War in Ukraine CE: The Golf War

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

(Thread IKs: fatherboxx)

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

US Senior Defense Official (SDO) brief re: Ukraine today. Intro then excerpts as I choose.

Press Briefing:
https://www.defense.gov/News/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/3351824/senior-defense-official-holds-a-background-briefing-on-ukraine/
Press Release with PDA (fast from US stocks, $500 milion) and USAI (weeks to months/years contracted from industry, $2.1 billion)
https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3350958/biden-administration-announces-additional-security-assistance-for-ukraine/

Highlights:
-SDO says lines largely static with significant artillery exchanges, but not much maneuver, and aim is to assist Ukraine go on counteroffensive [My note: just in the lasts 24-48 hours, some reports that Bakhmut lines might be moving in Russia's favor, but it's been months to move a matter of single-digit kilometers, and Bakhmut was originally thought to be potentially falling/evacuated a month ago]
-Four efforts: 1: Improved layered air defenses; 2: deliver steady flow of artillery rounds, other ammunition, spare parts, and maintenance support; 3: Armor (vehicle) donations; 4: train combined arms combat and maneuver
-SDO says US "understands" Ukrainian strategy in holding Bakhmut. Says Ukraine still has forces to pursue next phase of the war.
-When asked about US contracting for 122mm (soviet design) vs 155mm, the answer is kind of wishy-washy. Providing ammo for legacy guns, because Ukraine has them, but also there's a clear hunger for ammo amounts that the US and partners cannot sustain only from 155mm, though efforts are underway to increase 155mm production. [But the US has pretty publicly stated in press briefings and talks outside of this one that 155mm (and some other munitions) are not produced at a sufficient rate to meet demands due to prioritizing efficiency over raw production numbers.] I left all the howitzer discussion in, because there's a fair amount of reading between lines, especially when combined with past US statements over the past 6+ months about ordnance production numbers and drawdown of stocks.
-SDO does not say Wagner will be replaced or leadership in any domestic danger, just points out that there is squabbling, when asked about it
-No substantive update on Patriot employment or delivery timeline, Abrams delivery timeline.

quote:

STAFF: Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for joining us today for this background call. Joining us today is (inaudible) will be on background today with attribution to "a senior defense official".

And with that, I will turn it over to (inaudible).

SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Great, thank you.

Good afternoon, everyone. I am proud to announce a substantial new package of security assistance for Ukraine. Let me first offer some broader context, and then what I'll do is I'll summarize the capabilities that are included in this package today.

The war is at an important stage. Fighting continues in the east, but there have not been significant recent shifts in territorial control. The front lines are relatively static with significant exchanges of artillery, but without significant maneuver gains by either side.

As we have said previously, our focus is on supporting the Ukrainians to change the dynamic on the ground. We want to help Ukraine advance and hold its positions in what we expect will be a Ukrainian counteroffensive.

We continue to pursue that objective in several ways, including by working with allies and partners to provide new and significant capabilities and training. First, we have focused on enabling a layered and integrated approach to air defense; second, we are delivering a steady flow of artillery rounds and other ammunition, as well as spare parts and maintenance support to help sustain Ukraine's fight; third, we have marshalled commitments of important armor capabilities to enhance Ukraine's ability to conduct complex maneuvers; and fourth, to bring all of these capabilities to bear in a coordinated manner, we have expanded U.S.-led training of Ukraine's forces to focus on combined arms and joint maneuver operations.

We are putting all of these pieces together to provide full, lasting, combat-credible capabilities covering all of the steps from the donation, to the training, to the maintenance and sustainment. The substantial resources the United States has committed to Ukraine reflects the American interests and values that are at stake.

Judging from the significant commitments that our allies and partners have made, the stakes for Europe and the larger world are widely-recognized, as well. Allies stepped up again two weeks ago at the last meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group chaired by Secretary Austin. In fact, when you look at security assistance for Ukraine as a percentage of GDP, among the top 20 donors, the United States is roughly in the middle.

And today, on all days, as we welcome Finland's accession to NATO, I want to point out that Finland is one of the highest contributors to Ukraine both in percentage of GDP terms and in total dollars spent on military assistance. We look forward to an even closer relationship with Finland now that it has officially become the 31st NATO ally.

The package we are announcing today will complement many of the capabilities our allies and partners are providing. So this is a two-part package. It includes $2.1 billion in additional commitments for procurement under the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, as well as a drawdown of equipment from U.S. inventories valued at $500 million. As you know, drawdown and USAI authorities operate on different timelines, and our dual approach demonstrates our commitment to Ukraine's near-term needs, as well as its enduring strength over the longer term.

The full list of capabilities in this package was posted on the DOD website as always, so I'm not going to actually run through every single capability, but I want to summarize by describing three main categories of items.

First, the package includes important capabilities for air defense and to counter Russian unmanned aerial systems. This includes additional interceptors for both Patriot and NASAMS air defense systems, and it also includes new counter-UAS capabilities such as the 30-mm gun trucks to detect and intercept drones such as the Iranian-built Shaheds.

Second, in the category of fires, the package includes a range of items to help Ukraine sustain its fight. This includes additional Guided Multiple Launch Rocket Systems, or as we call them, GMLRS, as well as 155-mm artillery rounds, including Excaliber precision-guided rounds. It also includes additional mortar rounds, which continue to help ensure Ukraine has a layered indirect fires capability, including to support the close fight as its forces maneuver to push back Russian lines.

Third, the package includes several capabilities to support U.S.-provided armor. That includes 120-mm ammunition, which will support Ukraine's newly-formed armored tank battalions, as well as Abraham -- Abrams tanks that the United States has committed, 25-mm ammunition, which can be used on the Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicles that the United States previously committed, and also recovery vehicles and refuelers to keep the armor in the fight.

As I said at the top, we are focused both on the here and now and on the future. This dual package combining drawdown and procurement reflects that approach. The U.S. remains committed to the cause of a free and secure Ukraine.

And now, I look forward to taking your questions.

...

Q: Hi. Thank you. Two things. If you could just update us, for the senior defense official. Can you give us an update on training numbers, the total that have been trained, including on the -- on the Abrams, but as well, on all of the other training that's been going on in Europe?

And secondly, can you give us a better sense of the -- the communications, the satellite communications that's being provided. Is that Starlink, or is that paying for the -- an ongoing capability that the Starlink has provided, or is it a -- a different capability? Can you just help us understand what that is? Thank you.

SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Sure. I took down three -- three things then. In terms of the -- the training numbers, at this point, I think our numbers stand at more than 4,000 Ukrainian soldiers making up two brigades that were trained recently. Now, one of those brigades was for the Bradleys, and one was equipped with the Strykers. That was the training program in Grafenwoehr. But you know, when you look at the total training numbers since -- since the invasion last year, we -- we're up to more than 7,000 members trained of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

Abrams training has not yet begun, so we will -- we will give you a heads-up as we start that training program. We are still working on the equipment procurement, so we haven't -- we have not yet begun the training, but I would expect that that will happen relatively soon.

In terms of satellite communications, in this particular package, we are looking at a number of equipment items, but I can't comment on specific vendors because there is a -- a contracting process that is -- that is underway, so I just -- I can't get into that.

...

Q: Thank you so very much. I actually have a couple of questions.

One is equipment specific. Can you provide more details about what kind of gun trucks -- the 30 millimeter gun trucks, what kind of counter-UAS laser-guided rocket systems and what kind of precision aerial munitions are in this package? That's the first question.

Second question is is there any concern about the equipment that's been provided to Ukraine being used in Bakhmut? And is there any concern about the amount of effort and casualties that Ukraine is taking to defend that city, in terms of a -- a -- whether that affects the counter-offensive that's looming? Thanks.

SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Thank you. OK, several things.

So on the equipment, the specific equipment items, the gun trucks are a new item from -- from the United States. We're providing nine. They're called counter-UAS 30 millimeter gun trucks, and our expectation is that these will be able to detect and intercept drones, including the Iranian-built Shaheds, and it's -- it's a -- it's literally what it sounds like, a 30 millimeter gun mounted on a truck. Because that's procurement, it's going to take several months to be able to actually provide that to Ukraine.

And then I think you also asked about the 10 -- these are 10 mobile counter-UAS laser-guided rocket systems. These are going to enable -- this is also a new item -- this will enable Ukraine to fire precision rockets from mobile positions and they will use the APKWS, Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System, laser-guided munitions, again, to counter the drone threat, and the APKWS is something that was previously provided.

And then let's see here. On the precision -- the precision aerial munitions, that is -- that is a reference to JDAM, the Joint Direct Attack Munitions, and that also is through -- through procurement. So it will take a bit of time.

And in terms of your question more broadly about, you know, equipment being used in -- in Bakhmut, as -- as you know, we are in very close communication with the Ukrainian leadership team, the Ukrainian Armed Forces and the Ukrainian political leadership, and, you know, we -- we understand the -- the strategy that they have decided to pursue.

We absolutely are seeing the devastating loss of life that Russia is experiencing, with Wagner forces essentially being, you know, thrown -- thrown into a meat grinder and Russian forces being fixed in position because of the -- the robust Ukrainian defenses.

And so certainly we understand Ukraine's strategy and we are very confident that they do have the equipment that they need and that, as we are -- as we are helping them to field these newly trained forces, they do have the capabilities to be able to pursue whatever this next phase -- next phase looks like on the battlefield.

STAFF: Great, thank you. Our next question, we'll go to Alex Horton, Washington Post.

Q: Hey, thanks for doing this, SDO. I -- I -- I'm glad you brought up Bakhmut and equipment there. I was just outside the city a couple of weeks ago and I spoke to a battery commander who has D-30s. He wants M777s, doesn't have them, and his problem is running out of artillery shells for that. I see USAI is going to provide the 122 millimeter that would be used for this -- for this piece but it's simply becoming a math problem. Your ability to sustain artillery rounds is for the M777, not -- not what they mostly have, which is Soviet caliber.

So I'm -- I'm curious if -- if you are doing anything to combat this math problem? Are there any issues that you could, you know, address, like procuring the Soviet ammunition? And do you think maybe that the drip and drab approach to meter, you know, U.S. and NATO stockpile of howitzers, have -- have you come to see any flaws in that, now that they're running out of ammunition that you can't readily supply?

SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Great. So yeah, there's a lot of things that we are doing collaboratively with the Ukrainians on this question of both -- both the howitzers and the actual ammunition supplies.

