War in Ukraine CE: The Golf War

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > War in Ukraine CE: The Golf War

(Thread IKs: fatherboxx)

GABA ghoul: Oct 29, 2011

Spiegel wrote an interesting article on some illegal and semi-legal ethnic cleansing methods used in the occupied territories.

https://archive.ph/CzTYi

quote:

Then the Russians sawed off all the locks and moved into my house�
Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians have left apartments and houses behind in the territory annexed by Russia. Now the occupying forces are �nationalizing� many properties - and some Ukrainians are selling illegally.

Ever since spring began, Tatyana has often thought about her garden, her piece of black earth in a village in south-eastern Ukraine. At this time of year, she had crocuses in the flowerbed, she says, as well as daffodils, tulips and irises. She planted the fruit trees together with her now deceased husband: apples, pears, cherries, apricots and peaches. �I remember every flower, every tree that I planted,� says Tatjana, who actually has a different name. A year and a half has passed since she last saw her little house and garden.
Vladimir Putin's troops took Tatyana's home village near the city of Melitopol in the Zaporizhzhya region at the very beginning of the war of aggression more than two years ago. Tatyana worked in the administration of the village at the time. She did not want to serve the occupying forces, she says, �They then came to my house, questioned me for a long time and searched everything.� Tatyana uses an encrypted messenger service to make phone calls out of caution.

Not long after the unpleasant home visit, Tatyana fled to the Ukrainian-controlled territory with her mother, who was in need of care. The two women now live in a rented apartment in the regional capital of Zaporizhzhya. Tatyana left the keys to her home, the four-bedroom house that her parents-in-law once built, to a friend. The woman was supposed to look after it from time to time.
One day she alerted Tatjana: Russians had driven up to the property in a car. Since then, her friend has not dared to go there, says Tatyana. �Because then the Russians sawed off all the locks and moved into my house.� She heard from neighbors that the men living in her furniture worked for the traffic police.

Register for �abandoned property�

Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians had to leave their houses, apartments, stores, gardens and fields behind when they fled from the Russian invaders. Russia often quickly distributed properties that were attractive or at least undamaged among its own people. Abandoned workshops, stores and caf�s were handed over to new operators loyal to the Kremlin. Soldiers, administrative officials and construction workers moved into empty apartments and houses. In occupied cities such as Mariupol, Melitopol and Enerhodar, residents report entire families moving in from Russia - into the fully furnished apartments of Ukrainian families.

Moscow now apparently wants to give the criminal expropriation in the four newly annexed regions of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhya and Kherson a pseudo-legal veneer: In early April, Russian media reported that the �new regions� were planning �laws� to �nationalize� �ownerless property�. Real estate and companies were also nationalized on the Crimean peninsula, which was annexed in 2014, including an apartment that allegedly belonged to the family of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyi.
In the Luhansk region, the nationalization law was passed at the end of March. The rulers there claim to have identified 22,000 �ownerless apartments and houses� whose owners have allegedly not paid utilities since Russia's first invasion of Ukraine in 2014. In the neighboring Donetsk region, which includes the destroyed city of Mariupol, the occupying forces are said to have classified 30,000 properties as �ownerless�.

In Tatyana's homeland, the Zaporizhzhya region, the occupiers are currently collecting addresses. New �ownerless� apartments and houses appear almost daily in an administration register. Place by place, street by street, the occupying forces seem to be staking out their new territory. It is clear that these lists also include �the homes of people who work subversively against our residents and our state�, explained Nikolai Pastushenko, a collaborator from the Zaporizhzhya regional parliament. It sounds as if the expropriation is being used deliberately to punish rebellious Ukrainians. Tatyana has the impression that this was the case in her case.

Unpaid utility bill

In the Luhansk region, the occupiers justified the expropriation on the grounds that the utility companies that supply water, electricity and heat could no longer do without paying the utility bills for the abandoned apartments. In addition, living space was needed because there were too few hotels. A specially appointed commission in Luhansk is supposed to determine whether an apartment is actually �abandoned�. The owners are to be given deadlines to lay claim to their property.

In reality, Ukrainians who have fled cannot legally do anything to protect their property. Tatiana tried. A few months after she moved out, her friend found a note on Tatyana's front door. The occupiers asked her to come forward and present property documents. Tatyana says she duly made copies and had them presented. �But my friend was told that I had to appear in person.� That was out of the question for Tatyana. �They could have me arrested if I returned.�

Tatyana says that her daughter tried to have the documents notarized at a Russian consulate abroad. The occupation administrators had suggested this. However, her daughter was told at the consulate that Ukrainian documents could not be notarized. �Even under Russian law, what they are doing there is illegal,� says Tatyana. She then exchanged emails with the occupiers and sent everything she had in the way of proof - to no avail. In the end, she gave up and reported the loss of her house and land to the Ukrainian police.

Another family from a small town in the Zaporizhzhya region reported that they were not even asked for documents before the Russians moved in. A close relative who wanted to take some of the family's personal belongings out of the apartment was threatened by the occupiers. The family of four who fled to Germany not only lost the apartment they lived in, but also a second one they rented out and the wife's clothing boutique. �I'm 40 now,� says the woman, �and I have to start from scratch again.� She has little hope of getting her property back or being adequately compensated.

