temporary handing over of a couple planes, that will quickly be replaced by US active stock. But in that case it'd have to be already preagreed with US. And Morawiecki would simply play "those crazy Poles, and their ideas" stereotype. Also reminder to everyone that this year Poland will have an election. It's 50/50 whether PiS stays in power, and they ABSOLUTELY need to keep their power. Or a bunch of people will suddenly get in some serious problems for a lot of shady poo poo they did over last 8 years. Expect more crazy poo poo.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 13:26 |
|
Holy poo poo I forgot that there was a period of anticipation for "Ooooh when will the F16s get delivered".cinci zoo sniper posted:Pretty sure Morawiecki has a Scholz dartboard in his office. Scholz last week: “stfu about planes”. Morawiecki today: “Poland is ready to give Ukraine its F-16 fighters, if NATO supports this decision”. https://zn.ua/ukr/WORLD/polshcha-hotova-peredati-ukrajini-f-16-ale-za-odnijeji-umovi-moravetskij.html Actually though, this is odd, I'm struggling to find a Polish source for this that isn't some insane right wing ramblings. And I can't read ukrainian so can't confirm the article.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 13:32 |
|
Albino Squirrel posted:I mean, if Finland joins NATO it would be impossible to invade Sweden without crossing through a NATO country. Finland joining accomplishes most of Sweden's defense goals regardless of what Erdogan does. I think there were some theoretical concerns with Russia invading Gotland, but based on the "lol, lmao." state of Russia's navy and their apparent lack of an air force, I agree that it's not really a serious concern for Sweden.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 13:39 |
Kikas posted:Holy poo poo I forgot that there was a period of anticipation for "Ooooh when will the F16s get delivered". As TheRat says, Borrell had quite possibly the gaffe of his whole career in February 27. I seem to recall an even stupider tweet from him about “the planes are being delivered to Ukraine” or “crossing Ukrainian border” or some such, but that’s too much of a chore to look up, and the widely reported February 27 is bad enough on its own. As for the original source, there’s a Facebook link at the start of the article. Atreiden posted:Also thanks Cinci for your service, you kept this thread good. Sad to see you go. I’m not dying, lol.
|
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 13:40 |
F (for Cinci)
|
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 13:42 |
Is there any detailed explanation for why Russia has had some battlefield success lately or is it just the mobilization finally starting to add some mass to their advances?
|
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 13:44 |
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:F (for Cinci) I cannot believe cinci zoo sniper is loving dead cinci zoo sniper posted:As TheRat says, Borrell had quite possibly the gaffe of his whole career in February 27. I seem to recall an even stupider tweet from him about “the planes are being delivered to Ukraine” or “crossing Ukrainian border” or some such, but that’s too much of a chore to look up, and the widely reported February 27 is bad enough on its own. ...it's like he's still talking to me. Ah, this conference has literally just happened. Lol at the poor sods standing in the snow and wind (Poland has gotten a few Amber Alerts of "lol wind good luck fuckers" today), but that would explain why the usual news outlets are still preparing the digest.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 13:53 |
|
They've limited the amount of concurrent advances, then unfucked the logistics, and had time to work through issues. Russia still has enough manpower and material to learn a lot of lessons the hard way and keep on fighting. I imagine "mobiks" helped at least in having manpower to free up your valuable combat capable units.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 14:00 |
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Is there any detailed explanation for why Russia has had some battlefield success lately or is it just the mobilization finally starting to add some mass to their advances? Ukraine holding the line as lightly as practical while assembling the force for the next big offense means Russia can make tiny land gains at huge cost in places. Just like the weeks/months before the last big Ukrainian offensive.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 14:01 |
|
Also wait, have to go back on that, but giving the F16 from Poland is a loving stupid idea. We have like 40 of those things are they are our entire air power. Giving them out would () air out our army completely. So I'd guess despite him saying "if NATO allows us" he must have meant "if NATO orders us" because it makes no sense otherwise.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 14:18 |
|
Kikas posted:Also wait, have to go back on that, but giving the F16 from Poland is a loving stupid idea. We have like 40 of those things are they are our entire air power. Giving them out would () air out our army completely. It would almost certainly be contingent on the US replacing them. Hypothetically.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 14:26 |
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Is there any detailed explanation for why Russia has had some battlefield success lately or is it just the mobilization finally starting to add some mass to their advances? They’ve got much more higher concentration of people now, due to mobilisation and penal battalions adding up on narrower lines of front, and fresh/de-mothballed gear. Added up, that is allowing them to at the very least to attempt repeating the last summer’s strategy of advancing by pulverising everything with artillery - their advances are still measured in metres per day, and not steady at all. And “attempt” because HIMARS are complicated artillery logistics, and Excalibur rounds et. al. - tank warfare. alex314 posted:They've limited the amount of concurrent advances, then unfucked the logistics, and had time to work through issues. Russia still has enough manpower and material to learn a lot of lessons the hard way and keep on fighting. I imagine "mobiks" helped at least in having manpower to free up your valuable combat capable units. Yeah, this is a big part of it. They can just have mobilised soldiers staff 2nd-3rd line defences on the long rear end front line segment from from Donetsk until Dnipro, which has to be freeing up a measure of experienced units towards the more contested areas. sean10mm posted:Ukraine holding the line as lightly as practical while assembling the force for the next big offense means Russia can make tiny land gains at huge cost in places. Also this, we have no idea about the distribution of military resource to UAF right now, only the pressers from specific units in, e.g., Vuhledar.
