Russian Ukraine shenanigans

[DirkDiggler]

1 hour ago, Best-22 said:

Also, I'm seeing reporting that they have only committed 1/3 of the BTGs that were assembled at the border. If true, it seems they didn't learn from our experience in Vietnam; that once committed to military action it should be 100% effort and not an incremental ramping up of pressure.

It seems Russia has likely failed its day 1/2 objectives and its slower than they'd like. 

I'm seeing parallels but this time we are on the other side and I'm hoping Ukraine can capitalize on it while the west continues to support logistically. Too early to draw any meaningful conclusions though IMO. 

Caveat: Speculating.

  There’s only so many roads that support the Russian axis of advance.  I haven’t seen any videos showing Russian BTGs charging across the steppes WWII style (maybe they’re doing so, just haven’t seen it personally).  You can only cram so many units on to  limited LOCs; further, a lot of the roads outside the major cities are in poor condition and armored vehicles tear the shit out of pavement.

  Perhaps more importantly, you can only push forward the combat power you can logistically sustain.  Trucks need to use roads and are vulnerable to ambush/require security, helicopter sustainment is vulnerable to MANPADs and can’t move enough to keep large armored units in the fight.  I don’t believe the Russian AF has a large tactical airlift (airdrop) capability.  My guess is the Russians are overall limited by their ability to sustain their forward combat power.

[arg]

He does not look well compared to other vids I've seen.

 

[brickhistory]

When you might lose your F1 ride because your dad's friend starts a war:

https://www.espn.com/f1/story/_/id/33368180/haas-decide-nikita-mazepin-uralkali-next-week

[ClearedHot]

2 hours ago, Prozac said:

Holy shit! I realize this is one side of the story but if Russia lost anywhere near 80 MBTs in a 48hr period (against a supposedly far inferior force) that is astonishing. Makes one wonder if we’re witnessing the end of the tank as an effective battlefield weapon when confronted by infantry equipped with modern anti-tank weaponry. 

Javelin, the great armor equalizer.

 

3 hours ago, uhhello said:

Almost 1800 arrests country wide.  We'll see how long the protest will persists. 

Folks protesting Russia everywhere.

 

[Bigred]

2 hours ago, DirkDiggler said:

Caveat: Speculating.

  There’s only so many roads that support the Russian axis of advance.  I haven’t seen any videos showing Russian BTGs charging across the steppes WWII style (maybe they’re doing so, just haven’t seen it personally).  You can only cram so many units on to  limited LOCs; further, a lot of the roads outside the major cities are in poor condition and armored vehicles tear the shit out of pavement.

  Perhaps more importantly, you can only push forward the combat power you can logistically sustain.  Trucks need to use roads and are vulnerable to ambush/require security, helicopter sustainment is vulnerable to MANPADs and can’t move enough to keep large armored units in the fight.  I don’t believe the Russian AF has a large tactical airlift (airdrop) capability.  My guess is the Russians are overall limited by their ability to sustain their forward combat power.

The Russians didn’t modernize their logistics train in the past 20 years. C4I, combat systems, etc, sure, but they are using old trucks and old equipment to move said combat systems. It’s a recipe for disaster.
 

Logistics is what makes war. Without it, the Russians have hamstrung themselves. In my layman’s view, they only have enough beans and bullets for a few weeks. If the numbers coming out from the Ukrainian side are accurate, the Russians may be in for a helluva lot more of a fight, and sustaining said fight, than they may have bargained for. 

[VMFA187]

3 hours ago, Best-22 said:

Is it just me or has anyone else noticed pre-dawn fires just in time for daylight offensives? It wasnt what i was expecting, does anyone know enough about russian doctrine to say why that is? 

Are NVG/NODs less available to Russian units? Any other reason why they might be less comfortable than the US fighting at night? 

Or am I just way off and they actually are doing the bulk of their advance under darkness?

 

OPSEC permitting in your replies of course 

No one is comfortable fighting at night. We're just forced to train to it more, which is obviously beneficial. 

[Lawman]

No one is comfortable fighting at night. We're just forced to train to it more, which is obviously beneficial. 

We also have image intensification and FLIR in way more abundance than they do.

Conversely the Russians equip small ground units with ECM and Radar equipment.