Legal dilemma

For many of the refugees from the occupied territories, their apartments and houses were their only security and reserve. That is why some Ukrainians are now trying to sell these properties despite everything. But how and to whom? And is such a business legal? Notary Olena Sjerowa in Kiev receives many inquiries from desperate refugees. Her answers are sobering: the sale of real estate in the occupied territory to Russian citizens is illegal under Ukrainian law. In most cases, it fails because the necessary certificates are located in the occupied territory and cannot be obtained, says Sjerowa. And Russia does not recognize transactions with Ukrainians either. �You can't sell your property there or do anything with it without a permanent residence permit from the Russian Federation or a passport from the Russian Federation,� says the notary. This is confirmed by checklists that estate agents in Mariupol publish on social media. They always mention the Russian passport.

After 2014, it was still possible for Ukrainians to carry out real estate transactions in the occupied �People's Republics� of Donetsk and Luhansk, explains the notary. Since the annexation in violation of international law, things have been different. �This topic is painful for everyone,� admits Sjerowa. She can only tell people what the legal situation is. In the end, everyone decides for themselves. Those who need money sell according to Russian law. The business is risky. The sellers could also be held accountable. �Ukraine will never recognize these contracts.�

Booming purchase market

The notary does not want to explain how to sell an apartment illegally; she does not handle such transactions herself, emphasizes Sjerowa. Instead, Ukrainian TV journalist Nikolai Ossychenko reports on the booming real estate market in the Donetsk region, which is mainly driven by advertisements on the Telegram network. Ossychenko comes from the city of Donetsk and fled to Mariupol ten years ago when his home town was occupied by the Russians. He now lives in the area around Kiev. Once a week, he contacts residents of the occupied Donbass via TikTok, says Ossychenko. �Some call me a traitor, but others tell me straight out what's going on there now,� he says.

Ossychenko, 44 years old, thick glasses, is driving towards Donbass while talking into his cell phone over the roar of the engine. He explains that the sale of apartments and houses belonging to Ukrainian owners is carried out using forged documents via straw men. These are Russians or Ukrainians who have taken on Russian citizenship. The actual owner receives a maximum of 60 percent of the sale price, as he has to pay the front man and all others involved in the illegal transaction. �The notaries, brokers and officials make huge profits from this,� says Ossychenko. The profits are even greater when - especially in Mariupol - apartments are sold by dead people who can no longer claim any money.
But who wants to buy apartments and houses in a war zone anyway? On the one hand, there are Russians who sense a good opportunity to buy a summer house on the Azov Sea. On the other hand, locals are looking for new accommodation with a better quality of life: in large parts of the city of Donetsk, there has only been running water for hours at a time for a long time, says Ossychenko. In turn, guest workers and military personnel sent from Moscow were interested in the apartments in Donetsk and the surrounding area.

The Ukrainian leadership has not yet commented on the issue of the property sale. The country wants to recapture the territories - and not complicate the situation further afterwards. However, Petro Andryushchenko, the prominent advisor to the ousted mayor of Mariupol, encouraged his compatriots to sell at the end of February. �If you have the opportunity, do it,� the politician wrote on the social network Telegram . �I would gladly and without hesitation sell my apartment in Mariupol to the Russians,� he continued. When asked by SPIEGEL, Andryushchenko is somewhat more reserved. He himself cannot sell his apartment because he is too well known, he says. He does not want to set a public precedent of breaking the law. But if companies from the European Union, such as the German plaster manufacturer Knauf, continue to do business with the Russians, it will be difficult to explain to the Ukrainians who have fled why they of all people are not allowed to do so.

# ? May 6, 2024 10:50

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 7, 2024 14:27

Mr. Apollo: Nov 8, 2000

Looks like Ukraine is equipping it's sea drone with anti-air missiles now.

Here's a video clip from Reddit of a Russian helicopter taking out a Ukrainian sea drone that has a rack for 2 R-73 missiles. It the screen shot that's linked in the thread you can see that one of the missiles had already been fired.

https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1clh3eb/russian_ka29_helicopter_destroys_a_ukranian_naval/

screenshot: https://www.reddit.com/user/duccyzuccy/comments/1clh75x/r73_air_to_air_missile_on_ukranian_magura_v5/

Mr. Apollo fucked around with this message at 18:41 on May 6, 2024

# ? May 6, 2024 18:36

mawarannahr: May 21, 2019

Mr. Apollo posted:

Looks like Ukraine is equipping it's sea drone with anti-air missiles now.

Here's a video clip from Reddit of a Russian helicopter taking out a Ukrainian sea drone that has a rack for 2 R-73 missiles. It the screen shot that's linked in the thread you can see that one of the missiles had already been fired.

https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1clh3eb/russian_ka29_helicopter_destroys_a_ukranian_naval/

screenshot: https://www.reddit.com/user/duccyzuccy/comments/1clh75x/r73_air_to_air_missile_on_ukranian_magura_v5/

Interesting. This article was published last month -- I wonder if the author would find this idea is actual more useful to Taiwan than China (given the factors here related to air defense):

What Chinese Navy Planners Are Learning from Ukraine's Use of Unmanned Surface Vessels

www.rand.org posted:

The continued success of Ukrainian unmanned surface vessel (USV) attacks on Russian naval facilities and warships has kept USVs in the defense analytical spotlight and naval analysts around the world, particularly those in China, are taking note.

