(Thread IKs:
fatherboxx)
|
OperaMouse posted:Dutch news is reporting that a former Wagner soldier/mercenary wants to go to the International Court of Justice in The Hague to testify on Russian warcrimes. Igor Salikov was a soldier for 25 years, first in the Russian arny, then in Wagner. He wants to testify on crimes committed against civilians that he witnessed. Sounds like someone who has decided that death at the hands of church tourists is a good way to go
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2023 18:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 12:44 |
|
|
https://kyivindependent.com/ukraine-finally-moves-to-fortify-front-line-but-could-it-be-too-little-too-late/ Evidence that the Ukrainians have not properly prepared for the anticipated Russian winter offensive. https://x.com/J_JHelin/status/1736725222470963288?s=20 Helin believes that the Ukrainians will find the manpower one way or another but questions whether forcefully putting those who are reluctant in uniform will lead to a drop in quality, one of the few edges the Ukrainians have over their Russian counterparts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2023 18:43
|
|
|
With all the lend-lease discussion, which is about a war nearly 100 years ago, there's an odd lack of discussion- anywhere not just here, about China-Russian relations. As an example - today Adm Aquiliano (indo-pac cmd) cited deep concerns about China-Russian trade, arms supplies, and joint naval exercises. If China really is starting to choose Russia as an ally, it does seem that arms supply for Russia isn't an issue.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2023 18:43
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:
You are dooming and losing your mind because you fail to see the bigger picture and how vital Ukraine´s survival is to the European Union and NATO, even if everything you say is true (which it is, I think) You´ve got the German chancellor, a former marxist, saying Germany needs to step in if the US stops the support. Just today they set a deadline for German troops to be stationed in Lithuania. An absolutely historical event, but because no one posts about it in here apparently it is not happening.. You´ve got Japan and South Korea and Finland helping out Ukraine with ammunition and the Americans boosting their artillery grenade production more than previously planned. You have got Ukraine clearly setting up a new offensive next year or early 2025 hoping for better and more modern air craft, a sign that the US is finally aware of the need for air support during an offensive (!). The bad news here is not that Ukraine can´t win, it absolutely can. The bad news is that so many Ukrainian lives were wasted needlessly because the West completely misjudged Putin, despite everything that happened since he took power.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2023 19:00
|
|
|
KingaSlipek posted:You are dooming and losing your mind because you fail to see the bigger picture and how vital Ukraine´s survival is to the European Union and NATO, even if everything you say is true (which it is, I think) Yeah i think the West and alot of war nerds including myself, sorta assumed with wagner thunder run attempt on moscow and shitshow offensives russia had kept launching and the various pretty sucessful offesnives UA had, that the russian forces would break moral when enough western tanks and UA troops were hiting their positions and that happened to some degree, but it didnt happen to the workable scale, plus all the tactical issues other goons have mentioned. the russians are content for now to throw men at the east some smaller gains and hoping to clog the gears up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2023 19:10
|
|
|
BillsPhoenix posted:With all the lend-lease discussion, which is about a war nearly 100 years ago, there's an odd lack of discussion- anywhere not just here, about China-Russian relations. I thought the Lend Lease discussion was about one of the alternative workarounds for the Biden Administration to supply Ukraine with arms. (And I'm not totally sure it's still around, actually...) The problem with Lend Lease is that it comes with Ukraine ultimately having to pay something back in the future. https://euromaidanpress.com/2023/10/06/lend-lease-for-ukraine-is-it-dead-or-just-on-hold/ Dapper_Swindler posted:Yeah i think the West and alot of war nerds including myself, sorta assumed with wagner thunder run attempt on moscow and shitshow offensives russia had kept launching and the various pretty sucessful offesnives UA had, that the russian forces would break moral when enough western tanks and UA troops were hiting their positions and that happened to some degree, but it didnt happen to the workable scale, plus all the tactical issues other goons have mentioned. the russians are content for now to throw men at the east some smaller gains and hoping to clog the gears up. I do think that as coddled Westerners, it's hard to get our heads around the idea of a leadership looking at the human and financial cost of this war (which is, no matter how you look at it, coming with an enormous cost to Russia economically, diplomatically and militarily) and saying "I don't care keep going." Ultimately, this is like how sanctions can only be but so effective against a despotic government. You look at Russia or Iran and you've basically got regimes that don't give a poo poo and no one internally is in a position to bring the regime change threat that would make them change course. Eric Cantonese fucked around with this message at 19:17 on Dec 18, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2023 19:13