So I'll start with just the fact that we're incredibly transparent with the Ukrainians. So they have a really good understanding of what ammunition we are planning to provide, when we are planning to provide it, you know, what caliber is this for -- you know, for the M777, as -- as you mentioned. Is this for Soviet-type artillery pieces?

So that enables them to be able to plan their operations and understand where they need to flow their -- their equipment. So that's the first thing. And again, we have this continual conversation with them, not just about what they need right now but what � but what are they going to need in the future, and that's where we can plan to be able to time our deliveries to support what they need on the battlefield.

In terms of the -- you know, the challenge of -- of maintaining sufficient supply of ammunition of whatever caliber, I think we're at this really helpful inflection point right now because previously, the U.S. and most of the allies were just drawing down from their own stocks when it came to Western caliber -- you mentioned the, you know, 155 for the -- for the -- say, the M777 howitzer, for instance. And obviously, there's a finite supply in our own stocks.

But now, we're at this point where we are also doing a healthy amount of procurement because of increased production of ammunition. And the U.S. was -- was really at the front end of this wave, increasing production and procurement of 155 ammunition.

So today, when Ukraine gets their deliveries of 155 from the United States, they're getting deliveries that include ammunition we procured from USAI many, many months ago. So that is starting to come online. But other allies are also starting to boost production. You -- I'm sure you heard about the EU announcement to significantly increase ammunition production in Europe.

So all of this is coming online in the next several months to be able to enable -- enable this to be a sustainable support mechanism for Ukraine.

Now, you also mentioned the -- the availability of -- of howitzers, and I want to emphasize that this is another area where we feel like we have provided the right -- the right capability, the right numbers of -- of howitzers, both the M777, as I mentioned, but also we've had a number of allies providing other Western-type howitzers, whether you're talking, you know, the -- the French CAESAR or other capabilities.

We want to make sure that those howitzers can be kept in the fight, and so that's why you see us focusing also on things like barrel replacement. These -- these howitzers are getting a lot of use. So we have redoubled our efforts on -- on -- on making sure that they are capable.

And then on maintenance, we -- we have tele-maintenance that -- that is possible so that, whether it's a howitzer or -- or -- or, you know, an infantry fighting vehicle, Ukrainian Armed Forces, you know, soldiers far -- far into the field can call back and get assistance from U.S. and allied partners to be able to repair and not necessarily have to actually take that capability offline.

But lastly, you can tell this is a topic I like to talk about. Lastly, in terms of the -- the, what we call non-standard caliber, this is basically Soviet-type artillery and ammunition, we have found many sources of this around the world.

So, you'll -- you did notice, I think, in this USAI package we have a number of different caliber of non-standard ammunition, mortars, et cetera. And so, we will continue to procure the use -- the use capabilities for the Ukrainians because we recognize that they still do have a lot of Soviet-type equipment. And if we can keep it in the fight we can enable their effectiveness.

All right, thank you.

Q: Great. What about -- a question to that. I appreciate it. What's the plan when they run out -- the Soviet and Russian-type of ammunition and they don't have enough M777 to replace them?

SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Well, I think we're always looking at what their total capability needs are. And we are always able to look at providing them with more, whether it's through procurement or through our own stocks. And that -- and that's not just true of Howitzers, that's -- that's across the board true. So, we're always evaluating those -- those total requirements.

STAFF: Great. Our next question will go to Carla Babb, "VOA."

Q: Hey, thanks for doing this. Appreciate it. I just wanted to follow up some of the news we're hearing about Wagner Group, that there are reports out there from the U.K. Defense Ministry that they're seeing signs that the Russians are looking to replace Wagner Group. What can you tell us about that?

SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Well, I'm not familiar with the -- the specific report that you mentioned, Carla. But I can say, you know, in general, what we have seen from Wagner on the battlefield is an incredible brutality in their -- in their operations. And on the part of their leadership, a real disregard for the lives of these Russian Wagner fighters.

We also do certainly see, you know, tension and infighting at the leadership levels. This is not just in terms of, you know, Wagner leadership but really across the board within, you know, Russian leadership we certainly are seeing a good deal of squabbling, I would say.

STAFF: Great, thank you. We'll get through a few more here. James Levinson, "Fox."

...

Q: No, that's perfect, ma'am. Thank you.

So as regard to the mobile UAS laser-guided rocket systems, is that part of the January JCO test that was aimed at finding systems like that? And if so, is this the first time the U.S. has sent a new experimental system that was designed explicitly for Ukraine in mind to Ukraine? Or is this part of an ongoing effort? Thank you.

SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Thanks. I would characterize this as part of an ongoing effort. But I am not familiar with the specifics of that -- that test. So I'd have to -- I'd have to get back to you with -- with that very specific detail.

Q: No worries. And -- and these are for the Shaheds as well, right?

SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I'm sorry, yes. This is -- this is aimed at countering the Shaheds, among other -- among other drone threats.

# ¿ Apr 5, 2023 02:10

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 21, 2024 00:33

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

Orthanc6 posted:

What's the expected timeline for these replacing the current arsenal of 5.56? Cause that sounds like a timeline for Ukraine and Taiwan getting more hand-me-down guns and ammo than their bodies have room for.

The US is not fully replacing M4A1s or 5.56 weapons in general. FN still has a contract to make new-build M4A1s for the US military for years to come. The new weapons aren't replacing M4A1s for everyone in the US army and the army isn't expected to have its own 6.8mm ammo production online for a few more years from now. So the US won't be done with 5.56 or M4A1s any time this decade and probably not next decade either.

# ¿ Apr 5, 2023 04:44

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

The most trivial Crimea takeover, from a combat perspective, might�ve been 2014.

# ¿ Apr 6, 2023 02:43

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

ranbo das posted:

One of the examples they give when they're telling you about what will get you in trouble when you're getting your first clearance is something classified being in the newspapers, on TV and on Wikipedia.

Depending on your clearance there's a nonzero chance that you end up hooked to a polygraph test some day with a person from the Bureau asking questions about if you've ever saw classified information you weren't cleared for and that's a really bad time to have to explain yourself.

Absolutely no one is losing a clearance because they saw the news talk about the pentagon papers or a twitter embed populated.

The extreme dipshits are people who say they have clearances and seek out leaked documents to see for themselves. Bonus points if they�re so stupid that they comment, even obliquely, on their own take of the contents and/or repost those documents elsewhere or save them for their own files. Plenty enough total dipshits have done those things online over the last few days and talked about it.

# ¿ Apr 10, 2023 14:46

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

Cpt_Obvious posted:

Generally speaking, if the crew chamber is ever exposed to heat capable of igniting fuel or ammo then everyone inside is dead anyway.

Not when we're talking about HEAT and other intrusions that could set off a catastrophic kill but might only wound crew or kill one while the rest bail out or otherwise cause serious, but survivable damage. In that immediate battle, the vehicle is probably out of action regardless, but crew surviving to live another day or a vehicle being either repairable or able to be used for parts is a lot better than being blown apart entirely in a k-kill.

# ¿ Apr 15, 2023 22:39

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

SECDEF and CJCS did a press conference following the latest Ukraine Contact Group meeting.
https://www.defense.gov/News/Transc...-chiefs-of-sta/

Highlights, then intro and excerpts as I choose.

-US feels ground-based air defense (GBAD) more important than fighter jets right now (in response to question about supplying fighters)
-GBAD is a critical effort presently to protect critical and civil infrastructure from Russian aerial attack (My note: It has, as of this post writing, been an unusually long time since Russia launched a cruise missile attack using their bomber forces or navy. Since last fall, they have generally conducted 1-2 cruise missile attacks per month. It has been well over a month since Russia conduted a coordinated cruise missile attack.)
-2,500 Ukrainian troops training in Germany on combined arms now
-8,800 have completed training and returned to Ukraine
-Abrams training will begin in a few weeks (but the delivery is still something like months away)
-Multiple armor brigades* are trained and equipped for whatever task they may receive (US is being careful not to state when/if/where any offensive may or may not occur. Armored units can also prove vital to turning the tables in a defense).

quote:

STAFF: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for being here today. It is my pleasure to introduce Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin III, and chairman of the Joint Chiefs Staff, General Mark Milley. The secretary and the chairman will deliver opening remarks, and then we'll have some time to take a few questions. Please note that I will moderate those questions and call on journalists. Due to time constraints, I would ask those I call on to limit their follow-up questions to give your colleagues a chance to ask their questions, and I appreciate your assistance with this.

With that, Secretary Austin?

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE LLOYD J. AUSTIN III: Thanks, Patrick.

And good afternoon, everyone. Nearly one year ago, I first convened what became the Ukraine Defense Contact Group right here at Ramstein. Our goal was to improve the coordination of our support for Ukraine as it fought back against Russia's reckless and lawless invasion.

Over the past year, this Contact Group has become an extraordinary community of action, and together, we have rallied to defend the principles of democracy and freedom and sovereignty. So we're all back here at Ramstein a year later to build on that impressive progress.

Over the past year, the members of this Contact Group have provided tremendous capability to Ukraine. Right after Russia invaded, we surged in Javelins and Stingers, and then we provided Ukraine's defenders with howitzers and HIMARS and other artillery, and we continue to rush in ground-based air defense capabilities and munitions to help Ukraine control its sovereign skies and to help Ukraine defend its citizens from Russian cruise missiles and Iranian drones.

Our collective efforts have made a huge difference on the battlefield, and now, in just a few short months, the Contact Group has delivered more than 230 tanks, more than 1,550 armored vehicles and other equipment and munitions to support more than nine new armored brigades. We've also expedited our M1 Abrams timelines to supply Ukraine with more armored capability in the coming months, and the M1s that the Ukrainians will use for training will arrive here in Germany in the next few weeks. And all of this is huge progress, and I am confident that this equipment and the training that accompanied it � it will put Ukraine's forces in a position to continue to succeed on the battlefield.

Ukraine forces have formidable capability and courage, as we have seen throughout, and all of this progress rests on the coordinated work of some-50 nations of goodwill that have gathered again today.

Now, let me say just a few words about the reports of unauthorized disclosure of sensitive and classified U.S. material. I take this matter extremely seriously, and we will continue to work closely and � with our deeply-valued allies and partners in a spirit of abiding respect and friendship. As I have discussed this issue with our allies and partners, I've been struck by their solidarity and their commitment to reject efforts to divide us, so nothing will fracture our unity or reduce our determination.