Faced with ongoing attacks on its Black Sea Fleet stationed in Crimea, Russia has moved its fleet further away from Ukrainian missiles and USVs. Britain's Defense Minister Grant Shapps remarked that, �Russia's dominance in the Black Sea is now challenged.�

A January 2024 article in the Chinese defense periodical Naval and Merchant Ships, written by three analysts of the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN), entitled �How to Defend Harbors Against USVs?� focused on the emergent potential of USVs, noting that �the large-scale application of various types of USVs is already a new threat to modern naval warfare. USVs will bring new challenges to the development of traditional military ideas, theories of war, modes of combat, military organizational structures, weapons, and equipment.�

Faced with ongoing attacks on its Black Sea Fleet stationed in Crimea, Russia has moved its fleet further away from Ukrainian missiles and USVs.

The PLAN analysts first identify five advantages that USVs have in combat: effective concealment, low cost to manufacture and use, strong destructive ability, intelligent modes of control, and their potential to operate autonomously. Moreover, through modular construction and the addition of different weapons systems, they incorporate �diversified attack modes.� We compiled a similar list of USV characteristics that had been identified by Chinese naval analysts in a spring 2023 article. When it comes to their destructive ability, the Chinese authors note that �USVs are more dangerous than air strikes; compared with missiles, USV warheads have greater explosive power.� Furthermore, their low manufacturing cost allows them to be made and deployed at scale which means that USVs can �harness wolf groups tactics to achieve greater destructive power.�

The assessment next identifies the challenges of defending port infrastructure and ships in harbor against USV attacks. The PLAN analysts identify three port security challenges. First, they write bluntly that �the targets are obvious,� meaning the naval infrastructure such as buildings, docks, and the ships at anchor are easy to identify and target. Second, there is a �high degree of information transparency.� This refers to the perceived inability to easily camouflage large ports and the ease at which contemporary surveillance technology can detect targets in port. Third, there is �a high probability of causing damage� to these targets.

To defend against USV threats to ports, the PLAN analysts recommend establishing �a multi-domain three-dimensional defense system of 'sensing, defending, and attacking.'� For the first task of sensing, the PLAN analysts note that �USV's are susceptible to interference and detection, especially when it comes to their communication and navigation links. Active and passive methods can be used.� On coastal defense, the authors recommend �creating a modern defense system that moves from being just a point defense to a three-dimensional perimeter and surface defense.� The information flows for this defense should be coordinated across a range of actors including: �local governments, public security, and maritime affairs,� among others. As part of this defensive system, the authors stress the importance of floating defensive barriers, like those used by the United States, Russia, Singapore, and other countries around the world to protect naval bases, ports, and other infrastructure. The article includes product images seemingly copied from the U.S. Navy's primary port security barrier contractor website.

Finally, the article discusses how to go about attacking USV threats through a �consolidated multi-domain strike system.� The PLAN analysts propose the development of �a new type of kill chain network with more standoff advantages�using relevant weaponry and upgraded asymmetric combat styles.� They propose reducing the expenditure of precision guided weapons, and maximizing combat effectiveness. To achieve this, they propose, �a long-distance, medium-, and short-range multi-layered strike system and multi-domain interlocking fire network of electromagnetic and conventional weapons.� The longest-range aspect of this system includes attacking USV �forward operating bases, assembly areas, and production sites� with precision guided weapons and even hypersonic missiles. Taking warfare into the fully autonomous realm, the authors theorize that USVs could be used to patrol for, discover, and initiate attacks against attacking enemy USVs.

Ukraine's use of USVs has given the world's navies a genuine view of what large-scale future naval warfare might look like.

Ukraine's use of USVs has given the world's navies a genuine view of what large-scale future naval warfare might look like. At a minimum it is causing Chinese naval analysts to think about how to protect the PLAN's expensive capital investments. It has also shown that even a smaller country without a large navy can pose a serious asymmetric threat to a great power with a large fleet. With China's navy venturing ever further into the world's oceans, the possibility that major PLAN surface units, including even aircraft carrier battle groups, could face such asymmetric threats is growing.

In addition, there are potentially major implications of these developments for a hypothetical Taiwan scenario. Most obviously, the asymmetric example of Ukraine's employment of USVs may provide an important template for Taiwan's defense against a PLAN invasion fleet. In particular, the low cost and autonomous nature of these platforms could make them effective in this role. On the other hand, Beijing is a genuine �drone superpower,� wielding a fully developed set of USV programs, so the PLA will undoubtedly also be looking to take advantage of USVs in order to pose new threats against the fleets of hypothetical third parties (whether the United States or Japan) intervening to assist Taiwan. It can also be anticipated that Beijing's naval planners would employ USVs to tighten a Chinese naval blockade around the island, to assault Taiwan's naval forces and harbors, to complicate the targeting for Taiwan's defenders, as well as to conduct close-in surveillance and �soften up� potential landing zones.

# ? May 6, 2024 18:50

Raenir Salazar: Nov 5, 2010; College Slice

Yeah I'm skeptical of people who claim that the lessons of the Ukraine war and other conflicts just means unequivocally good things for Taiwan's prospects when China has a larger more modern better funded military which is also paying close attention and is taking notes and has repeatedly established a pattern of not only learning from mistakes but learning from observation and doing error correction.