|
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 14:38 |
|
Kikas posted:Also wait, have to go back on that, but giving the F16 from Poland is a loving stupid idea. We have like 40 of those things are they are our entire air power. Giving them out would () air out our army completely. Poland has F-35:s on order. I suppose the plan would be: "NATO allies cover our airspace for the few years before F-35 becomes online." Note that Poland has a good incentive to do this, as the EU has a mechanism where the union compensates states for military hardware donated. F-16s are expensive, and if they could unload, say, half their fleet on Ukraine just before it was removed from service anyway, it would go a long way towards paying for their F-35 acquisition.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 14:52 |
|
F-16 block 52 still have a lot of use left in them. It might be better in the long run to have 100 FA-50 and 40 F-35, but completely dismantling the Airforce for a couple years seems very risky. Plus there's a matter of lost skill, and interrupted pilot training pipeline.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 15:14 |
|
Kikas posted:Holy poo poo I forgot that there was a period of anticipation for "Ooooh when will the F16s get delivered". That was for MiG-29s. Pity that didn't work out. Kikas posted:Lol at the poor sods standing in the snow and wind (Poland has gotten a few Amber Alerts of "lol wind good luck fuckers" today), but that would explain why the usual news outlets are still preparing the digest. Not discussing the merits, just FYI Amber Alerts are specifically about child abduction.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 15:40 |
Tevery Best posted:Not discussing the merits, just FYI Amber Alerts are specifically about child abduction. Technically the weather alarms in Europe are yellow, orange, and red, yes. https://meteoalarm.org/en/page/help#list Edit: Novaya Gazeta has an informative piece on the real estate crash in Crimea. https://novayagazeta.eu/articles/2023/01/30/voina-zhilia-ne-daet cinci zoo sniper fucked around with this message at 17:17 on Jan 30, 2023 |
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 15:43 |
|
I'm not sure I fully understand or appreciate the significance of, say, Poland holding on to a couple dozen jets, or any European NATO country holding on to tanks. Isn't the nuclear umbrella the only actual defense they need? Because if it isn't, I don't see the number of tanks and jets each of these smaller states has as a meaningful defence against Russia in a conventional war, but I also don't see how a conventional war with Russia would even be possible within the next generation.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 17:50 |
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Is there any detailed explanation for why Russia has had some battlefield success lately or is it just the mobilization finally starting to add some mass to their advances? Don't let the news organizations overplay this. "some battlefield success lately" amounts to losing several thousand--and maybe several tens of thousands--of mobilized recruits to move a notional front line about a kilometer or two to occupy a small town north of a small city (Bakhmut). It's not a breakthrough, in that the Ukrainian lines are not breached, and it's not a sudden or unexpected change. I'm kind of with Michael Koffman on this: I'd give Russia a 50/50 chance of taking Bakhmut. If they do, then what? It doesn't really get them that much in terms of new options. It doesn't present any kind of operational dilemma for Ukraine. One of the best outcomes for Russia is if the attrition forces Ukraine to commit new operational formations it's busy training, but so far that doesn't seem to be the case. Ukraine is rotating units, and likely replenishing those units with new recruits, but it's not e.g. taking a new mechanized battalion trained in the UK and committing them to save Bakhmut. Dolash posted:...I also don't see how a conventional war with Russia would even be possible within the next generation. Don't underestimate how quickly military institutions can reform and change. It's not always predictable--and of course some fail to change, and thus keep failing. But history is replete with examples of militaries completely reforming in a matter of a couple years, from ancient times through modern.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 17:51 |