Now, I'm grateful to my good friend Oleksii Reznikov for joining us at Ramstein, and he once again gave us all a first-hand account of the battlefield dynamics, highlighting Ukraine's most urgent needs in the critical months ahead.

We also heard from my colleagues in U.S. European Command about the progress on building Ukraine's combat power as Ukraine prepares to push back the lines of Russian invade � invaders, and we talked about key enablers that will help Ukraine repel Russian forces such as heavy equipment and transport vehicles and refuelers and mine rollers. And I'd like to thank those here who announced donations of these important systems, including Germany and the Netherlands. We also discussed ways to intensify our sustainment in industrial base initiatives.

Now, Russia has continued its assault on civilian targets in Ukraine, including schools and theaters and apartment buildings, and those targets have absolutely no military value whatsoever. So we're helping Ukraine defend its citizens and its skies against Russian missiles and Iranian drones.

Now, many Contact Group members have stepped up with new air defense systems and critically-needed ammunition for those systems, and we're going to stay focused on the key capabilities that Ukraine needs right now, as well as in the medium term.

Now, we also heard today from the European Union on its proposal to speed up the production and delivery of ammunition for Ukraine, and more countries are thinking about how they can increase industrial production not just for the near term, but also for the medium term and the long term, and that is a powerful reminder that we stand with Ukraine's defenders for the long haul.

You know, Putin made a series of grave miscalculations when he ordered the invasion of Ukraine more than a year ago. He thought that Ukraine wouldn't dare to fight back, but Ukraine is standing strong with the help of its partners. Putin thought that our unity would fracture, but Russia's cruel war of choice has only brought us closer together. And I'd note that Finland, which has long taken part in this contact group, is here today as a new NATO ally. I expect that Sweden will soon follow, and that makes something crystal clear � Putin's war of choice is not the result of NATO enlargement, Putin's war is the cause of NATO's enlargement.

You know, when I first convened this contact group, I saw nations of goodwill that were eager to help Ukraine resist Russia's imperial aggression, I saw a coalition that stood united and firm, I saw countries determined to stand up for an open and secure world of rights and rules, and all of that was just as true at Ramstein today as it was a year ago.

The Ukrainians are still standing strong in their fight for their freedom and they have the courage and the capability for the road ahead and we will have their backs for as long as it takes.

And so with that, I'll turn it over to the Chairman.

GENERAL MARK A. MILLEY: Thank you, Secretary, and I want to start off by thanking Secretary Austin for his leadership over the past year in this 11th Ukrainian Defense Contact Group, which has resulted in enormous support to Ukraine, not only from the countries of Europe but really from the globe, and it really wouldn't be happening without Secretary Austin's leadership. So thank you, sir.

And thanks also to the ministers and chiefs of defense from over 50 countries that attended today and have consistently attended now for a year, and their participation and support is critical to the capability of the Ukrainian military to defend itself.

It's been nearly a year since Secretary Austin began this contact group right here at Ramstein and this forum has been vital to coordinate and synchronize the support, continued international support, to Ukraine.

I also want to thank Ukrainian Minister of Defense Reznikov and � and my colleague and partner, Chief of Defense General Zaluzhnyi, whom I've had a chance to contact in the last week or so, and his representative here, General Moisuk, for their continued leadership. I also congratulate Finland on their accession into NATO. This historic event marks a deepening of the NATO alliance and reaffirms to the world the strength of this relationship.

But this is not just about the United States and European security. NATO and this contact group helped to uphold something bigger than that. They uphold the global international order, where all nations can live in peace and can prosper, a world that respects sovereignty and the rule of law, a world that counters unbridled military aggression.

421 days ago, Putin thought he could overthrow the Ukrainian government, thought he could fracture NATO as he launched an unprovoked war of aggression, with hundreds of thousands of Russian forces crossing the border on multiple avenues of approach. He was wrong. Ukraine's spirit remains unbroken.

There are now 31 members of NATO and NATO is even stronger and united in the face of Russia's aggression and its attack on the rules-based order. The United States and the members of this contact group remain committed to supporting Ukraine as it fights for freedom against Russia's illegal and unprovoked invasion.

To date, the United States has committed more than $35 billion in military assistance, including over two million tank and artillery rounds, tens of thousands of anti-armor weapons systems, air defense systems, and other forms of munitions, hundreds of tanks and armored vehicles, precision aerial munitions and counter-UAS capabilities.

In addition, there's about 2,500 Ukrainian soldiers conducting training right now in Germany. Another 8,800, almost 9,000 have completed training and have returned to Ukraine. And there are 65 Ukrainians that completed training on Patriot missile systems just recently.

Since the early phases of this war and for every month since, the United States has provided Ukraine with the capabilities to defend itself, and in conjunction with our allies and partners, we have delivered. This coalition will continue to provide vital training and additional capabilities for air defense and maneuver to enable Ukraine's ongoing fight.

Air defense munitions, air defense capabilities, tank munitions, armored vehicle capabilities, artillery ammunition, artillery tubes androckets, and spare parts remain critical as Ukraine protects its cities and expels the Russian menace from its territory.

Our countries and the countries of Europe have pledged that Ukraine will have the capabilities it needs to execute their missions on their own timeline and we have pledged that support for as long as it takes, as the Secretary just said. This week, the United States announced our latest security assistance package as part of our ongoing commitment to Ukraine.

As we stand here today, the Ukrainian military continues to perform very well. Intense fighting in and around Bakhmut continues and has for several months. Russia is expending significant manpower for very little gain. Russia is intensifying indiscriminate shelling in Avdiivka and other cities and urban areas. And Russia continues to pay severely for its war of choice.

Unlike the Ukrainian forces who are highly motivated to fight for their country, to fight for their freedom, their democracy and their way of life, the Russians lack in leadership, they lack will, the morale is poor, and their discipline is eroding.

Russia has resorted to tightening conscription laws as they indiscriminately feed their citizens into the chaos of war, and so far, they've been quite ineffective in their coordination or direction of combined arms maneuver on the battlefield.

Over the past year, Russia's temporary territorial gains have come with enormous losses. Hundreds of thousands of Russians have fled their country, in addition to the casualties. They are trying to avoid fighting in Putin's war.

Russia continues to fail in achieving its strategic objectives. They failed to seize Kyiv, they failed to topple the Ukrainian government, and they failed to fracture NATO. In fact, they've done just the opposite. Kyiv stands, the people of Ukraine are emboldened, and NATO has never been stronger.

As President Biden and Secretary Austin have repeatedly said, the United States remains committed for as long as it takes.

Thank you and I look forward to your questions.

STAFF: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Thank you, Chairman. Our first question will go to Rachel Cohen, Defense News.

Q: Hi, thank you for doing this. I have one question for each of you. Mr. Chairman, we know from the recent leaks that the Pentagon was bullish on Ukraine's chances of retaking much territory in the spring counter-offensive. Is that still your assessment now or what has changed? And are you concerned that spring conditions on the ground will slow things down?

And then for Secretary Austin, looking at the current crisis in Sudan, what lessons learned from the Afghanistan evacuation are shaping your efforts to prepare to get U.S. embassy staff out of Sudan? And has the State Department asked you to begin that process?

GEN. MILLEY: Well, let me � let me start by saying that I'm not going to comment on future operations specifically or any of the substance that's in any of these leaks that are out there.

But I will say that our task and our commitment to Ukraine was to provide the � the training and the equipment for up to nine brigades, armored brigades, armored mech brigades to conduct either offensive or defensive operations. Those brigades are trained, they're manned and they're equipped, and they are prepared for combat operations. So whenever and wherever Ukraine chooses to use them, we will continue that support, and I am very confident in those units' ability to succeed.

...

Q: My question is going to � to � to both, calling fighter jets. Ukraine said that they need more fighter jets. Poland has just delivered MiGs. Did you talk about fighter jets? And how helpful could they be for Ukraine?

SEC. AUSTIN: Right now, what � what we all believe is what Ukraine needs most urgently is ground-based air defense capability. That is what has enabled them to prevent the Russian air forces from having a meaning �meaningful impact in this fight. And so you've heard us say that for the last several months. We will continue to say that because that is what is � is � is most important in the current � in the future of fight, the immediate future. We have to make sure that the � the Ukrainians have the ability to protect their infrastructure, protect their citizens, but also protect troops that the troops are maneuvering. So we � we continue to engage our partners and � and � and allies and � and emphasize that we need to do everything we can to ensure that Ukraine has adequate air defense � ground-based air defense capability.

And I have to applaud the � the work that our partners are doing. Where possible, they're stepping up to the plate. I believe that � that we can still do more, and I'm asking them to do more, and I believe that they will respond, so �

STAFF: Okay, our next question will go to Will Dunlop, Agence France-Presse.

Q: Thank you.

Secretary Austin, are Contact Group members working to speed up deliveries of military supplies, especially key items such as artillery rounds, ahead of Ukraine's counteroffensive? And does Ukraine have the items it needs for that offensive?

And Chairman Milley, do you think the Abrams tanks will have a significant impact once they arrive on the battlefield in Ukraine? The U.S. has previously expressed concerns about logistics and sustainment for the tanks. Have those concerns been sufficiently addressed? Thank you.

...

GEN. MILLEY: So on the M1 tank, you know, I'm biased, but I think the M1 tank's the best tank in the world. There are other tanks that are quite good. Leopards, for example, are being provided, as well. But I do think the M1 tank, when it is delivered, will make a difference.

Now, let me distinguish between � in a couple of weeks you're going to get training tanks � those aren't quite combat-capable � and they'll be used to train the crews on how to shoot, maneuver and maintain these tanks, and that'll be part of the sustainment package to get them trained up as the other tanks are � are � are being refurbished in order for � to accelerate their delivery. But when they do get here and those crews are trained and they're used in a combined-arms maneuver tactic in combination with mech infantry, the Bradleys, they'll be very effective.

But I would also caution, there's no silver bullet in war. It's a � it's a � war is � the outcomes of battles and wars are the function of many, many variables. And in this case, you � you would have to make sure that your tanks are used in combined arms with mechanized infantry, artillery, all of that is synchronized with dismounted forces, et cetera. So there is no silver bullet in this case, but I do think the M1 tank, when it's delivered and it reaches its operational capability, that it will be very effective on the battlefield.

STAFF: Thank you. And our last question will go to Anne-Claire Coudray, TF1.