I think the fact is with the vastly larger amount of shipping along China's coasts, the greater number of piers/ports for vessels of various sizes, its much more challenging to use drones to target PLAN assets; who likely will have better trained, funded, and protected crews and assets; things like the radar not working because rats chewed the wires and nested in the computers is highly unlikely to be a factor and so on. Not that China doesn't have its own corruption problems but it seems more willing to spend the effort and money in rooting it out.

# ? May 6, 2024 19:48

DeliciousPatriotism: May 26, 2008

Raenir Salazar posted:

Yeah I'm skeptical of people who claim that the lessons of the Ukraine war and other conflicts just means unequivocally good things for Taiwan's prospects when China has a larger more modern better funded military which is also paying close attention and is taking notes and has repeatedly established a pattern of not only learning from mistakes but learning from observation and doing error correction.

I think the fact is with the vastly larger amount of shipping along China's coasts, the greater number of piers/ports for vessels of various sizes, its much more challenging to use drones to target PLAN assets; who likely will have better trained, funded, and protected crews and assets; things like the radar not working because rats chewed the wires and nested in the computers is highly unlikely to be a factor and so on. Not that China doesn't have its own corruption problems but it seems more willing to spend the effort and money in rooting it out.

Also how does a sponsor state keep Taiwan supplied routinely without getting directly involved.

# ? May 6, 2024 20:05

Raenir Salazar: Nov 5, 2010; College Slice

DeliciousPatriotism posted:

Also how does a sponsor state keep Taiwan supplied routinely without getting directly involved.

I'm not sure I understand how this connects to what I said but this hasn't stopped the US from supplying Ukraine. The US can supply Taiwan much the same, via airlift or by sea and dare the PLA to pull the trigger if the US is somehow neutral; which is very unlikely as most scenarios assume the US directly defends Taiwan and immediately commits forces docked in Japan and Guam.

# ? May 6, 2024 20:17

Charliegrs: Aug 10, 2009

Raenir Salazar posted:

I'm not sure I understand how this connects to what I said but this hasn't stopped the US from supplying Ukraine. The US can supply Taiwan much the same, via airlift or by sea and dare the PLA to pull the trigger if the US is somehow neutral; which is very unlikely as most scenarios assume the US directly defends Taiwan and immediately commits forces docked in Japan and Guam.

Ukraine isn't an island nation that can be easily blockaded like Cuba was during the Cuban missile crisis. And an air and sea blockade is probably one of the first things China would do.

# ? May 6, 2024 23:26

golden bubble: Jun 3, 2011; yospos

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/06/russia-us-soldier-south-korea-00156328

quote:

The soldier, a US staff sergeant who is stationed in South Korea, was arrested last Thursday, said one of the officials, who was granted anonymity to discuss a sensitive incident. The soldier had traveled to Russia to meet a woman, possibly his girlfriend, the official said.

Come to Russia to meet your totally real, hot Russian girlfriend. We totally won't arrest you and hold you hostage the moment you step over the border.

# ? May 7, 2024 01:59

Raenir Salazar: Nov 5, 2010; College Slice

Charliegrs posted:

Ukraine isn't an island nation that can be easily blockaded like Cuba was during the Cuban missile crisis. And an air and sea blockade is probably one of the first things China would do.

I don't think this matters much when its the US you're facing.

# ? May 7, 2024 02:12

Ynglaur: Oct 9, 2013; The Malta Conference, anyone?

Raenir Salazar posted:

I don't think this matters much when its the US you're facing.

I disagree. I think it absolutely would matter because it changes the calculus of escalation for all parties involved. Russia can't reasonably blockade Ukraine's western border, but if they could, how far would Europe and the US go to break that blockade? Could the US break a Chinese blockade of Taiwan? Perhaps. But I wouldn't say it's a sure thing. The US Navy is far smaller and older than it once was, and land-based anti-ship missiles have basically brought the concept of coastal artillery back.

Consider this: Ukraine, without a navy at all, has managed to secure the Black Sea for its own cargo transport. They've done this by negating the effectiveness of of the Russian Navy. Could Taiwan do the same to PLAN? Again, perhaps, but it's not a sure thing.

# ? May 7, 2024 13:08

jarlywarly: Aug 31, 2018

It's still 11 carrier battle groups..

# ? May 7, 2024 13:22

Dirt5o8: Nov 6, 2008; EUGENE? Where's my fuckin' money, Eugene?

A single carrier group destroyed would be an absolute disaster in loss of life and equipment. A national tragedy in and of itself. Yeeting carrier groups to attrite coastal defenses seems unlikely if it's not in direct defense of the sovereign territory.

# ? May 7, 2024 13:28

Dandywalken: Feb 11, 2014

Dirt5o8 posted:

A single carrier group destroyed would be an absolute disaster in loss of life and equipment. A national tragedy in and of itself. Yeeting carrier groups to attrite coastal defenses seems unlikely if it's not in direct defense of the sovereign territory.

Agreed, hopefully China doesnt do that vs Taiwans coastal defenses.

# ? May 7, 2024 13:55

Nenonen: Oct 22, 2009; Mulla on aina kolkyt donaa taskussa

Black Sea is not a very good point of comparison to Taiwan, as Turkey controls access to the first one and the maritime front has been a sideshow from the beginning and nothing decisive can happen there.

# ? May 7, 2024 15:21

Comstar: Apr 20, 2007; Are you happy now?