It does however give me some hope in a LSCO type scenario that one of the two Big Bad’s has demonstrated little in the ability to maneuver in the dark. Conduct fire support operations sure, but if there is an entire portion of the day that they find themselves readily fixed in their combat cycle, that’s a huge advantage to us who can conduct maneuver in the dark.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pawnman]

50 minutes ago, Bigred said:

The Russians didn’t modernize their logistics train in the past 20 years. C4I, combat systems, etc, sure, but they are using old trucks and old equipment to move said combat systems. It’s a recipe for disaster.
 

Logistics is what makes war. Without it, the Russians have hamstrung themselves. In my layman’s view, they only have enough beans and bullets for a few weeks. If the numbers coming out from the Ukrainian side are accurate, the Russians may be in for a helluva lot more of a fight, and sustaining said fight, than they may have bargained for. 

Amateurs talk tactics. Professionals talk logistics. 

[ViperMan]

Here me out on this one.

We should hellfire Putin. Send them a *uck of a message. Shake things up. Call their remaining leadership's bluff on further escalation. Put them on notice that they are criminals and are legal targets.

[ClearedHot]

23 minutes ago, ViperMan said:

Here me out on this one.

We should hellfire Putin. Send them a *uck of a message. Shake things up. Call their remaining leadership's bluff on further escalation. Put them on notice that they are criminals and are legal targets.

Hellfire the President of a sovereign nation that has more nuclear weapons than we do?

[FLEA]

4 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

Hellfire the President of a sovereign nation that has more nuclear weapons than we do?

If al-Baghdadi taught me anything it's that a man can survive a hellfire 2, 3, 4, 9 times and come back to haunt you. 

[Smokin]

They've threatened nukes just if another country intervenes IN UKRAINE.  If we launched an attack against Russia itself, even if everyone saw it as just against their leadership, it would be World War III.  Imagine Russia sending a cruise missile against the White House.  We see him as a criminal, clearly enough people in Russia see him as their leader, otherwise he'd be hanging from a bridge.

[fire4effect]

43 minutes ago, ViperMan said:

Here me out on this one.

We should hellfire Putin. Send them a *uck of a message. Shake things up. Call their remaining leadership's bluff on further escalation. Put them on notice that they are criminals and are legal targets.

As much as I would like too the Russian people will have to handle this one in house. Even that has some risk.

[ViperMan]

37 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

Hellfire the President of a sovereign nation that has more nuclear weapons than we do?

Yeah. "President" and "sovereign nation" may not be the most illuminating phrases to characterize Putin and what he's doing at this point. I dunno, but IMO he is clearly WAY over the line here, into instant war criminal status. And I think both us and them are past the point of counting our nukes. We both have the ability to annihilate each other, and I personally *highly* doubt they would risk total war over one guy - even their "president" - who last time I checked was an autocrat who was suppressing political opposition in his country. I think dropping one dude as a message would maybe give their leadership chain enough of a shake up they'd be given the opportunity to back off.

Clearly we will be fighting nuclear powers in the future. It stands to reason we should figure out good ways to do it.

[waveshaper]

The last Russian Empire collapsed in 1917 after Russian soldiers/citizens got tired of the Tsar's shitshow/slaughter on the Eastern Front and back in the homeland. Hopefully we will eventually see a repeat (Round 2) and Emperor Ras-Putin will meet the same fate as Tsar Nicholas II.

Eastern Front 1917/Movie Clip. Most of the actual Russian military units that mutinied were on Ukrainian turf.  

 

[brickhistory]

This Administration is a clown show:

https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2022/02/25/this-is-embarrassing-jen-psaki-tells-peter-doocy-why-u-s-will-continue-to-work-with-putin-in-key-areas/

 

Hate the political slant of the website if you wish, but the fact is, the White House said it will continue to cooperate with the Russians on "areas of mutual concern."  Implying that Ukraine is not.  So enough with the "treason" cheap shots.

It won't sanction oil/gas revenue streams.

Enough with the Biden's a foreign policy wizard.

This won't get serious until the Russki keyboard wizards interrupt the re-runs of "Matlock."

Meanwhile, have fun getting a loan to fill up your car.

 

break, break:

Kill Putin?  Sure, why not?  Nothing says full-on fight's on like killing the leader of a nation.  

Of course, you can't be too outraged when someone Hellfire-skis our leaders in that case.