Q: Thank you. One question for Secretary Lloyd Austin. Do you really believe in a (inaudible) counter-offensive? Because here today, we mainly hear about sustainability and long-term aid, and if this counteroffensive doesn't lead to Ukrainian victory quickly, do you think that the Biden administration will still have the support of the American people to continue to help Ukraine?

And if I have the time, one quick question to General Miley (sic). You have been asked about jets, but is there any chance that the United States change their mind about the delivery of F-16? Thank you.

SEC. AUSTIN: So, (Clair ?), your question is whether or not we can expect to have � continue to have support for Ukraine. Well, we � we've enjoyed strong support from the American people throughout for � for this� this effort, this campaign, and that support has enabled the Ukrainians to be as successful as they have been on the battlefield. I have to credit the Ukrainians for their will to fight, for the ingenuity, for their professionalism, for their leadership. But even when you have all of that, you can't get it done unless you have the right gear and � and the � and � and you are able to sustain your efforts. And so we've worked together to help create the dynamics that we've seen thus far...

...

GEN. MILLEY: So on the F-16 or any other fourth generation aircraft from any other country, I would � you know, first of all, those are policy questions that'll be made by political leaders, but from a military perspective, the task is to control the airspace.

How you control that airspace can be done in many, many different ways. The most cost effective, efficient and � way to do that right now for Ukraine and the fastest way to do that for Ukraine is through air defense. They've been doing it for over a year now.

They've been denying the airspace to effective Russian use. The Russians have been flying some sorties in Ukraine but limited amounts of sorties over Russian-occupied Ukraine. They have � Russians have not done battlefield air interdiction deep into Ukraine territory, except through missiles and rockets that have been fired from over Russian territory.

Why is that done by the Russians? Because the Ukrainians are shooting Russian aircraft down. So the Russians are cautious to come into Ukraine because of the effective use of the Ukrainian air defense system. That is the most critical thing right now, is that air defense system, to make sure that it is robust, it's rigorous, it's deep, and it's layered from high altitude to mid altitude to low altitude and from short range, mid range to long range. And the front line forces � the Ukrainian front line forces need to be protected.

That's the most important, critical military task right now. That was the theme of this entire day, was air defense, air defense, air defense, to make sure that Ukraine can defend its airspace.

In terms of the aircraft themselves, there's a long lead time for � for training of pilots, et cetera, and the Russians have a significant amount of air power. And to take the Ukrainian Air Force from where it is today and to build it up to match the Russian Air Force, that's a significant level of effort by lots of countries, and those policy choices may or may not be made down the road and we'll see where that goes.

But right now, the immediate need is air defense.

*a note on brigades. US brigade combat teams are pretty large and heavy, and it does not sound like the Ukrainian brigades are approaching that size. Some of the examples in past interviews have referred to a brigade size of around 2,000 troops. In contrast, in the US, an armored brigade combat team is just over 4,000 troops. Styker and Infantry brigade combat teams are over 4,500 troops. Ukrainian units do not look like US force structure. https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2021-05/57088-Force-Structure-Primer.pdf

# ¿ Apr 22, 2023 00:10

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

Warbadger posted:

Pilot error insofar as the pilot deliberately doing the multiple tasks necessary to release a weapon without actually intending to release a weapon is a lot less likely than you'd think. Equipment malfunction is flat out not a realistic cause,

Equipment malfunction in the sense of "it was supposed to use wings and glide, but it fell like a rock" is totally possible. Or "guidance failure," which can and has put bombs miles off target. One of the most infamous examples of the latter was a UK flight trying to hit a bridge, but guidance failure put two bombs squarely into a civilian marketplace.

Otherwise, accidental/negligent weapon release is rare, but it happens. A NATO air patrol fired an AMRAAM into a baltic nation a few years back. I've been at an airfield where everything shut down because someone screwed up and plopped live munitions directly out of their aircraft and onto an operational munitions handling area. I was also at an airfield where a pilot practicing emergency landings actually punched off his fuel tanks, which then went bouncing into a public street.

AMRAAM:
https://theaviationgeekclub.com/pilot-error-to-blame-for-accidental-firing-of-aim-120-over-estonia/

Russians accidentally firing at Russian onlookers during a flyby/demonstration:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/sep/19/russian-helicopter-accidentally-fires-rocket-onlookers-zapad-war-games

A-10s accidentally drop training bombs near highway in Florida:
https://people.com/human-interest/air-force-bombs-florida-training-accident/

US F-16 accidentally drops training round on civilian property in Japan
https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/24173-usaf-f-16-accidentally-releases-dummy-bomb-in-japan

quote:

The Japanese defense ministry lodged a complaint with the U.S. military over the incident. �The dropped object is quite heavy and it must not happen.

# ¿ Apr 23, 2023 15:19

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

Warbadger posted:

Congratulations, you've just listed a bunch of cases where people did all the things necessary to launch a weapon, causing a weapon to launch in what amounts to "dropped the bomb in the wrong place", plus one extra-not-applicable "intentionally fired live munition they thought was an inert practice munition". You made the exact same bad argument last year with regards to the shot taken at the aforementioned NATO surveillance aircraft.

Your original post was misleading and was backed up by zero evidence. I provided real world examples that give people a better understanding of aviation mishaps with regards to unintentional weapon release or weapon release that lands somewhere other than intended.

Don�t get snippy just because I provided readers with real world examples.

E: Addittionally, it's been a long time, do you have a link to what you are talking about, since you are calling out some post you say I made about the AWACS incident from six months ago or something?

And you should read the articles. One of the ones I linked is explicitly about a mechanical failure causing weapons to drop and not at all about a pilot trying to drop bombs, but missing:

quote:

an A-10C Thunderbolt II fighter jet out of Georgia�s Moody Air Force Base hit a bird and the collision sent three BDU-33 dummy bombs out near a highway, the 23rd Wing Public Affairs Office announced.

mlmp08 fucked around with this message at 16:04 on Apr 23, 2023

# ¿ Apr 23, 2023 15:49

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

Warbadger posted:

Words

Maybe we are talking past each other. I think there is insufficient evidence to make a call on why the bombs fell.

Potential reasons include:
Mechanical mishap caused separation of ordnance.
Crew error (dropping at all)
Crew error (chose to drop, but dropped wrong)
Mechanical erro (crew dropped correctly, but ordnance failed in some way)

No one ITT knows; it�s all guesswork.

The shot at the RJ is similar. No one knows ITT.

# ¿ Apr 23, 2023 23:05

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

Icon Of Sin posted:

As a PMC, are they covered by any protections at all?

Yes. The international standards and accords are designed to maximize protections, not minimize them.

# ¿ Apr 24, 2023 13:15

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

Deteriorata posted:

They cycled a lot of guys through. The total number may have stayed roughly constant, but they're different guys.

Plus the very simple math that even for wagner members who lived unscathed, some of them are on 6 month contracts.

It�s not like an army raises 20,000 guys and then in 20 years those 20,000 troops all retire and 20,000 new guys show up.

# ¿ May 2, 2023 00:41

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

Icon Of Sin posted:

(Not singling you out, your post just made me think of this)

It�s been semi-confusing for me, but I remembered that artillery (and by extension, US air defense artillery, who are the ones with Patriot systems) uses �battery� in place of �company� as their organizational unit with like 3-4 platoons/headed by a captain.

I�m not sure that any news orgs are actually making that distinction, but a patriot �battery� intercepting a missile could be spread out over a wider area and have their own detection assets forward of their deployed positions. It makes a little more sense to me thinking of it that way, rather than a single patriot truck getting a lucky shot on a fast/low cruise missile.

A patriot battery has one fire control radar and one engagement control station.

Patriot as it exists today is essentially incapable of air defense operations when disaggregated below the battery level.

Tuna-Fish posted:

Correct, but the PAC-3 upgrade was specifically about turning the system into a dedicated anti-ballistic missile defense system.

Patriot is designed to detect and engage cruise missiles, anti-radiation missiles, tactical ballistic missiles, fixed-wing aircraft, unmanned aircraft, and rotary-wing aircraft.

mlmp08 fucked around with this message at 13:04 on May 8, 2023

# ¿ May 8, 2023 13:02

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

US DOD update, not much here. I cut out everything unrelated to Ukraine.

Link with video: https://www.defense.gov/News/Transc...press-briefing/
Link with USAI announcement: https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3388890/biden-administration-announces-additional-security-assistance-for-ukraine/

Reminder that USAI is a contract mechanism, not a drawdown from US stocks, so anything in a USAI tends to be months to a year+ down the road.

Highlights:
-USAI includes ammunition, training/maintenance support, air defense systems/munitions, equipment to help integrate Western and legacy Ukrainian air defenses, among other things
-US Confirms that Ukraine used Patriot to shoot down a Kinzhal (NATO reporting name Killjoy) missile. These are missiles launched from modified MiG-31s, capable of hypersonic speeds.
-US continues to train Ukrainian personnel in Germany, plans to do so as long as Ukraine has demand for it

quote:

BRIGADIER GENERAL PAT RYDER: Good afternoon, everybody. Just a few things here at the top, and then we'll get right to your questions.

Today, the Department of Defense announced a new security assistance package to reaffirm steadfast U.S. support for Ukraine, including to bolster its air defenses and sustain its artillery ammunition needs. This package, which totals up to $1.2 billion, is being provided under the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative. This UAI package underscores the continued U.S. commitment to meeting Ukraine's most urgent requirements by committing critical capabilities such as air defense systems and munitions, while also building the capacity of Ukraine's Armed Forces to defend its territory and deter Russian aggression over the long-term. This includes procuring additional 155 millimeter artillery rounds and sustainment support to enable Ukraine to better maintain its on-hand systems and equipment. The capabilities in this package include additional air defense systems and munitions equipment to integrate Western air defense launchers, missiles and radars with Ukraine's air defense systems, ammunition for counter-unmanned aerial systems, 155 milliliter artillery rounds, commercial satellite imagery services and support for training, maintenance and sustainment activities.

The United States will continue to work with our allies and our partners to provide Ukraine with capabilities to meet its immediate battlefield needs and longer-term security assistance requirements.

...

Q: Thanks, General Ryder. You mentioned the commercial satellite imagery services in the Ukraine package. Can you say which companies DOD is planning to contract with for these services? And just more broadly, can you talk about why DOD is kind of leaning on the commercial sector for this rather than just providing its own imagery to the Ukrainians?

GEN. RYDER: Again, I don't have anything specific to announce today, in terms of particular companies that we may or may not be contracting with through this USAI effort. That will be work that's ongoing, certainly as we look at options on how best to support Ukraine. And so when we do have something to announce on that front, we certainly will. Okay, thank you.