Dirt5o8 posted:

A single carrier group destroyed would be an absolute disaster in loss of life and equipment. A national tragedy in and of itself. Yeeting carrier groups to attrite coastal defenses seems unlikely if it's not in direct defense of the sovereign territory.

A single carrier group being destroyed just means 10 more show up later.

This is not a winning strategy unless there's a 2nd Battle of the Atlantic going on at the same time.

# ? May 7, 2024 16:06

Kraftwerk: Aug 13, 2011; i do not have 10,000 bircoins, please stop asking

I do wonder if we're due for a major upset in how naval warfare works. I think most Navies are very much heavily refurbished cold war era affairs with much of the original technology mothballed or no longer in production.
I'm reasonably sure there's limited production capability for Mk.48 torpedos for example. Meanwhile the Harpoon missile is very much out of date and yesterday's news. Based on the kind of standoff capabilities the Chinese are building into their navies it sounds like Tomahawks will probably be more relevant in these engagements if they ever happen, but I digress.

Pre WW2 it was believed Battleships were the Queens of the sea and that they'd rule any engagement. Then the Japanese came along and decimated the British and American pacific fleets forcing the US to pivot to carriers due to the loss of their battleships. Thereafter, aircraft carriers have been the most valuable and important ships in Naval warfare till the 1990s.

Now I'm thinking you could potentially overwhelm a battlegroup with a swarm of drones and hypersonic missiles and even if you can't destroy it, you could potentially reduce its effectiveness or heavily damage it. Perhaps the naval warfare of the 21st century will be cheaper or more drone oriented.

# ? May 7, 2024 16:09

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Comstar posted:

A single carrier group being destroyed just means 10 more show up later.

This is not a winning strategy unless there's a 2nd Battle of the Atlantic going on at the same time.

Are you arguing that any US government would willingly make the political choice to sacrifice multiple carrier groups in the defense of Taiwan?

# ? May 7, 2024 16:11

WarpedLichen: Aug 14, 2008

BBC reports that SBU claims they have foiled a Zelensky assassination plot and arrested some colonels:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-68968256?at_format=link&at_bbc_team=editorial

Those are some high ranking moles.

# ? May 7, 2024 16:29

ranbo das: Oct 16, 2013

I think assuming that you could destroy one carrier and assume that will result in the US backing down is wild no matter who is in office, and definitely not supported by history.

# ? May 7, 2024 16:37

PittTheElder: Feb 13, 2012; Yes, it's like a lava lamp.

Kraftwerk posted:

Pre WW2 it was believed Battleships were the Queens of the sea and that they'd rule any engagement. Then the Japanese came along and decimated the British and American pacific fleets forcing the US to pivot to carriers due to the loss of their battleships. Thereafter, aircraft carriers have been the most valuable and important ships in Naval warfare till the 1990s.

This really isn't true. While it wasn't really appreciated just how decisive naval aviation would turn out to be, the US had already decided to pivot to carrier forces, with the Midways authorized and the first tranche laid down before Pearl Harbor ever happened.

The British had come to similar conclusions even earlier, and had even carried off a hugely successful carrier raid at Taranto while Pearl was still in the planning phases. They would have invested much more heavily in the fleet air arm as well, except for the part where they were flat broke already.

# ? May 7, 2024 16:48

Dirt5o8: Nov 6, 2008; EUGENE? Where's my fuckin' money, Eugene?

ranbo das posted:

I think assuming that you could destroy one carrier and assume that will result in the US backing down is wild no matter who is in office, and definitely not supported by history.

I was more assuming that the U.S. would not willingly put a carrier group(s) into such a disadvantaged position with the understanding that they will be used to wear away a defense network tied into an opponents industrial base.

Also need to account for anywhere else that may require a carrier group on station. 11 is a massive amount of carrier groups relative to anyone else but the world is a big place and U.S. obligations, alliances and opponents will demand the Navy's attention even if a naval war with China kicked off.

# ? May 7, 2024 16:54

Kraftwerk: Aug 13, 2011; i do not have 10,000 bircoins, please stop asking

ranbo das posted:

I think assuming that you could destroy one carrier and assume that will result in the US backing down is wild no matter who is in office, and definitely not supported by history.

You make a very good point here. Right now it seems as if the US is exasperated with interventionist conflicts now that Operation IF/EF is over and Afghanistan basically turned into the millennial equivalent of the Vietnam War.

But it's important to remember that 1930s America had very popular isolationist politics, had influential figures like Charles Lindbergh directly (or indirectly if you're feeling charitable and agree with his biographer) expressing support for Nazi ideals. History doesn't repeat itself but it kind of rhymes. We live in a world increasingly similar to the 1930s in terms of the zeitgeist. In many ways the war for Ukraine is playing out like the Spanish Civil war. Doesn't mean there's going to be a WW3 or anything, not what I'm suggesting. Just that America was very isolationist and very much indifferent to the plight of the people who were oppressed by the Nazis and Japanese right up until they weren't. It only took Pearl Harbor and we were off to the races.

PittTheElder posted:

This really isn't true. While it wasn't really appreciated just how decisive naval aviation would turn out to be, the US had already decided to pivot to carrier forces, with the Midways authorized and the first tranche laid down before Pearl Harbor ever happened.