|
|
|
watching perun's latest video interviewing a retired us general, and it's really driving home the feeling that not having military observers in this conflict is a mistake. not even to support the ukrainian's, but to get an actual handle on what a peer conflict in the 21st century looks like
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2023 19:41
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure that some countries have observers there and have for a while. I think I read that there is a British contingent at least, and a few other European countries have a small number of troops there I'm almost certain.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2023 19:50
|
|
|
Eric Cantonese posted:I thought the Lend Lease discussion was about one of the alternative workarounds for the Biden Administration to supply Ukraine with arms. (And I'm not totally sure it's still around, actually...) The problem with Lend Lease is that it comes with Ukraine ultimately having to pay something back Oh I think 2 parts then. Not agreeing with most if kreftworks points, but it seemed like they were noting this war is starting to come down to a difference in field able population - if China is moving towards alliance with Russia, then it does seem like equipment isn't a concern and it is coming down to Russia simply having more people. China allying with Russia also reduces chances that NATO directly fields troops.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2023 19:56
|
|
|
Eric Cantonese posted:Ultimately, this is like how sanctions can only be but so effective against a despotic government. You look at Russia or Iran and you've basically got regimes that don't give a poo poo and no one internally is in a position to bring the regime change threat that would make them change course. They tend to change the calculus of what the sanctions accomplish. Ideally, you want to protect the aggressed from the aggressor state by creating pyrrhic conditions for them. If the aggressor continues regardless because the ruling person or party has no concern for that continued harm to the nation, then the outcome is that you let them implode. Kavros fucked around with this message at 20:10 on Dec 18, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2023 20:05
|
|
|
BillsPhoenix posted:Oh I think 2 parts then. Not agreeing with most if kreftworks points, but it seemed like they were noting this war is starting to come down to a difference in field able population - if China is moving towards alliance with Russia, then it does seem like equipment isn't a concern and it is coming down to Russia simply having more people. That being said, I think even China has some limits on what it's willing to provide. I'm sure it's already more than I'd like, but I think it's telling that it's North Korean sending over artillery shells and not Xi. I'm suspicious about how large China's appetite is for getting involved in a purely military way on Russia's side beyond seeing how their drone and avionics tech does in battlefield conditions. That's a substantial contribution, but I wonder how much that outdoes the other factors that are turning this into a war of attrition where both sides are having to be very careful about conserving resources and manpower.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2023 20:15
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:This is the point I’ve been trying to make. lmao perhaps
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2023 23:36
|
|
|
That art piece pairs well with Ukraine threads historical prognostications on the fall of Kyiv, which, as we approach day 6 of the special military action, i must again assure you is imminent
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2023 00:05
|
|
|
I think the general thought was that the Russians just sucked at offense since they took such devastating losses... but as it turns out, it was just as hard for Ukraine. It's nearly impossible to do an offensive when neither side has air superiority, the entire front is filled with mines, an entire platoon can get wiped out in an instant by cluster munitions and a tank can get destroyed by a spicy 400 dollar drone. I don't see how either side will make any significant gains while this holds true. One side has to run out of equipment or manpower first
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2023 00:24
|
|
|
Collapsing Farts posted:I think the general thought was that the Russians just sucked at offense since they took such devastating losses... but as it turns out, it was just as hard for Ukraine. It's nearly impossible to do an offensive when neither side has air superiority, the entire front is filled with mines, an entire platoon can get wiped out in an instant by cluster munitions and a tank can get destroyed by a spicy 400 dollar drone. It's WWI all over again
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2023 02:23
|
|
|
https://static.rusi.org/heavy-armoured-forces-in-future-warfare-occasional-paper-december-23.pdf RUSI published a good article about heavy armored (armoured) forces. No, the Main Battle Tank (MBT) is not dead. The recommendations at the end are rather bland, but it's a good read for goons who don't mind an academic overview of heavy armor in the 21st century. I found it interesting they pulled lessons from World War II through South Africa through Ukraine, and didn't find much between these very different theatres that contradicted themselves. If anything, Ukraine is reinforcing lessons we've known for a long time, particularly around force reconstitution.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2023 16:24