Will?

Q: Thank you. Another USAI question -- it -- it mentioned -- the announcement mentioned air defense systems and munitions. Have the specific systems been selected yet or is that something that -- that still is -- has not been done? And also, is there any timeline on these items, especially the air defense (inaudible) 155s, given the -- kind of the urgency of the need for those capabilities in Ukraine?

GEN. RYDER: Yeah, sure. So a couple of things there. So again, on today's announcement about the USAI, just to -- and not to belabor the point here, but again, a key difference between that and the presidential drawdown authorities is that the USAI is an authority under which the United States can procure capabilities from industry or partners versus, again, drawing from existing stocks.

So this -- today's announcement is really focused on -- or represents, rather, the beginning of a contracting process to provide additional priority capabilities to Ukraine, which will entail exploring options as how to best support them.

When it comes to providing nearer term support, you've seen us use the PDA to drawdown on existing capabilities and rush those capabilities to Ukraine. So when it comes to things like air defense, for example, you've seen us provide Patriots, NASAMS, we've provided HAWKs. Our allies and partners have provided things like SAM-T, Avengers, counter-UAS.

So we're not waiting to provide Ukraine with air defense capabilities now. The USAI gives us the ability to leverage the power and the capabilities of the private sector in order to support Ukraine's medium and long term security assistance needs.

Yeah?

Q: One quick follow-up on that. So just to -- just to confirm though that -- but the specific systems that are -- that are under -- are mentioned in this announcement have not been determined yet?

GEN. RYDER: Correct. So that is -- that is something that we'll be exploring, and again, when we have something to announce, we will.

...

Q: Two related questions. Ukrainians say they used a Patriot missile to intercept a Russian Kinzhal, or Killjoy, missile. Was the U.S. able to confirm that? And what did you learn from the intercept of what Putin has called an impossible to intercept missile? And then what is the -- how much concern is there about Ukraine's current stock of air defense munitions? Do they have enough, given the continued Russian barrages?

GEN. RYDER: Yeah, thanks, Oren.

So first of all, when it comes to Ukraine's readiness, its inventory or details of missile intercepts, I'd -- I'd refer you to them. I can confirm that they did down a Russian missile by employing the Patriot missile defense system. As you know, that -- that system is part of a broader range of air defense capabilities that the United States and the international community have provided to Ukraine. I listed out some of those, you know, as part of their multilayered integrated air defense capability.

And so as Secretary Austin highlighted about three weeks ago at the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, the U.S., our allies, our partners, we're going to continue to rush ground-based air defense capabilities and munitions to help Ukraine control its sovereign skies and to help Ukraine defend its citizens from Russian cruise missiles and Iranian drones. And again, as evidenced by today's USAI announcement and the procurement of additional air defense systems and munitions, this is something that we're going to keep after both in the near term and the long term. Thank you.

...

Q: Thanks, General. Back to Ukraine, last week, I think it was the Ukrainian official said that -- that nine BCTs -- nine Ukrainian BCTs have been trained. I'm just curious, does the -- does that mean that the training that the U.S. was providing has finished? And more broadly, what's the status of the U.S. training effort to -- for the Ukrainian forces?

GEN. RYDER: Yeah, so -- great question. So training does continue at Grafenw�hr, combined arms training, and I -- I'd refer you to U.S. Army Europe and Africa to provide you with the exact numbers, but it -- I do know that -- that we have upwards of a couple thousand that are going through training there right now.

And again, we will be able to maintain that support and that capability to train Ukrainians as long as the demand is there. So we continue to discuss that with our Ukrainian partners, in terms of sending additional forces.

As always, a consideration as they do that is how many forces do they keep in the field, vice getting trained, but I think, going back to what we've talked about all along during this conflict, is that providing equipment along with training gives the Ukrainians a capability, vice just having equipment. Part of that capability includes the maintenance and sustainment of those capabilities.

And so we are very eager to continue working alongside our allies and our partners to provide that type of training to the Ukrainians going forward. Thanks very much.

...

Q: I just wanted to double check -- you -- you did confirm -- you did confirm that a Patriot downed this Kinzhal missile ...

GEN. RYDER: Correct.

Q: ... did I hear that right?

GEN. RYDER: Correct.

Q: Was this a U.S.-provided Patriot or one of the -- from the Dutch or Germans?

GEN. RYDER: Yeah, in terms of those kinds of operational details, I'd refer you to the Ukrainians.

Q: You can't confirm if the U.S. Patriots are now over there?

GEN. RYDER: The U.S. Patriot is over there.

Q: It is? So you're confirming that ...

GEN. RYDER: I'm confirming U.S. Patriot system is in Ukraine, but in terms of which specific battery they employed, whether it was a U.S.-provided, Dutch-provided, I'd refer you to the Ukrainians.

Q: OK, that's fine. Thanks.

GEN. RYDER: OK, thanks. And last question, we'll go to Will.

Q: Also, I just had a quick follow-up on the -- on the Kinzhal. Is -- is this the first time -- or the first intercept of a hypersonic missile in combat? And do you have the date of the intercept?

GEN. RYDER: I don't, and I -- and I -- again, I'm not going to get into the specifics or trying to characterize it, other than, again, to say we can confirm that the Ukrainians took down this Russian missile with a Patriot missile defense system.

All right, thanks very much, everybody. Appreciate it.

# ¿ May 11, 2023 01:42

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

An interesting tidbit. Otherwise, today's DOD press brief didn't have much about Ukraine. There are only so many ways to ask "when will Ukraine get F-16s" and receive an answer of "Don't know yet" or ways to ask "Was defending Bakhmut worth it" and getting the answer of "Ask Ukraine, but Russia took a lot of casualties" in return.

https://www.defense.gov/News/Transc...press-briefing/

quote:

GEN. RYDER: You know, look, as I mentioned before, we have been working very closely with our allies and partners to help Ukraine build up its combat power. They have nine mechanized armored brigades that we've provided, they have significant air defense capability. The entire world has come together to ensure that they have ammunition, and importantly, we're also providing training and we're working very closely with them on sustainment and logistics aspects.

So as they prepare to conduct counter-offensive operations, they have got a very strong hand and we're very confident that they have the combat capability that they'll need. And so again, our focus now is going to continue to be on providing them with the security assistance required to sustain and defend - sustain their fight and defend their country.

Q: And if I may on Belgorod, footage circulating on social media accounts about the units that attacked Belgorod showed what it - seems to be some Western and American-provided vehicles or weapons, to include Humvees and at least one MaxxPro MRAP. Is the DOD confident that none of the weapons provided to Ukraine were used on Russian territory? Thank you.

GEN. RYDER: Yeah, so we've seen those reports, something that we obviously continue to monitor very closely. I will say that we can confirm that the U.S. government has not approved any third party transfers of equipment to paramilitary organizations outside the Ukrainian Armed Forces, nor has the Ukrainian government requested any such transfers. So again, it's something we'll keep a close eye on. Thank you.

Let me go to Kasim.

Q: General, I will follow up on that. So if you haven't authorized the Ukrainian military to - to - to give the U.S.-provided armored vehicles to the groups associated with the military, then does that mean that there were some diversions of the - some of the equipment provided by the United States and found their ways into the hands of paramilitary groups that went into the Russian territories? And what - what's going to be the U.S. response if this - the footages are authentic?

GEN. RYDER: Yeah, thanks, Kasim. So - so a couple of hypothetical questions there, right? Again, we're - it's something we're keeping a close eye on. As you know, the United States has communicated regularly with Ukraine that the security assistance that we're providing them is for them to use inside Ukraine as part of their efforts to defend their country and their sovereignty.

You know, I would tell you that when you see imagery like that - you know, again, something we'll look into - I don't know if it's true or not, in terms of the veracity of that imagery. I mean, you'll recall yesterday there were some bogus images of reported, alleged explosions at the Pentagon. So, you know, we just - all of us, both within the DOD and I'm sure in the journalism - journalistic community, have to take a look at these things and make sure we get the facts before we make assumptions.

Like I said, at this point in time, we have not authorized any transfer of equipment, they have not asked for transfer of equipment to so-called paramilitary organizations, and we've put in place some very strict protocols, in terms of end use monitoring, and have had good success working with our Ukrainian partners toward that end.

So again, we'll keep an eye on it, and just leave it there.

And this bit:

quote:

Q: Thank you, General. Regarding to F-16s, what assurances do you have from Ukraine that they will not use these F-16s to fire into Russia -- I mean, their territory, which could widen this war? Thank you.

GEN. RYDER: Yeah. I would just refer you back to the president's comments during his press briefing over the weekend, where he stated that President Zelenskyy assured him that these aircraft would be used within Ukraine. Thank you.

# ¿ May 24, 2023 01:30

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

SECDEF and CJCS gave a press briefing after the 12th meeting of the Ukraine contact group. Not much concrete announced.

Video here:
https://www.c-span.org/video/?528333-1/secretary-austin-general-milley-news-conference

Highlights / Parahrasing (transcript not out in a friendly format yet):

-Netherlands and Denmark taking lead on training Ukrainians on F-16s, and there is discussion of maybe other 4th gen aircraft. No real idea of timeline, when fielded, how many, etc. There is a LOT that goes into standing up functional fixed-wing squadrons, with a new type of aircraft.
-Continuing to work on building new or determining what air defenses can be donated to Ukraine.
-Continuing to ramp up industrial base and production.
-When asked why F-16 decision reversed and why US hasn't donated their own F-16s, Austin repeats similar comments to what were already made previously, essentially. Points out that the US has focused on the things that are most important and critical to defend themselves. Points out that air defenses have paid off well, and can be fielded faster and cheaper than something like F-16s. Also points out the 9 armored and mechanized brigades supplied and trained. Milley says the fastest, quickest, cheapest way to contest the airspace and deny air superiority to the Russians, as has been done. Milley states that fielding and sustaining F-16s is about $2 billion to buy and sustain 10 aircraft, and Russia has 1,000 aircraft, between 4th and 5th gen. Argues the GBAD was the smartest way to contest the air, but F-16s will have some role in the future.
-Milley confirms there are no magic weapons in war.
-Milley lays out that when determining how/what to give to Ukraine, there are cost, risk, benefit analysis.
-Milley: USEUCOM staff is evaluating whether or not US equipment was taken into Russia on the recent raid. He can't say whether or not that was US equipment. He reiterates that the US has asked Ukraine not to use any US donated equipment to directly attack into Russia. The conflict includes the US and NATO training, advising, assisting, supporting defense of Ukraine in their war, but this is not a war between the US or NATO and Russia. Austin: the weapons donated are to defend Ukrainian sovereign territory.
-As is typical, points out that it's an international effort, and some countries can and do provide weapons, others training, others funding.
-When asked if the strategy is to help Ukraine get a decisive win or to get a better hand at a negotiated settlement, Austin says Ukrainians decide the goal, and the international community is supporting their significant fight and defense of their country. There is a balance to what can be provided for them to pull soldiers off the line to train versus remaining on the lines. Milley: All wars come to an end either with a clear victory or a negotiated settlement. Russia is not going to win this war, militarily. Ukrainian objectives to liberate all of Ukrainian territory occupied by Russian forces might be achievable militarily someday, but not in the near term.