|
Dolash posted:I'm not sure I fully understand or appreciate the significance of, say, Poland holding on to a couple dozen jets, or any European NATO country holding on to tanks. Isn't the nuclear umbrella the only actual defense they need? They are defense against salami slicing. If RU took a Lithuanian border town, Joe Biden isn’t pressing the button and ending the world.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 17:55 |
|
Can't recall if it was already posted, but WaPo has a deep dive into the tank imbroglio: tl;dr: the big hold up was a result of Scholz's desire to not be the first to send tanks butting up against Secretary of Defense Austin being convinced that M-1s were too complicated for Ukraine to get into the field in a reasonable amount of time. Eventually it was good enough for Germany that the US promised to send a bunch of M-1s in the medium- to long-term and Germany et all would supply Leopards in the short term. quote:Short on time, Biden sought new Ukraine tank plan to break stalemate Tanks for reading.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 17:56 |
|
Dolash posted:I'm not sure I fully understand or appreciate the significance of, say, Poland holding on to a couple dozen jets, or any European NATO country holding on to tanks. Isn't the nuclear umbrella the only actual defense they need?
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 18:02 |
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:If, for example, Russia makes good on its threats to attack equipment destined for Ukraine while it's still in Poland it's better if NATO has military responses available that aren't "end the world". For example you could threaten to take out Russian military assets in Ukraine or the Black Sea proportional to the attack that was made. yeah. the problem is that nuclear deterrents are still fundamentally insane. starting a nuclear exchange is a lose/lose scenario, even if you are being invaded it makes no sense to use a nuke and thus get nuked yourself. Nuclear deterrents only work because of spite; namely, the belief that leaders are indeed spiteful enough to say 'gently caress all y'all, launch the nukes while we still can', even though its loving stupid. Thus, a strong conventional army is still necessary, just in case your enemies get it in their heads that you are too rational to press the big red button.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 18:06 |
|
That WaPo article is good. Further proof of Scholz's ridiculous delaying tactics, his government managed to delay Ukraine getting Leopards for months for absolutely no good reason.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 18:08 |
|
Blut posted:That WaPo article is good. Further proof of Scholz's ridiculous delaying tactics, his government managed to delay Ukraine getting Leopards for months for absolutely no good reason. Personally I think Germany not wanting to look like a main military force in Europe is a pretty good, historical reason. I don't see any reason to blame Germany more than the US for the delay.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 18:25 |
|
TheRat posted:Personally I think Germany not wanting to look like a main military force in Europe is a pretty good, historical reason. I don't see any reason to blame Germany more than the US for the delay. Nobody thinks that sending military equipment to Ukraine (or allowing other countries to send military equipment to Ukraine) means the Nazis are back. That reason sounds like plausible deniability for idiots to lap up.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 18:32 |
|
Somewhat pissed that the US has to build all new tanks for Ukraine 'later this year'. Where the gently caress are all of the tanks we've been overproducing for years? Even if we don't want those going to Ukraine because they have the ~*~secret~*~ armor, can't we give them to one of our other allies and take their export M1s and give them to Ukraine?