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:https://static.rusi.org/heavy-armoured-forces-in-future-warfare-occasional-paper-december-23.pdf I have to say I found this article well researched but ultimately unimaginative. It seems the argument largely is rooted in the echos of this concept: quote:The history of US light and medium armoured forces in the Second World War, at the point when they encountered German heavy armoured forces with a significant combat power advantage in the direct fight, was not a happy one, and involved significant losses, an experience that still shapes current US thinking on the employment of MBTs. This has been termed the Sherman Dilemma, whereby a force adopts a less-capable combat vehicle with the expectation that combined arms integration will offset its disadvantages in the direct fight, only to discover that combined arms integration does not provide the expected benefits under actual operational conditions. Which isn't wrong but is also probably worth a deeper reexamination in the modern concept. Put another way, I think this is a fine article if you're giving advice to current tank designers because there's no proven new paradigm. But it is not a good article if you're trying to come up with offensive plans in Ukraine or future warfare. WarpedLichen fucked around with this message at 19:55 on Dec 19, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2023 19:52
|
|
|
I agree it's rather unimaginative, but in some ways that's the point: the evidence from Ukraine does not indicate the requirement for a transformative change in armored forces. If anything, it has highlighted several key things we've learned and either are currently applying, or have forgotten at the institutional level and need to re-learn. The scale is different--particularly with regards to operational depth--but the basics hold true.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2023 20:14
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:I agree it's rather unimaginative, but in some ways that's the point: the evidence from Ukraine does not indicate the requirement for a transformative change in armored forces. If anything, it has highlighted several key things we've learned and either are currently applying, or have forgotten at the institutional level and need to re-learn. The scale is different--particularly with regards to operational depth--but the basics hold true. Tactically the Ukrainians seem to love the Bradley so there’s that. Where does the new US booker tank fall into this?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2023 20:57
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:Where does the new US booker tank fall into this? Technically the military doesn't want you to call it a tank at all but de facto its a light tank. Its meant for roles where mobility is the most important factor (ie. mountainous terrain or perhaps scouting in a pinch) or operating as a assault gun (think glorified closer range focused SPG) in close contact with supporting ground forces. Its got a 105mm gun so it won't be great in anti tank role but that is OK. Its meant to take out pill boxes, trenches, and other fortifications mostly. Not go head to head with a T90. Basically something with more bang and better protection than a Bradley but a lot lighter, cheaper, and better logistics than a Abrams. I think they're currently planning on buying around 500 over the next several years.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2023 21:09
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:Tactically the Ukrainians seem to love the Bradley so there’s that. The vehicle is a third lighter than an Abrams. The gun by itself is 816kg lighter. The first unit to get it will be the 82nd airborne, with presumably a similar role in mind to how they used the Sheridan. Edit: I certainly hope they plan to airdrop the thing because come on Blue Footed Booby fucked around with this message at 21:39 on Dec 19, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2023 21:16
|
|
|
I'd say Bradleys might be prefered in Ukraine right now. Bradleys can be used for both offensive and defensive actions due to its mobility and utility. Some of the craziest videos of the war included Bradleys. There are videos of Bradleys suppressing entire treelines and other videos of Bradleys quickly coming in to support and extract entire squads under fire. This second part is a big deal and not something a tank can do Though I'm sure tanks are very much welcome in Ukraine as well
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2023 02:13
|
|
|
Blue Footed Booby posted:Edit: I certainly hope they plan to airdrop the thing because come on There is explicitly not a requirement that the vehicle be able to be air dropped.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2023 02:26
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:There is explicitly not a requirement that the vehicle be able to be air dropped. I think it fits on a C130, though, which means it can be landed in right airstrips. It's very much an acknowledgement that even light units can use armored firepower.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2023 02:36
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:There is explicitly not a requirement that the vehicle be able to be air dropped.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2023 02:38
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:I think it fits on a C130, though, which means it can be landed in right airstrips. Nope, C-17 and up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2023 02:43