# ¿ May 26, 2023 02:41

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

Mederlock posted:

Oh interesting I didn't realize it was quite that straightforward. I've only shot them in DCS without quite understanding how they work under the hood

And there�s been some time spent on this. Integration efforts of RIM-7 were made public almost six months ago.

# ¿ Jun 1, 2023 04:46

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

Back Hack posted:

Speaking of infantry, you don't want them anywhere near a ERA equipped tank, which makes for quite an oxymoron; tanks need infantry support.

Tanks don�t necessarily need infantry standing 6 meters away.

# ¿ Jun 2, 2023 04:13

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

Back Hack posted:

It's very common for deadly fragmentation from ERA casings to be thrown much greater than just 6 meters.

Yeah. My point was that infantry supporting tanks are often dozens or hundreds of meters from said tanks. There are exceptions like sitting at the field-phone slapped on the back of a tank, but you really try to minimize hanging out close to tanks because they have numerous ways to kill infantry or draw fire.

# ¿ Jun 2, 2023 05:20

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

StumblyWumbly posted:

There have been a lot of unrealistic peace plans proposed, but have any involved Russia paying reparations?

That�s probably less realistic than Russia just giving back Crimea, short of some very specific definition of reparation like calling it a reparation to return some of the kids Russia resettled and refuses to return to their families. I doubt whatever eventual managed settlement arises includes reparations.

# ¿ Jun 3, 2023 15:53

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

Australian retired F/A-18s are of such an old vintage that the USN doesn�t fly that type anymore at all.

# ¿ Jun 6, 2023 01:19

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

madeintaipei posted:

USMC is part of the USN, but yeah. C/D Hornets, not the Super Hornet, which is a substantially different airplane.

Australia flew A/Bs.

# ¿ Jun 6, 2023 05:35

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

GhostofJohnMuir posted:

but i don't really have much of a sense of what ukraine might be trying to grind towards in their immediate front

I think that is precisely the UAF�s intent.

# ¿ Jun 9, 2023 23:43

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

Huggybear posted:

And are they mothballed? How hard is it to unmothball a fighter jet. Let alone train a pilot to fly one.

If F-16s happen, set your calendar; they likely wouldn�t be operational anywhere within a year, maybe longer.

# ¿ Jun 10, 2023 03:16

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

Plus, the lengths of the various offensives lately are roughly 3-4 weeks in Kharkiv, 10 weeks in Kherson, and 9 months for Bakhmut. Bakhmut was more like 13 months, if you start the clock when Russia announced a changed focus of the war toward focusing specifically on the Donbass. You're just not going to see some massive breakthrough in the first few days of combat most of the time, barring some highly unusual/unexpected results.

# ¿ Jun 10, 2023 16:59

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

Bog standard Russian doctrine includes having many kilometers of disruption zone, where they try to disintegrate, degrade, slow, canalize and generally seek to weaken a force before it gets to the battle zone. This is generally an economy of force effort.

So on top of general fog of war, it can be hard, even for the combatants, to have a clear idea of how the battle is going based on actions in the DZ.

# ¿ Jun 11, 2023 19:54

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

Deteriorata posted:

https://twitter.com/michaeldweiss/status/1668049097012441095

I really, really do not think this quote is correct.

From February 2023:
https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/missile-defense-weapons/ukraine-has-wait-key-systems-raytheon-ceo-says

The idea that Raytheon can suddenly crank out 12x Patriot batteries per year and is giving 5 away does not really match historic trends. I think the reporter may have misunderstood what was said.

quote:

For NASAMS, six are on order for Ukraine, but �they won�t see those until starting this summer, probably through next year,� he says. Ukraine has received existing donated NASAMS, and officials have said they are highly effective at targeting Russian cruise missiles and UAVs.

# ¿ Jun 12, 2023 05:07

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

Kraftwerk posted:

Nobody had any stingers in the area to shoot these down? Or could they fire these ATGMs from outside the effective range of stinger?

Modern ATGMs often can outrange a stinger. And standing in observed open fields with stingers is bad for the stinger operator. And a MANPADS team taking cover among trees can mean their line of sight is kinda poo poo. It�s not a terribly easy problem, especially if the helos accept some risk during critical operations instead of the more risk averse flying we�ve often seen.

# ¿ Jun 12, 2023 15:49

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

Small DOD update. Most of it was about stuff other than Ukraine.

Press conference:
https://www.defense.gov/News/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/3427251/deputy-pentagon-press-secretary-sabrina-singh-holds-a-press-briefing/
PDA:
https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3426389/biden-administration-announces-additional-security-assistance-for-ukraine/

Highlights:
-US is not replacing vehicles 1 for 1, nor planning to. PDAs are decided weeks out, not in a day or two turnaround.
-US does not know who, if anyone, destroyed the dam.

quote:

DEPUTY PRESS SECRETARY SABRINA SINGH: Hello everyone. Good afternoon. I have a few items to pass along at the top here -- I think I'm echoing a bit -- but I have a few items to pass off at the top here and then I'd be happy to take your questions.

So today, Secretary Austin departed on travel to Germany and Brussels, where he and Chairman Milley will host an in-person meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group on June 15th, and then that will be followed by a NATO Defense Ministers Meeting on June 16th. Readouts from the meeting will be posted on Defense.gov throughout the week.

Also today, the Department announced additional security assistance to meet Ukraine's critical security and defense needs. This is the Biden administration's 40th presidential drawdown of equipment from DOD inventories of -- for Ukraine since August 2021.

It includes key capabilities to aid Ukraine's efforts to retake its sovereign territory as they bravely protect Ukraine's soldiers, civilians and critical infrastructure. The package includes artillery, anti-armor systems and ammunition valued up to $325 million, and additional details can also be found on Defense.gov.

...

Q: Thanks. A couple on Ukraine. First, can you say anything about Russia reporting that as many as 16 different types of armored vehicles the U.S. provided has -- have been destroyed in these early rounds of the counter-offensive?

And then secondly on the dam, what can you say now about the attack on the dam and whether it was indeed Russia? And what can you share about what you know?

MS. SINGH: Sure. Thanks, Tara, for the question. So on the report that 16 vehicles were destroyed, I've seen the reports but I can't corroborate some of the video and imagery coming out of that. So we're going to continue to monitor that but I just wouldn't be able to confirm the reports that the -- at least what we're seeing from Russians of putting out those imagery.

In terms of the dam, we're continuing to assess who, if anyone, is responsible for destroying the dam. We don't have -- we just don't have anything additional right now to provide. I know that's something that the Ukrainians are continuing to look into.

It's -- we've seen this type of behavior before from Russians, of destroying critical infrastructure, but on this case, when it comes to the dam specifically, I just don't have more information at this moment.

Q: Okay. And then just a follow-up on the vehicles --

MS. SINGH: Sure.

Q: -- if those reports are true, does this line up with what the Pentagon was kind of planning for as far as losses? And is there a plan in place to help backfill some of that for Ukraine?

MS. SINGH: Well, I think, here in this building, we were always going to assess that there was going to be damages and casualties of capabilities and systems that have been provided to the Ukrainians. I don't know that there's going to be a backfill of a -- like, one-to-one ratio, but as you're seeing today just with our announcement of our 40th presidential drawdown authority, you're seeing continued support go to Ukraine in their fight against the Russians to take back their sovereign territory.

Again, I don't think -- I don't know that it'd be a one-to-one ratio every time, but we are -- something that went into our calculations when we provided this equipment to the Ukrainians is that there could be battlefield losses and damages as the fight continues. And so this is just one of many packages that we've announced. You saw last week, we rolled out a USAI package, and on -- not tomorrow -- on Thursday, the Secretary and the Chairman will be meeting in person the -- hosting the Ukrainian Defense Contact Group where, again, that's another discussion for allies and partners to decide and to figure out and hear from the Ukrainians themselves of what else they need on the battlefield.

Oren?

Q: So a follow-up to Tara's question on the Bradley�s and the Strykers being provided now. Certainly the timing certainly seems to line up. The counteroffensive begins, and suddenly you're providing armored vehicles again. Is that intentional that now that Ukraine will suffer and has suffered some losses on the battlefield, you are providing these to continue support for the offensive or are you saying that was coincident to the timing, lined up like that?

MS. SINGH: Well, I mean, we consider presidential drawdown packages a few weeks out. They don't -- they're not something that happens, you know, two or three days beforehand. Packages are something that we have to consider what we're pulling off of our shelves in order to give the Ukrainians, and how long that will take.

And so I wouldn't say that, you know, each package is timed directly for what you alluded to, but you know, as President Zelenskyy said, they have -- they're continuing to engage in offensive operations. I'll let the Ukrainians speak to that. But in terms of this package, this is something that meets the priorities of the Ukrainians. Armor, artillery, air defense -- these are all priorities that they've laid out and something that will be continued to be discussed at the Contact Group on Thursday.

...

Q: Thanks, Sabrina. I want to get back to the issue of the Bradleys and the other battlefield vehicle and equipment losses. Is the Pentagon tracking those losses? And can you tell me, is it part of the monitoring process, or is there some other way that the Pentagon has an idea of what's being lost in Ukraine in terms of, you know, what's lost on the battlefield?

MS. SINGH: Thanks, Howard. So we are in constant communication at all different levels with the Ukrainians, and of course, when it comes to presidential drawdown authorities and the packages that we put together, one of the things that we're doing is working with the Ukrainians to determine what they need to meet their requirements not just in the short term, but also long-term goals. So of course, one of the things that we would be discussing with the Ukrainians is loss of battlefield equipment, capabilities, anything not working, any systems not performing the way they should be. So there is a direct line of communication at all different levels here in this building with the Ukrainians.