The British had come to similar conclusions even earlier, and had even carried off a hugely successful carrier raid at Taranto while Pearl was still in the planning phases. They would have invested much more heavily in the fleet air arm as well, except for the part where they were flat broke already.

Yeah I think I put too much significance on attitudes in the 1920s that led to Billy Mitchell being court-martialed for longer than I needed to.

Kraftwerk fucked around with this message at 17:13 on May 7, 2024

# ? May 7, 2024 17:09

ought ten: Feb 6, 2004

Kraftwerk posted:

I do wonder if we're due for a major upset in how naval warfare works. I think most Navies are very much heavily refurbished cold war era affairs with much of the original technology mothballed or no longer in production.
I'm reasonably sure there's limited production capability for Mk.48 torpedos for example. Meanwhile the Harpoon missile is very much out of date and yesterday's news. Based on the kind of standoff capabilities the Chinese are building into their navies it sounds like Tomahawks will probably be more relevant in these engagements if they ever happen, but I digress.

Pre WW2 it was believed Battleships were the Queens of the sea and that they'd rule any engagement. Then the Japanese came along and decimated the British and American pacific fleets forcing the US to pivot to carriers due to the loss of their battleships. Thereafter, aircraft carriers have been the most valuable and important ships in Naval warfare till the 1990s.

Now I'm thinking you could potentially overwhelm a battlegroup with a swarm of drones and hypersonic missiles and even if you can't destroy it, you could potentially reduce its effectiveness or heavily damage it. Perhaps the naval warfare of the 21st century will be cheaper or more drone oriented.

Reuters just did an article yesterday to that effect. It's drones, and the USN isn't ready. https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/sea-drone-warfare-has-arrived-us-is-floundering-2024-05-06/

# ? May 7, 2024 17:15

Tigey: Apr 6, 2015

Kraftwerk posted:

Yeah I think I put too much significance on attitudes in the 1920s that led to Billy Mitchell being court-martialed for longer than I needed to.

The court decision was correct, as if you look at the images not only were those old battleships non-moving targets, they were also loaded in MAME and not on genuine hardware

# ? May 7, 2024 17:22

D-Pad: Jun 28, 2006

Don't forget by the end of the decade America is also going to have like 8 of the smaller amphibious assault ships which are basically small carriers. They are also planning on a few of them being stocked with nothing but F-35s instead of the usual mix of aircraft types that these carry.

https://www.twz.com/20201/the-next-america-class-amphibious-assault-ship-will-almost-be-in-a-class-of-its-own

https://www.twz.com/8798/heres-the-usmcs-plan-for-lightning-carriers-brimming-with-f-35bs

# ? May 7, 2024 17:40

mawarannahr: May 21, 2019

D-Pad posted:

Don't forget by the end of the decade America is also going to have like 8 of the smaller amphibious assault ships which are basically small carriers. They are also planning on a few of them being stocked with nothing but F-35s instead of the usual mix of aircraft types that these carry.

https://www.twz.com/20201/the-next-america-class-amphibious-assault-ship-will-almost-be-in-a-class-of-its-own

https://www.twz.com/8798/heres-the-usmcs-plan-for-lightning-carriers-brimming-with-f-35bs

They'll be lucky if that hunk of junk stays afloat at all. This is who's making them:
US Navy inspections of Ingalls-built ships uncovered significant problems, report shows

www.defensenews.com - Fri, 09 Oct 2020 posted:

WASHINGTON � Navy inspectors found serious technical issues across all three U.S. Navy ship classes being built at Ingalls Shipbuilding in Pascagoula, Mississippi in 2018 and 2019, according to an unclassified report sent to Congress earlier this year.

The Navy�s Board of Inspection and Survey, known as INSURV, which conducts acceptance trials for new ships, found that DDG-117, the Paul Ignatius, had the lowest overall score of any of the five previous destroyers built at Ingalls since the program restarted. And issues with the America-class amphibious assault ship Tripoli in 2018 set the service�s acceptance of the new ship back a whole year.

Both Ingalls' parent company Huntington Ingalls Industries and the Navy say all issues discovered on ships during acceptance trials are handled prior to delivery, and that Ingalls' ships have performed well recently. But the issues in 2018 and 2019 raise concerns about a shipyard the Navy depends heavily on as it tries to expand its fleet.

According to the annual unclassified INSURV report sent to Congress in April, the America class LHA, Arleigh Burke class DDG, and the San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock (LPD) all showed issues in multiple areas in recent years.

On the destroyer Ignatius, inspectors found four of what�s known as �starred deficiencies,� which the Navy�s INSURV instruction defines as a deficiency that significantly degrades the ships ability to perform a primary or secondary mission, or impacts the safety of the ship. Starred deficiencies must be corrected before delivery.

Starred deficiencies included shortcoming in aviation systems, intelligence collection systems and command and control systems. Other issues were discovered in the ship�s air intakes, generators, high-pressure air system and steering systems.

By way of comparison, the Bath Iron Works-built destroyer Thomas Hudner in 2019 scored the highest of any destroyer in the history of the program, the INSURV report said. Bath, which has had issues of its own, did not delivery a deficiency-free ship either, however. Inspectors found issues with the helicopter landing and undersea warfare systems.