|
|
|
FMguru posted:In a very real sense, almost all vehicles can be air-dropped. Once.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2023 02:45
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Nope, C-17 and up. Ah, you're correct. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2023 02:50
|
|
|
Prism posted:Once. I've seen Operation Dumbo Drop. If they US Military had the technology to drop an elephant out of a plane in 1995 and have it live, they have the technology to drop a tank out of a plane now and have it live.  On the topic of the new tanks. I would imagine the Ukrainian army is still having real problems with the massive mish mash of weapon systems and vehicles that they have? In all the aid stuff they've been getting have they been getting spare parts to keep all their existing stuff going. I would imagine a lot of their equipment doesn't exactly use off the shelf parts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2023 02:56
|
|
|
Prism posted:Once. Multiple times, even, they just lose the descriptor ‘vehicle’ at some point in the process.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2023 03:18
|
|
|
So the Booker basically a modern StuG III?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2023 07:09
|
|
|
Mr. Apollo posted:So the Booker basically a modern StuG III? Yeah, they even call it an assault gun.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2023 08:22
|
|
|
I'm actually fairly unimpressed by the RUSI MBT paper. There's a number of risible statements, including but not limited to: -MBTs are actually the most mobile* *unless you want them to drive anywhere -Implying MBTs are the only way to maintain anti-tank capability without sacrificing mobility. I might be misreading this one, its confusing. -It's impractical to put an autoloader into an MBT (??????) -The Javelin, 30 year old technology, is the absolute top end ATGM we must concern ourselves with There's also some minor stuff. like it notes that Canadian forces found their MBTs invaluable in Afghanistan, but doesn't discuss why - i'm gonna say its because MBTs are basically designed to bounce RPG-7s. Great justification for the MBT as an oppression vehicle against the vastly outmatched, but hardly a ringing endorsement for warfighting where the other side has decent gear. The 'Sherman Dilemma' stuff is a little silly when comparing the modern combat environment to ww2. Critically it doesn't grapple at all with whether or not MBTs can actually achieve breakthroughs in a modern combat environment, instead it just takes it as a given. it handwaves the assault on Kyiv being a failure because 'Russians are incompetent'; it doesn't attempt to address the failure of the Ukrainian armored offensive or causes thereof *at all*. It draws examples from a combat exercise where an US forces got completely owned by constant drone fires but treats it as 'lessons to be learned' rather than 'there's a fuckin problem here, our battleships keep getting sunk by torpedo bombers'.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2023 09:31
|
|
|
We need more tanks. Yes I know that this 10 million dollar tank can be easily disabled by a 400 dollar drone. This is OK, this is fine
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2023 14:57
|
|
|
Tanks still more mobile offroad and more survivable vs artillery than dismounts and light vehicles with an ATGM or mortar strapped to them. If you think drones are bad for armored vehicles that can shoot at the front line from hundreds to thousands of meters away, wait til you see what they do to wheeled vehicles and guys on foot shooting from 100-500 meters away. Also, unfortunately for the world, this conflict has been a big boost for the argument to continue landmine usage for years and decades to come. (Telling that the US, PRC, and Russia were already onboard with landmines anyway I guess).
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2023 16:39
|
|
|
quote:Great justification for the MBT as an oppression vehicle against the vastly outmatched If you can call it an "oppression vehicle" I'm not sure you need any other excuse to want it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2023 17:02
|
|
|
Collapsing Farts posted:We need more tanks. Yes I know that this 10 million dollar tank can be easily disabled by a 400 dollar drone. This is OK, this is fine It's the same adage that was being said in 2022, combined arms with integrated air defence is key, everything needs to link, if there is a deficiency in one area it will allow exploitation. Tanks are incredible at both manoeuvre and killing other heavy armour, javelin is incredible at killing heavy armour but not manoeuvre (dismounted) etc etc, people want one solution but it's not that simple.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2023 17:12
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:There is explicitly not a requirement that the vehicle be able to be air dropped. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2023 17:37
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8ZPbnVqHrY New Anders Puck Nielsen video dropped explaining Russia's rationale behind their human wave tactics using convicts and expendable troops.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2023 17:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 12:44 |
|
|
Basically everything can be easily taken out by something efficiently and cheaply. That doesn't stop something from still being desirable to have on the battlefield.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2023 23:08
|
|