# ¿ Jun 15, 2023 00:17

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

SECDEF and CJCS held a press briefing in conjunction with the 13th meeting of the Ukraine Contact Group. Transcript in link, excerpts in post. I kept a lot of it in, because these are only once a month, so most of the cuts are cross-talk or explicitly off-topic questions that go nowhere.

Transcript and Video:
https://www.defense.gov/News/Transc...-chairman-gene/

Highlights:
-US message remains standing by Ukraine for "as long as it takes," and there is no "easy sprint to the finish line" for Ukraine.
-Several countries offering aid now, while others are beginning multi-year aid programs to both budget out as well as demonstrate commitment
-Air defense and artillery/munitions remains one of the long-term efforts, in terms of type of aid provided to Ukraine.
-Ukrainian offensive in early stages and unable to be characterized yet
-When asked about combat losses, SECDEF reiterates that it is a given that in combat, losses are expected. Also highlights that Ukraine was given and has utilized recovery and repair equipment and supplies to recover and reconstitute a portion of lost equipment, and US and partners retain means to flow further supplies and materiel into Ukraine.
-Milley points out this is a very difficult fight, with hundreds of thousands of Russian troops in dug in, prepared positions in Ukraine, but Ukraine is making steady progress, and Ukrainian troops' morale is higher than that of the Russian forces. Estimates the offensive will take a long time at high cost.
-When asked why the US isn't more vocal about Ukraine joining NATO (a select group of Eastern European NATO countries want to expedite entry or give them some special status), the SECDEF [in my reading] does not really answer the question.
-No real update on F-16 discussion. Denmark and Netherlands heading up a training plan, no timeline on training or on fielding. [My comment: Probably remains a 2024 or 2025 or beyond thing.]

quote:

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE LLOYD J. AUSTIN III: Thanks, Patrick. Good afternoon, everyone, and thanks for being here.

We've just wrapped up our 13th meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group and it once again demonstrated the unity and the resolve that have characterized this group ever since our very first meeting. We continue to be inspired by the Ukrainian people.

As I told the Contact Group today, the missile strike that hit a residential building in Kryvyi Rih reminded us all of the senseless suffering that the people of Ukraine have endured. But they remain undaunted, and so do their leaders.

We were fortunate to be joined yet again by my good friend, Ukrainian Minister of Defense Oleksiy Reznikov. As always, this Contact Group benefits hugely from hearing firsthand from him and his team about the state of the battlefield and Ukraine's most urgent needs. As I've told Oleksiy, we have great confidence in the training and the capabilities of the Ukrainian Armed Forces thanks in large part to the tireless and combined work of the Contact Group -- Group's members.

Now, we all know that the Ukrainians have been engaged in a tough fight to defend their sovereign territory and take back the -- the occupied territory, and we have all seen the skill and courage of Ukraine's defenders ever since the start of Russia's invasion. Of course, we've given Ukraine's forces important training and impressive capabilities, but war is fluid, dynamic and unpredictable. Ukraine's fight is not some easy sprint to the finish line and our message remains clear: We will stand by Ukraine for as long as it takes.

Now, let me talk a bit more about today's Contact Group. In addition to the briefing from Ukraine, we heard from the leaders of U.S. European Command, and they briefed us on future training plans as well as efforts to maintain and sustain the equipment that we've already provided and to ensure that Ukraine can do so for future equipment, as well.

We also heard from our friends from Germany and Poland on their work sustaining Ukraine's new Leopard tanks, and our colleagues from the Netherlands and Denmark shared the progress that they've made on plans to train Ukrainian pilots on fourth-generation fighter aircraft, including F-16s.

But it brings me back to one of the very top priorities of this Contact Group. We remain laser-focused on meeting Ukraine's urgent needs for ground-based air defense systems, and that's especially important since Russia's -- since Russia has ruthlessly ramped up its missile and drone attacks over the past month against Ukraine's cities, and these attacks have killed scores of Ukrainian civilians, and that's just part of Moscow's reckless and lawless attempt to break the will of the Ukrainian people.

But Ukraine's air defenders have served -- saved countless lives using air defense systems and intercepts -- interceptor missiles donated by members of this Contact Group, and our ongoing support will ensure that Ukraine can continue to defend its civilians, its cities and its critical infrastructure.

Now, several countries have stepped up today with new commitments for Ukraine.

Canada committed another $500 million package to support Ukraine, and that will include more than 200 critical air defense missiles to help Ukraine's skies -- help protect Ukraine's skies. And the United States, along with the U.K., Denmark and the Netherlands all contributed funding for additional critical air defense missiles for Ukraine. Italy also announced its latest tranche of assistance, which includes highly critical capabilities that meet Ukraine's most urgent needs to defend itself.

And several allies are beginning to think about supporting Ukraine for the long term. Norway and Germany announced multi-year packages and Denmark just announced its own nearly $2.6 billion package for military assistance through 2024.

All these contributions underscore our unity in supporting Ukraine and in defending the rules-based international order that keeps us all secure.

Ukraine has overcome so many obstacles but more lie ahead, and Ukraine's troops and citizens do not stand alone. Thanks to the historic support of nations of goodwill from around the world, Ukraine is well-positioned for the challenges still to come.

As President Biden has said, our support will not waver, our resolve will not falter, and our unity will not crack. Make no mistake, we will stand with the Ukrainian people for as long as it takes.

And with that, I'll turn it over to General Milley.

GENERAL MARK A. MILLEY: Thank you, Secretary Austin, and good afternoon to everyone that's with us here today.

For 16 months, the international community has stood together in defense of the rules-based international order. This coalition's commitment at this 13th meeting of the Ukrainian Defense Contact Group demonstrates our unwavering dedication to the ideals of sovereignty and self-determination.

But first, let me thank Secretary Austin for his steadfast leadership in fostering this global coalition. From the first meeting to the 13th today, without his leadership, these would not be happening. And thank you also to the ministers and chiefs of defense from some-50 nations that joined us today.

To Ukrainian Minister of Defense Reznikov, my counterpart, General Zaluzhnyi, who is not here today but I did have a chance to talk to him the other day, and his representative, General Moisiuk, who was here, thank you for your unflinching resolve and determination in the face of immense adversity and thank you also for the incredible bravery of the Ukrainian people.

We stand here today not simply as a group of nations but as a united front standing for the values that are much larger than ourselves. We stand for the bedrock principles of national sovereignty and liberty, principles that Russia's illegal and unprovoked invasion of Ukraine clearly undermine.

Putin's war of choice is not just a transgression against Ukraine, it is literally a frontal assault on the very international order that guarantees peace, prosperity and freedom to all nations. The brave Ukrainian people continue to demonstrate their spirit of resilience, fighting relentlessly to reclaim their homeland from Russian occupation. Each day, the Ukrainians fight not just with steel and weapons but the iron will of their spirit.

As President Zelenskyy has announced recently, the Ukrainians have embarked on an offensive operation to liberate their country. They're in the early stages and it's far too early to make any definitive assessments but I can tell you that each day, the Ukrainians demonstrate the courage and tenacity needed to methodically regain their territory.

We have said before that war is dynamic, it is a contest of wills. As the Secretary just said, it's uncertain, it's violent, and as always, has high costs. But we can be sure that Ukrainian bravery, competency and preparedness will carry the day. We can be confident that this contact group has given Ukraine the tools that it needs to succeed.

And we know that the will of the Ukrainian people will continue to resonate far beyond their borders. In fact, it will resonate throughout the globe. Their actions echo the voices of all people who cherish freedom and the rights to determine their own fate against tyranny. Our assistance to Ukraine supports their cause to remain free and independent. It represents our commitment to what binds us as nations operating within the rules-based international order.

We have and we will continue to offer wide-ranging support, from providing sophisticated combined arms capabilities to intelligence to training of Ukrainian forces to be more effective on the battlefield. Through a global effort, more than 6,000 Ukrainians are being trained right now at 40 different locations -- training locations in 65 courses in 33 nations on three continents. That is all happening right now, today.

Since the beginning of the war, the United States has trained over 11,000 Ukrainians in combined arms maneuver and staff training. The U.S. training effort has created 12 maneuver battalions, nearly 5,000 operators that are fighting in those machines right now, along with their combined arms staffs. We are currently training three battalions -- a tank battalion and two territorial National Guard battalions.

All in all, the international effort has trained almost 60,000 Ukrainian soldiers for this current operation, and many of whom are engaged in close combat as we stand here today.

Last week, the United States released another Ukrainian Security Assistance Initiative package totaling several billion dollars, $2 billion. This package procures critical capabilities, including Patriot munitions, HAWK air defense systems, artillery rocket munitions, maintenance and sustainment support, and much more.

Additionally this week, we released our latest drawdown package of $325 million. From our current stocks, we are providing Ukraine air defense munitions, GMLRS, long-range artillery, artillery rounds, 155, Bradley, Strykers, and many other capabilities.

Over the past year, we have seen the strength of Ukraine because of the international coalition and the impact of our collective support, along with the courage of the Ukrainian people. We see Ukrainian forces displaying exceptional skill in operating complex systems, like Patriot, armored vehicles and HIMARS. We see Ukrainians effectively leveraging anti-armor weapons, advanced munitions and sophisticated air defense systems.

Our commitment to Ukraine extends far beyond the here and the now. It is not defined by time or convenience but it is defined by the principles of democracy, freedom and the international rule of law. It is a pledge that upholds the international order to ensure that every nation, big or small, can live in peace, enjoying its rightful sovereignty without fear of unprovoked aggression.

As the President of the United States and Secretary of Defense Austin have consistently stated over and over again, the United States remains committed to supporting Ukraine for as long as it takes. We will continue to provide Ukraine with the means to fight until Russia ends this unprovoked aggression.

Thank you and I look forward to your questions.

STAFF: Thank you both, gentlemen. The first question, we'll go to Dan Lamothe, Washington Post.

Q: Gentlemen, good afternoon. Thanks for your time today.

A question for Secretary Austin please. We've started to see battlefield losses in this Ukrainian counter-offensive emerge online and otherwise. To -- to what degree do they concern you? And do you anticipate additional commitments of U.S. fighting vehicles to bolster the counter-offensive as it moves forward?