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 18:49 |
|
Family Values posted:Somewhat pissed that the US has to build all new tanks for Ukraine 'later this year'. Where the gently caress are all of the tanks we've been overproducing for years? Even if we don't want those going to Ukraine because they have the ~*~secret~*~ armor, can't we give them to one of our other allies and take their export M1s and give them to Ukraine? Or perhaps even "give them the export tanks now, we will backfill them to you later in the next 8 years and gently caress anyone up that would attack you in the meantime
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 18:57 |
|
Quixzlizx posted:Nobody thinks that sending military equipment to Ukraine (or allowing other countries to send military equipment to Ukraine) means the Nazis are back. One of Scholz' advisors made the argument that earlier this year that if Russia captured a tank with German insignia, Russian propaganda could claim they were being attacked by Nato. And I'm absolutely dumbfounded by this line of reasoning. Russian propaganda is already completely off the rails, who the gently caress cares? The only reason to care about Russian propaganda is to point and laugh at it. beer_war fucked around with this message at 19:01 on Jan 30, 2023 |
# ? Jan 30, 2023 18:58 |
:nm: (struck tank on fire, also don’t scroll anywhere there) https://t.me/csources/183008 - this is from Vuhledar direction, looks like Russians are throwing T-80BVM at it (2022 modernisation with extra ERA). Serves to underscore that it’s a high priority target already. Probably not entirely coincidentally, there was UAF artillery strike on a railway bridge between Melitopol’ and Crimea. https://twitter.com/DefMon3/status/1619755420423430144 https://t.me/brussinf/5608 Russians are posting photos from Blahodatne (near Bakhmut, from Soledar direction), which is an incremental progress for the Russian Bakhmut campaign, of a sort - cutting off one of the 3 UAF supply routes there. That said, I feel that Vuhledar is going to be the new serious flashpoint, and Bakhmut will be left for Wagner to break their teeth on if Prigozhin fancies, since neither from Vuhledar nor from Kreminna there’s as little as a word of them. Also, it seems that Germany is preparing some gear for moving all those tanks, IFVs, and APCs announced around. https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-en/news/military-support-ukraine-2054992 quote:78 truck tractor trains and 86 semi-trailers* (before: 14 truck tractor trains and 14 semi-trailers*
|
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 19:08 |
|
Family Values posted:Somewhat pissed that the US has to build all new tanks for Ukraine 'later this year'. Where the gently caress are all of the tanks we've been overproducing for years? Even if we don't want those going to Ukraine because they have the ~*~secret~*~ armor, can't we give them to one of our other allies and take their export M1s and give them to Ukraine? I'm not entirely sure the US gives the super secret tanks to anyone, and our major allies who we might be willing to trust dont really need a whole new tank to manage and fit in to how they do things. Keisari posted:Or perhaps even "give them the export tanks now, we will backfill them to you later in the next 8 years and gently caress anyone up that would attack you in the meantime The two remotely viable options for that currently IMO are Poland and Taiwan since both have orders in the works but our aid to both is strongly implied regardless of whether they accept or not, so why would they? Poland is in NATO and the US is fairly heavily invested in Taiwan remaining independent. Like I guess you could give Saudi Arabia a gently caress ton of money and give them a guarantee and have them ship that poo poo over, but a guarantee is just words on paper and it's probably nice having actual tanks. Telsa Cola fucked around with this message at 19:15 on Jan 30, 2023 |
# ? Jan 30, 2023 19:10 |
|
Family Values posted:Somewhat pissed that the US has to build all new tanks for Ukraine 'later this year'. Where the gently caress are all of the tanks we've been overproducing for years? Even if we don't want those going to Ukraine because they have the ~*~secret~*~ armor, can't we give them to one of our other allies and take their export M1s and give them to Ukraine? We dont sell DU armored Abrams to any ally as far as I know.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 19:12 |
|
Ynglaur posted:I'm kind of with Michael Koffman on this: I'd give Russia a 50/50 chance of taking Bakhmut. If they do, then what? It doesn't really get them that much in terms of new options. It doesn't present any kind of operational dilemma for Ukraine. There is the possibility that Bakhmut holds significance for the Russians as a defensive stronghold that they want in their hands rather than allow the Ukrainians to have access to an urban area which is an intersection area for several major routes. T0513 and T0504 intersect in Bakhmut and in late summer were major supply lines for the Ukrainian Army as reported by ISW in late August. Those two roads offer lateral movement for the UA along the front and it the past two months have been all about bringing those routes under Russian control which had already been partially successful with the fall of Soledar on the northern shoulder. Bakhmut also has E40 running between it and Krasna Hora and that route runs right into the heart of the breakaway republics. T0513 to the south (already under Russian control) leads directly into Horlivka and efforts south of Bakhmut have been centered around ensuring routes into that city under control as well. It may well be that the Russians view Bakhmut, and other urban crossroads in the area as defensive liabilities if left indefinitely under Ukrainian hands and want control to make Ukrainian redeployment more difficult along that area of the front and having urban and fortified terrain protecting key roads that lead deep into Luhansk and Dontesk territory.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 19:19 |
|
Telsa Cola posted:I'm not entirely sure the US gives the super secret tanks to anyone, and our major allies who we might be willing to trust dont really need a whole new tank to manage and fit in to how they do things. Yeah, true. And probably 2016-2020 eroded the value of American guarantees, so there's that as well. At least some Leos should arrive more quickly, and they will need tanks a year from now on as well
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 19:21 |
https://www.ft.com/content/959c4a23-676e-49d7-b25e-409fa85c397e FT did a bunch of interviews for whether if the tanks are too late. The article in general is quite good, I suggest reading it.quote:… Or was worth a read anyway, I copied like half of it. Family Values posted:Somewhat pissed that the US has to build all new tanks for Ukraine 'later this year'. Where the gently caress are all of the tanks we've been overproducing for years? Even if we don't want those going to Ukraine because they have the ~*~secret~*~ armor, can't we give them to one of our other allies and take their export M1s and give them to Ukraine? Keisari posted:Or perhaps even "give them the export tanks now, we will backfill them to you later in the next 8 years and gently caress anyone up that would attack you in the meantime What’s funny is that US can’t even build them fairly right now, since that factory is apparently loaded up for years worth of tank deliveries ordered by Poland and Taiwan. Apparently though there are “options”, so I assume they’ll convince *spins globe* (wait it’s only Poland on this thing) Kuwait or something to give a bit of theirs up.