On Tripoli, the INSURV report says that failures in the propulsion and anchoring systems, as well as production delays, pushed the acceptance trial back a whole year. On LPD-27, the Portland, the ship scored lower than any of the previous four ships over the past five years, with deficiencies in main engines, aviation, small boat handling, anchoring, generators and air search radar systems, the report found.

In a statement, Huntington Ingalls Industries spokesperson Becci Brenton pointed to increasing standards for ship acceptance on the part of INSURV, and said Ingalls is committed to fixing any issues that arise prior to delivery.

�Ingalls is committed to delivering quality ships to our Navy customer,� Brenton said in a statement. "An important part of this process involves INSURV providing the shipbuilder with a thorough inspection that sets and continues to raise the evaluation criteria to ensure the material readiness of the fleet.

�If there are system issues uncovered during the testing and grooming of ships, it is our responsibility to use our experience and shipbuilding expertise to create solutions that ensure that each ship performs its missions in a safe and reliable manner. We quickly respond to all deficiencies cited during ship inspections and those are corrected or resolved prior to delivery as Ingalls is dedicated to providing fully capable and operational ships to the Navy.�

Brenton also pointed to the recent delivery of the destroyer Delbert D. Black as an indication the Company is making good progress.

�DDG 119 (Ingalls' most recent delivered destroyer) received the best overall INSURV grade since the restart of the DDG program,� she said.

The Navy�s statement echoed much of what HII expressed, saying that Ingalls worked hard to fix deficiencies in a timely manner. The Navy also said the issue on Tripoli was largely driven by a new electric anchoring system that took time to get right.

�The Navy engaged with Ingalls management team regarding these areas of concern over the past year, and corrective actions were put in place,� said Navy spokesperson Lt. Courtney Callaghan.

Rising standards?

HII�s pointing to rising standards for accepting ships tracks with recent criticism the Navy has faced from both the Government Accountability Office and Congress. Both groups were unhappy about the service accepting ships that were either incomplete or that have significant deficiencies.

In a July 2017 report, the GAO said the Navy didn�t have consistent standards applied across its shipbuilding enterprise.

�The Navy�s ship delivery policy does not facilitate a process that provides complete and quality ships to the fleet and practices do not comport with policy,� the report said. "The policy emphasizes that ships should be defect-free and mission-capable, but lacks clarity regarding what defects should be corrected and by when.

�Without a clear policy, Navy program offices define their own standards of quality and completeness, which are not always consistent.�

For example, the GAO found that 25 of the 58 systems required to be certified for deployment on LPD-25 were incomplete at the time of the ship�s delivery, and 14 were still incomplete when the ship was transferred to the fleet. Multiple systems were found deficient while the ship was in the fleet, including an advanced electronics system that �controls nearly all systems and equipment on the ship,� the GAO found.

�The system has experienced widespread performance failures and the Navy has been unable to repair the ship efficiently, including during the post-delivery period and after the ship was provided to the fleet,� the report found. �As a result, the Navy is in the process of looking at incorporating a new system.�

Congressional authorizers, who tasked GAO with the report in the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act have been vocal about what they saw as the Navy loose standards around vessel delivery. Specifically, the committees were unhappy that the Navy took delivery of DDG-1000 from Bath Iron Works without a working combat system.

A change to the law forced the Navy to roll back its delivery date for Zumwalt to after it had its combat system installed at BAE Systems in San Diego.

# ? May 7, 2024 17:59

SlowBloke: Aug 14, 2017

Kraftwerk posted:

I do wonder if we're due for a major upset in how naval warfare works. I think most Navies are very much heavily refurbished cold war era affairs with much of the original technology mothballed or no longer in production.

European countries, especially the ones with Mediterranean ports, have relatively modern frigate class hulls (FREMM is 2010era, Horizon is 2000era for instance), anything heavier is refurbished Cold War kit.

Kraftwerk posted:

Now I'm thinking you could potentially overwhelm a battlegroup with a swarm of drones and hypersonic missiles and even if you can't destroy it, you could potentially reduce its effectiveness or heavily damage it. Perhaps the naval warfare of the 21st century will be cheaper or more drone oriented.

All of them are kinda hopeless against drone warfare since they don't have much antiair onboard, the otomelara autocannon could do antiair in a pinch with special ammo but it's not their main selling point.

# ? May 7, 2024 18:10

Kaal: May 22, 2002; through thousands of posts in D&D over a decade, I now believe I know what I'm talking about. if I post forcefully and confidently, I can convince others that is true. no one sees through my facade.

ought ten posted:

Reuters just did an article yesterday to that effect. It's drones, and the USN isn't ready. https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/sea-drone-warfare-has-arrived-us-is-floundering-2024-05-06/

Drones are potent and certainly offer novel threats to American carriers and destroyers, but there�s basically two major issues that have limited their widespread adoption:

First is that the technology is iterating so quickly that it�s difficult to commit to any individual drone program. There�s been several drone carrier proposals, but they often end up looking obsolete before they can get their feet under them. It�s a bit like during the beginning of the jet age, where the US would field a bunch of new aircraft and then retire all of them within a decade. That�s difficult to justify, particularly when the mindset is that navy ships should last for 30 years or more. The LCS ships, for example, are not lauded as being forward-thinking drone carriers ahead of their time - they�re seen as wasteful boondoggles.