But, Putin has laid it all on the line.  If he fails, he's literally gonna be gone, as in dead.  At 69/70, perhaps he was willing to roll the dice since most of his years are behind him.  Go big or go home, if you will.  

Something to consider in our calculus of this.

 

[M2]

5 hours ago, arg said:

He does not look well compared to other vids I've seen.

 

As compared to...

 

[Smokin]

Russia's just threatened Sweden and Finland.  As much as I don't want this war to spread, one way to end Russia as we know it is for them to over-extend.  The war is clearly not going as well as they thought it would and maybe they don't have quite the military we thought they did and might be on opportunity to send a real message. 

Admitting another country to NATO as response to Russia invading Ukraine would be a power move that would get Putin's attention.  But that would take balls, so we won't do it.

[nsplayr]

2 hours ago, ViperMan said:

Yeah. "President" and "sovereign nation" may not be the most illuminating phrases to characterize Putin and what he's doing at this point. I dunno, but IMO he is clearly WAY over the line here, into instant war criminal status. And I think both us and them are past the point of counting our nukes. We both have the ability to annihilate each other, and I personally *highly* doubt they would risk total war over one guy - even their "president" - who last time I checked was an autocrat who was suppressing political opposition in his country. I think dropping one dude as a message would maybe give their leadership chain enough of a shake up they'd be given the opportunity to back off.

Clearly we will be fighting nuclear powers in the future. It stands to reason we should figure out good ways to do it.

Ok tough guy yea let’s assassinate the head of state of a nuclear power…any other brilliant ideas?

And trust me, I’m fully in the “F Russia” camp 🇺🇦💪

[jazzdude]

Agree on this point. Lose/lose for all involved. Again, not the mark of smart or good leadership. Smart leaders look for the win/win. Understanding one’s adversary does not necessarily mean accommodating them. 

Sometimes you don't need a win, you just need to lose less than your adversary.

Maybe restarting the cold war is in Russia's interest. Stronger NATO resolve means the need to expand Russia's military to counter a growing NATO threat. Short term risk increase in exchange for a possible long term objective. On the flip side, how supportive would the American (or European) public be of open war with Russia, epecially if Russia never overtly attacks a NATO member? If Russia believes NATO wouldn't actually conduct a first strike, that short term increased tension might be worth it.

But like FLEA said, a lot of people are looking at this from what we think Russia's/Putin's goals are, rather than trying to really understand what motivates them. Putin seems to behave very rationally to advance his goals (in other words, his actions always seem to be calculated/deliberate and not at a whim), so I doubt he would've launched the invasion of Ukraine if he didn't believe it was in his best interests. Not understanding his goals and motivations means we won't be able to contain/counter him, so he stays one step ahead of us.

[hockeydork]

I think you are over thinking it man. He isn't one step ahead of us, he can just make decisions swiftly, good or bad, while we run around like dopes under reacting. If the Russians beat the Ukrainians, someone else will end up fighting them, maybe in 5 years, maybe in 15. 

 

How different would this all look had this not happened:

https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-torpedoed-sale-of-iron-dome-to-ukraine-fearing-russian-reaction-report/

 

[ClearedHot]

[BashiChuni]

Scary hearing talking heads and senators talking about a possible No fly zone over Ukraine 

[Day Man]

17 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

Scary hearing talking heads and senators talking about a possible No fly zone over Ukraine 

you mean like @congressman?

 

how tf do you embed tweets?

Edited February 26, 2022 by Day Man

[FLEA]

I'll tell you hwat though, I've got mad respects for this President Zelensky. This dude has been fighting like hell on every front to keep his country free. I mean, every diplomatic, economic, information and now military fronts. Dude stays in Kyiv, makes phone calls to world leaders all night, puts out statements, condemns Russia at every turn, then drives a truck into the center of Kyiv and hands out rifles to every man and woman that can hold one. It's the middle of the fucking night right now and he's on Twitter live streaming known Russian advancing positions to his people. Dude doesn't fucking sleep. I know propaganda is real and I'm not certain how much fighting he is actually doing from a combat standpoint, but from a simple being there and making sure shit happens standpoint this dude is leaps and bounds ahead of the fucko that fled Kabul last year. 

Its amazing how much one charismatic leader can motivate people to stand their ground for their values when they are willing to do the same. Wonder how many of our politicians in Washington could attest to that. 

Edited February 26, 2022 by FLEA