And then for General Milley, in light of this counter-offensive, there's the expectation that this could be a grinding, bloody slog that takes many months. To what degree and what kind of patience do you anticipate will be necessary not just for the Ukrainians, but the American people and taxpayers and the U. -- and the military alliance that is supporting Ukraine as this goes on? Thank you.

SEC. AUSTIN: Thanks, Dan.

Regarding the battlefield losses of vehicles and equipment, this is a war, so we know that there will be battle damage on both sides. And you know, what's important is that, you know, the Ukrainians have the ability to recover equipment that's been damaged, repair where -- where possible, get that equipment back into the fight, and also that they have the -- we have a means to continue to push capability forward.

So there will continue to be battle damage. I think the Russians have shown us that same five vehicles about a thousand times from 10 different angles. But quite frankly, the Ukrainians have -- still have a lot of combat capability -- combat power. So as you've indicated, this will continue to be a -- a tough fight as we anticipated, and I believe that the -- the -- the element that does the best in terms of sustainment will -- will probably have the advantage at the end of the day. So our focus is on making sure that we continue to push forward what Ukraine needs in order to be successful.

GEN. MILLEY: So Dan, it'll be very premature to put any estimates of how long, time, on an operation of this magnitude. There are several hundred thousand Russian troops dug in in prepared positions all along the front line, and Ukraine has begun their attack, and they're making steady progress. This is a very difficult fight. It's a very violent fight and it will likely take a considerable amount of time and at high cost. But at the end of the day, as Napoleon once said, "The moral is to the physical as three is to one", and the Ukrainian morale, their leadership, their skill, their tenacity, their resilience is very high. Russian, on the -- the Russians, on the other hand, their leadership is -- is not necessarily coherent. Their troops' morale is not high. They've been sitting in defensive positions. Many of them don't even know why they're there. So we'll see. It's too early to tell, but we'll see how this plays out.

...

Q: Thank you very much. From (inaudible). Secretary Austin, one question: There is a growing frustration among Eastern European allies, that they believe there is not enough support from your government, your admin -- administration towards a Ukrainian membership in NATO. Why are you so hesitant to give any more concrete signs that Ukraine will enter the alliance and that there will be some more promises which go beyond the Budapest clauses? Thank you.

SEC. AUSTIN: Well, thanks. I think you've heard us say over and over again that we continue to support Ukraine's open door -- excuse me --- NATO's open-door policy, and each -- each country will -- will have a different path to -- to -- to accession. And so again, I'll let -- I will further say that we remain where we were with Budapest, and -- and so as -- as we go forward here, I think you'll see allies and -- and partners continue to work together to provide Ukraine what it needs to be successful, and also provide assurances going forward, so...

STAFF: Our next question will go to Carla Babb, Voice of America.

Q: Mr. Secretary, Chairman, thank you both for doing this. Mr. Secretary, what has the U.S. committed to provide to the F-16 training program for Ukrainians, specifically, trainers, munitions, jets? And can you provide us with any more details on the overall F-16 training plans?

...

SEC. AUSTIN: Thanks, Carla. Let me start with the F-16 question here. First, let me say how much I really appreciate the Netherlands and Denmark stepping up to lead this consortium. And they are outlining the -- the -- the plan for training, and there are a number of other countries that have joined in and volunteered to -- to help in this effort.

And so this work continues. We were briefed today on -- on kind of the outline of the plan and the steps for, you know, for the way ahead, and I have to tell you that they, in the 30 days that we've been after this, they have leaned into this in a major way.

As you know, the United States will have to provide approval for the training, and also some other aspects of this, and as you would expect, we continue to work with the Netherlands and Denmark as they -- as they put this plan together. But -- but again, this will take some time, but -- but they're really moving out in a very impressive way and -- and they're getting support from other partners in the -- in the UDC -- CG.

...

STAFF: Thank you, gentlemen. Final question will go to (Vitaly Surkov, U.A. Television.

Q: Thank you. You said what about Ukrainian advanced. Which insight did you get from observing this advance? Maybe it would change the way of help, maybe a new type of weapons United States would provide. And what you promoted, when F-16 and Abrams could be on the territory of Ukraine? That�s it. Thank you.

SEC. AUSTIN: Is that for me or the chairman?

Q: (inaudible).

GEN. MILLEY: Yeah, we had a -- a session today with a variety of countries. We're early in the planning process. I -- I think there's a -- a -- an intent by several countries that have stepped up to take the lead, Netherlands and -- and -- and Denmark, in terms of the planning. So there's a lot of work left to be done, but I think it would be premature to -- to give a specific date on any time the F-16s or any other type of advanced aircraft would be employed in combat in -- in Ukraine. There's -- there's a lot of work to do. You have to do language training. You have to do pilot training. You've got to get all the systems set in place. So those -- those wheels are in motion, but we're a ways from completion of that project.

SEC. AUSTIN: In terms of lessons learned, there are -- there are key lessons learned in every fight, and -- and we always encourage our partners to capture those lessons learned and -- and adapt as required.

You know, fights are dynamic. Squads and platoons actually fight the fight. Everybody else on the battlefield supports it. And so what those squads and platoons are doing and seeing and learning, how they're employing supporting fires and -- and all of that, and we incorporate those insights into the training that we're doing for follow-on forces.

And so the -- the Ukrainian military is a learning organization and an adaptive organization, and we see continuous adaptation on -- on -- on a daily basis. It's been that way from the very start, and as things -- as the battlefield dynamics have changed over the weeks and months, we've worked with the Ukrainians -- we've also changed, in terms of kinds of things that we're providing them, and it's been successful and the evidence that it's been successful is because -- is -- can be seen in where the -- where the Ukrainians are today on the battlefield.

# ¿ Jun 15, 2023 20:51

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

Nenonen posted:

Why do you think that they volunteer? Military assigns people to units based on what needs they have, not what the recruits dream of.

Tiny Timbs posted:

I've known several people who volunteered to do EOD. Don't underestimate 20-somethings' natural desire to work with explosives

On the soldier/NCO side, US EOD typically was pretty selective in wanting high performers with higher than average technical skills, and the ability to memorize a lot of schematics, understand basic electronics, etc. It was a job where reenlistment bonuses were the highest there are, and promotion rates pretty good. Sapper is also competitive, though officers seem to go a lot more nuts on sapper tab bragging than enlisted do. EOD has a bit of a reputation of not being hosed with as much by "big" army policy and fuckery, in exchange for the dangerous job and even in non-dangerous jobs, erratic schedule in demand (for example, being activated or tasked to go do EOD work in support of political rallies, big state events, etc).

# ¿ Jun 16, 2023 15:19

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

Mederlock posted:

What in the gently caress

Like so many, he died of the thing that gets so many of us: car crash.

# ¿ Jun 16, 2023 15:40

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

Charliegrs posted:

So if it was the US military that was doing these breaching operations in Ukraine instead of the Ukrainian military what would it look like? Would they be using a lot of those line charges (I forget the name, the ones that shoot a rope of explosives to clear mines)? Would they be using a crapload of those mine clearing tanks?

The biggest difference might be less the couple hours of actual breaching and more the corps and division-level shaping that takes place prior to the breach.

Here's a basic (and kind of old) breach 101 video they used for instruction of the breach at the US maneuver center.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZ-sCT_maAQ

# ¿ Jun 16, 2023 22:30

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

Bel Shazar posted:

My guess is $0 cost for the equipment and then whatever the shipping cost is goes against the president's spend authority, with a discount recorded for the cost savings from lack of ongoing storage fees.

This GAO report (about past PDAs) details what is supposed to happen to execute a PDA. The DOD is not authorized to say that the equipment just costs $0; that would be unlawful. They also cannot count the cost of shipment against the PDA; that comes from O&M money, unless a new contract is cheaper than shipping it on DOD assets. How much depreciation is applied, if any, I don't know. I also don't know other ways that the accounting might get weird (for example, an M113 purchased in the 1980s and counted in 1980s dollars is way "cheaper" than building a new one at current inflation and refurbishment rates). PDAs do not require computing the cost to replace the items; in many cases, there will be no replacement. In other cases (Javelin, 155mm, Stinger, etc), I bet the US just eats the inflation and production line cost (new Stingers cost waaay more than we bought them for, even accounting for inflation).

https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-17-26.pdf

E: Pentagon clarified that in some cases the services were calculating cost based on cost to replace the item with a new replacement. By counting costs to replace with new vs net book value, that overestimated the cost of some PDA drawdown items.

mlmp08 fucked around with this message at 05:21 on Jun 21, 2023

# ¿ Jun 21, 2023 02:09

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

"Sir, Wagner has broken through several kilometers. Now, I know you'd normally think that might be good, but"

# ¿ Jun 24, 2023 04:14

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

Sigmund Fraud posted:

I believed that Wagner was deliberately denied heavy armour and AA to keep them harmless. Now we see all kinds of modern armour and AA in the convoys. What happened?

Wagner has had basic short-range SAMs and T-90s for a long time. Just less of them.

# ¿ Jun 24, 2023 16:43

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

In exchange for standing down, they will fill up his Priggy Bank and let him leave peacefully in exile in a beautiful villa with an expansive picture window overlooking a nice set of waterfalls and cliffside bird roosts.

# ¿ Jun 24, 2023 18:58

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

What could ever go wrong with the US just wiring large sums of money to a Russian PMC?

# ¿ Jun 27, 2023 14:30

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

Nelson Mandingo posted:

I would say Wagner declaring intent, and then doing a rebellion that took them outside the gates of Moscow where they were setting up artillery to siege the city

That never happened.

# ¿ Jun 28, 2023 03:51

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

Nenonen posted:

Well yeah, Wagner besieging or occupying Moscow is even more unbelievable than the small Russian northern column surrounding or occupying Kyiv.

The pro-Russian twitter/telegram guys who held it as an article of faith that Kyiv was surrounded or cut off were mind-boggling. Just videos of journalists and Ukrainian troops driving around on major highways, and they were still convinced Russia has the city under siege.

# ¿ Jun 28, 2023 04:01

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 21, 2024 00:33

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

OddObserver posted:

FWIW, Prigozhin claimed they did set up artillery (he is quoted as such in e.g. https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/26/europe/prigozhin-speaks-moscow-march-intl/index.html), but I am not aware of any independent confirmation.

Every bit of verifiable evidence we have is that Wagner forces never came within 100 miles of Moscow, much less set up artillery at the "gates" of Moscow (not sure what that means) to lay siege to the city.

# ¿ Jun 28, 2023 04:21

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

«‹›5 »