Secondly, the issue is the tyranny of distance. This is particularly a problem in the Pacific Ocean, which is considered the greatest threat axis. Drones, cruise missiles, torpedoes, and other weapons just get swallowed up by the scale of the operational environment. That�s why the US has maintained its focus on aircraft carriers and aerial weapons. The sort of littoral threats being developed in the War in Ukraine have been concerning the US Navy for quite a while at this point, and their general solution has been to stay so far off the coast that they can essentially be out of reach - or at least will force attackers to come out into the open. As such, any American drone or cruise missile program has limited applicability to US doctrine.

While these two problems are certainly being worked on, they pose significant hurdles for the development of new American weapons in the near future. Given the geo-political situation, the US will likely wait and see what sort of technologies are successful in the War in Ukraine or are being built by China, Iran, North Korea, etc.

# ? May 7, 2024 18:11

Volmarias: Dec 31, 2002; EMAIL... THE INTERNET... SEARCH ENGINES...

Kraftwerk posted:

Just that America was very isolationist and very much indifferent to the plight of the people who were oppressed by the Nazis and Japanese right up until they weren't. It only took Pearl Harbor and we were off to the races.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but given the existing racism in the US, a lot of the racist rhetoric behind isolationism retreated with the isolationism as it became politically suicidal to suggest that perhaps America should not in fact show up to show Japan and Germany what's up. The Nazis even based their race science on a lot of work Americans had done in pursuit of pseudoscience. The racism didn't just go away with the war.

Volmarias fucked around with this message at 19:00 on May 7, 2024

# ? May 7, 2024 18:57

SpannerX: Apr 26, 2010; I had a beer with Stephen Harper once and now I like him.; Fun Shoe

mawarannahr posted:

They'll be lucky if that hunk of junk stays afloat at all. This is who's making them:
US Navy inspections of Ingalls-built ships uncovered significant problems, report shows

I can confirm, that shipyard sucks

# ? May 7, 2024 19:09

Kaiser Schnitzel: Mar 29, 2006; Schnitzel mit uns

General Dynamics owned shipyards seem to be the least bad ones. I don't know much about NASSCO's track record but BIW and Electric Boat seem much less delay/overrun prone than other US shipyards.

# ? May 7, 2024 19:27

mlmp08: Jul 11, 2004; Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration; Nap Ghost

Someone should start a whole thread about Taiwan invasion scenario derails in a new thread that I don't follow.

# ? May 8, 2024 00:15

Nitrox: Jul 5, 2002

WarpedLichen posted:

BBC reports that SBU claims they have foiled a Zelensky assassination plot and arrested some colonels:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-68968256?at_format=link&at_bbc_team=editorial

Those are some high ranking moles.

Jesus poo poo.

# ? May 8, 2024 00:49

Charliegrs: Aug 10, 2009

Nitrox posted:

Jesus poo poo.

Yeah I don't know what to make of it. How do you get that high up in rank while also being easily swayed to commit high treason?

# ? May 8, 2024 02:31

D-Pad: Jun 28, 2006

I feel like assassinating zelensky would just make him a martyr and galvanize the Ukrainians even more at a time when things are on shaky ground morale wise with Russian advances, failure of western support, debate over lowering conscription age etc. It seems counterproductive because it's not going to knock Ukraine out of the war.

# ? May 8, 2024 02:58

Nitrox: Jul 5, 2002

Charliegrs posted:

Yeah I don't know what to make of it. How do you get that high up in rank while also being easily swayed to commit high treason?

I imagine money was a factor

# ? May 8, 2024 03:43

Szarrukin: Sep 29, 2021

Charliegrs posted:

Yeah I don't know what to make of it. How do you get that high up in rank while also being easily swayed to commit high treason?

Corruption.

# ? May 8, 2024 03:50

D-Pad: Jun 28, 2006

D-Pad posted:

I have been thinking the same thing. I saw that robot dog with the flamethrower on its back the other day and thought about putting a small gun of some sort with a targeting computer on the back of one of those robot dogs and you could have several following around your infantry squad. It wouldn't have much range but I feel like you could design one that would be better than nothing. You'd want to make the gun/computer modular so you could plop it on whatever you wanted like tanks, apcs, your command HQ. Kind of a last line of defense against the small commercial drones coming to drop a grenade on your head.

https://www.twz.com/sea/rifle-armed-robot-dogs-now-being-tested-by-marine-special-operators

# ? May 8, 2024 03:58

Volmarias: Dec 31, 2002; EMAIL... THE INTERNET... SEARCH ENGINES...

Charliegrs posted:

Yeah I don't know what to make of it. How do you get that high up in rank while also being easily swayed to commit high treason?

Charitably, probably a combination of money, and threatening to reveal the other bribery they did to you which would not be very popular.

# ? May 8, 2024 04:39

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 7, 2024 14:27

nimby: Nov 4, 2009; The pinnacle of cloud computing.

D-Pad posted:

I feel like assassinating zelensky would just make him a martyr and galvanize the Ukrainians even more at a time when things are on shaky ground morale wise with Russian advances, failure of western support, debate over lowering conscription age etc. It seems counterproductive because it's not going to knock Ukraine out of the war.

It'd really depend on what context the assassination happens in. If it's just killing him, yeah that won't help Russia much. If it includes a concerted push along the front to capitalize on the chaos, or a coup from inside the military, that's something else.

# ? May 8, 2024 05:22

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > War in Ukraine CE: The Golf War

«‹›485 »