|
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 19:23 |
|
Quixzlizx posted:Nobody thinks that sending military equipment to Ukraine (or allowing other countries to send military equipment to Ukraine) means the Nazis are back. I feel like this might be slightly unfair given how much of Germany's history education focuses on pummeling through the idea that "We did a VERY VERY VERY BAD THING before, NEVER AGAIN." It's unfortunate but understandable how parts of their internal politics might end up oversensitive about anything that might remotely sound like they're inching back towards the Bad Thing, even if everyone else is actually OK with the action in question. See also discussions in this thread about how the German ministry of defense is where, traditionally, the gently caress-up political appointees are assigned in the cabinet shuffles to get them out of the way, or how the Bundswehr has been badly underfunded and organized ever since the end of the Cold War if not before. I imagine the average German has, on the whole, a very low tolerance of military adventurism in general, or anything remotely like it. Moon Slayer posted:Can't recall if it was already posted, but WaPo has a deep dive into the tank imbroglio: Good article, thanks for bringing it up. A good insight into the internal disagreements that go on between allies.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 19:27 |
|
Family Values posted:Somewhat pissed that the US has to build all new tanks for Ukraine 'later this year'. Where the gently caress are all of the tanks we've been overproducing for years? Even if we don't want those going to Ukraine because they have the ~*~secret~*~ armor, can't we give them to one of our other allies and take their export M1s and give them to Ukraine? They're not fully new, they take tanks from our cold war stockpile and upgrade to modern standards (and remove the DU armor)
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 19:32 |
|
Tomn posted:I feel like this might be slightly unfair given how much of Germany's history education focuses on pummeling through the idea that "We did a VERY VERY VERY BAD THING before, NEVER AGAIN." It's unfortunate but understandable how parts of their internal politics might end up oversensitive about anything that might remotely sound like they're inching back towards the Bad Thing, even if everyone else is actually OK with the action in question. So it's ethically OK for "pacifists" to build up a profitable MIC that exports military equipment throughout Europe, but not OK to donate that same military equipment from that same MIC to a democratic country being invaded and genocided? You/they might have had a point if Ukraine was asking for manned German formations to join the war.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 19:37 |
|
|
# ? May 27, 2024 03:56 |
|
TheRat posted:Personally I think Germany not wanting to look like a main military force in Europe is a pretty good, historical reason. I don't see any reason to blame Germany more than the US for the delay. I think there is a difference though. In the migrant crisis and the debt crises of Spain and Greece, Germany put itself at the forefront and dictated terms. Germany sees itself at the front of Europe and the continental economic engine. Germany may have historical reasons for not wanting to appear as the military leader, but, in the end, it should play its part in leading in all crises, not just ones it finds convenient for its own purposes, and skulking when it does not. As has been discussed many times, there are logistics is issues with the American MBTs like Abrams, such as fuel, weight, and technology loss—such as DU, that are not concerns with the Leopards. And if it was equally on the Americans, why are the challenger 2s from Britain not enough to cover Scholz or, while not MBTs, the French foreign legion wheeled recon with tank destroyers being sent (forget the name, apologies). Additionally, the leopards are already en masse in continental Europe in great number as opposed to American stocks. Yes, America could have done more to accelerate the process but I don’t think that Germany should necessarily be excused in their delays by equating their actions with American actions.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2023 19:40 |