mlmp08 posted:

When the US has acknowledged using WP as an incendiary weapon rather than as a smokescreen, it typically has been explicitly to drive people out of hardened positions and/or lock them down inside bunkers (might not kill them if they just hole up in cover, but if they can't see out of their fighting position and don't expose themselves, they are sufficiently suppressed).

One of the times the US authorized use of WP for this, it was due to just how thoroughly hardened a bunch of ISIS positions were, making it extremely hard to actually confirm destruction or dig out their fighting positions, so WP was used as an incendiary and also to blind ISIS fighting positions. This was controversial. It was also explicitly not for the purpose of just using WP on soft targets and people, but rather using them to suppress and disrupt hardened fortifications.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/06/14/iraq/syria-danger-us-white-phosphorus

bulletsponge13 posted:

I think it's the other way around, but I am not knowledgeable enough to be certain. I know that from an Infantry standpoint, that would be used under different tactical scenario, particularly since Napalm is air delivered.

Napalm is a burning gel that can be slung off and spread in sheets, and needs chemicals to extinguish, and once it's burned through its gel fuel, it will consume any other combustible matter. It burns slow and hot. We were taught to call this in on harder targets, and larger area targets

WP burns hot as hell, much hotter, but relatively fast. It won't burn through hardened positions/bunkers, and can be extinguished with mud/water/denial of oxygen. (MASH has a fantastic scene on WP treatment). We were taught this was virtually only for soft targets and people.

Their targets had overlap, but much different considerations - the danger close of each varies.


Not an expert, talking out my B-Hole caveat applies.

bulletsponge13 posted:

The Soviet Union considered WP and all smoke Chemical Weapons, at least in their retrospective look at the Soviet Afghan War by the General Staff College. It was very weird to see them 'brag' about XXX chemical deployments, and then learn that most of them were smoke.

It does make a sort of sense- anyone caught in a smoke grenade is probably breathing not good stuff, and I'm yet to be around smoke that didn't give the at least the faint perfume of CS/Tear Gas.

E- I highly recommend the book. It's a very neat, detailed look at their views of the war, with lessons learned scattered in. I recommend it to anyone interested in counterinsurgency, the war, the region, and anyone who wants to see how America copied their homework during GWOT.

bees everywhere posted:

The only time I've seen WP used was for marking targets. Other than that, I heard my old TOC at FOB Shank ended up getting destroyed by a WP 107mm rocket. That certainly would have raised my anxiety level more than the traditional IDF.

The Door Frame posted:

Russian commercial aviation is kind of terrifying in the best of times. They could have just claimed a mechanical malfunction in a poorly maintained jet, incapable of being corrected by the poorly trained flight crew, and that would be a very plausible story that even skeptics could buy

Although here was an Aeroflot crash like a decade or so ago caused by the pilot turning off all pilot assistance aides and letting his kids fly the plane, so it's not like a drunk plane of mostly high rollers is implausible or anything

OddObserver posted:

FWIW, a lot of Soviet incendiary stuff appears to be thermite based rather than WP (e.g. 9M22S for Grad).

Stultus Maximus posted:

Remember "horseshoe theory?" Because lol
https://twitter.com/RepMTG/status/1709664379312947574

Crab Dad posted:

Negotiate for peace…. These loving idiots. How does one negotiate for peace with an invader bent on self proclaimed genocide?

Marjorie Taylor Greene posted:

In Afghanistan, Biden's woke generals tucked their tail and ran. He dishonored the sacrifices made by every American soldier who fought in the 20-year war, especially those who gave their life for the cause.

A.o.D. posted:

WP is ferociously hot and will burn through a lot of things the uninitiated might not think can burn (everything burns if you try hard enough), but it likes to fall straight down and sit and burn.

spankmeister posted:

Does it burn through concrete?

GD_American posted:

ded posted:

the cause of

Stultus Maximus posted:

Remember "horseshoe theory?" Because lol
https://twitter.com/RepMTG/status/1709664379312947574

bees everywhere posted:

The only time I've seen WP used was for marking targets. Other than that, I heard my old TOC at FOB Shank ended up getting destroyed by a WP 107mm rocket. That certainly would have raised my anxiety level more than the traditional IDF.

Herstory Begins Now posted:

magnesium acshually, those get recorded on video a lot and people always call them WP even though they look quite distinct visually

eg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0BttoqSbeE

quote:

German Chancellor Olaf #Scholz explained his decision not to provide #Ukraine with #Taurus cruise missiles. Scholz said that this is due to "constitutional restrictions and the danger of escalation of the conflict," Politico reported.

PurpleXVI posted:

Really, Germany? You're still pounding that old drum? Russia must have some wild dirt on Scholz.

DTurtle posted:

It's actually worse than that. I posted it in the D&D Ukraine thread. The main concern is that unlike the British and French missiles, targeting for Taurus could be done autonomously by Ukrainians. The German officials expressed concern that Ukraine might use Taurus to attack the Kerch bridge and Germany couldn't do anything to stop them.

quote:

Warriors-tankmen of the 25th Air Assault Brigade talk about their combat experience.

PurpleXVI posted:

Short video with a little bit of combat stories and battle experience from Ukrainian tankers. I thought it was interesting.

DTurtle posted:

It's actually worse than that. I posted it in the D&D Ukraine thread. The main concern is that unlike the British and French missiles, targeting for Taurus could be done autonomously by Ukrainians. The German officials expressed concern that Ukraine might use Taurus to attack the Kerch bridge and Germany couldn't do anything to stop them.

Discussion Quorum posted:

Wait - so every Storm Shadow that hits a Russian target is actually programmed/set up/whatever by the Brits rather than the Ukrainians? That actually seems worse from a "nuh uh we're not touching you" standpoint

Discussion Quorum posted:

Wait - so every Storm Shadow that hits a Russian target is actually programmed/set up/whatever by the Brits rather than the Ukrainians? That actually seems worse from a "nuh uh we're not touching you" standpoint

Discussion Quorum posted:

Wait - so every Storm Shadow that hits a Russian target is actually programmed/set up/whatever by the Brits rather than the Ukrainians? That actually seems worse from a "nuh uh we're not touching you" standpoint

Bild - Machine translated posted:

The German government is not planning to deliver the Taurus cruise missiles so urgently requested by the Ukrainian army in the foreseeable future. This was confirmed to BILD from German and Ukrainian government circles.
...
This is why Scholz does not supply Taurus missiles

Germany has not yet given the government in Kiev a formal denial of the request, but has made it clear internally that the Taurus missiles will not be delivered at present. Thus, Scholz is theoretically keeping the option open for the future, but delivery is considered highly unlikely.

What are the reasons for Scholz's current no to Taurus?

Last week, according to BILD information, the chancellor was asked in an internal meeting of the Foreign Affairs Committee why France and Great Britain supply cruise missiles but Germany continues not to. Scholz responded in the meeting, according to participants, that the two countries "can do something we are not allowed to do, so the question doesn't arise." A clear Taurus rejection!

What Scholz apparently means by this is that the UK and France contribute the geospatial data for missile targets directly themselves, the UK also with its own personnel on the ground.

In addition to the issue of geospatial data and possible personnel, German government officials are also said to have expressed concern that Taurus cruise missiles could be used to hit the Kerch Bridge.

Thus, in recent weeks, there have been talks between British and German government officials in which British representatives tried to convince Germany to supply them. During these talks, according to BILD information, the German side expressed concrete concern that the bridge in Crimea could be destroyed with the German weapon.

There is clear criticism of the chancellor's actions from the CDU. "With the cancellation of the Taurus delivery, Scholz confirms Germany's total failure as a self-proclaimed leading nation for European security and offends our partners like Great Britain and France, who are already supplying cruise missiles," foreign affairs and defense expert Roderich Kiesewetter (60) told BILD.

Kiesewetter still believes a Taurus delivery is the right thing to do, but that the Chancellery's stance is dangerous. "With Taurus, there is a chance for Ukraine to cut off Russian supply lines to Crimea and liberate Crimea, thus ending the war more quickly. Putin's fate hangs on Crimea, Scholz knows that," the CDU politician said. "He is thus deliberately sacrificing the lives of many innocent Ukrainians and opposing coalition partners FDP and Greens, apparently because he does not want Russia to lose. This is bitter and harmful for European and German security!"

DTurtle posted:

Emphasis mine.

PurpleXVI posted:

https://twitter.com/KyivPost/status/1710227599580955015

Really, Germany? You're still pounding that old drum? Russia must have some wild dirt on Scholz.

CommieGIR posted:

Scholz is such a piece of poo poo - Kerch bridge is as legit a target as any other Russian target in Ukraine's territory. How is the bridge different from the strikes Ukraine already carries out on Crimea proper?

CommieGIR posted:

Scholz is such a piece of poo poo - Kerch bridge is as legit a target as any other Russian target in Ukraine's territory. How is the bridge different from the strikes Ukraine already carries out on Crimea proper?

Fivemarks posted:

Because the official german position is that Crimea is Russian territory.

Antigravitas posted:

e: Also, why would you voluntarily out yourself as a Bild reader?

mlmp08 posted:

One difference is that it is significantly harder to hit the bridge without killing civilians than it would be with a bunch of other Russian targets Ukraine could target with German weapons instead.

PurpleXVI posted:

Short clip, but this time it's a brief, positive review of the Stryker APC.

mlmp08 posted:

One difference is that it is significantly harder to hit the bridge without killing civilians than it would be with a bunch of other Russian targets Ukraine could target with German weapons instead.

BaconAndBullets posted:

Pretty sure that's the Integrated Visual Augmentation System (IVAS). It basically combined IR, night vision, and augmented reality into one package with the ability to stream UAV feeds and potential to tie in weapon optics. Pretty crazy stuff. The new helmet, Improved Head Protection System, comes with rails purpose built for mounting the system so I think the Army is thinking it's gonna go into full production.

M_Gargantua posted:

If you hit the Kerch bridge during the equivalent of LA traffic you'd still be justified in doing so IMO.