Warfare Russia/Ukraine War

[muck]

Ten years since Russia shot down passenger flight MH17. It's forces on the ground took some nice photos of themselves at the crash site when they weren't too busy looting.

View attachment 486339

View attachment 486340

View attachment 486341

That's as sickening as it is interesting. I'd only ever seen a video of the "rebels" first finding the wreckage.
The people being filmed seemed genuinely upset and even somewhat remorseful at the time when they realised they'd downed a passenger aircraft rather than an actual military transport.

 

[muck]

National politicians are elected to address concerns people have in their daily lives, foreign powerplays are very low on the priority list.

No one is denying the first, but the second half of the sentence is misleading, and I think you know this very well.

This is not just a "foreign powerplay". Not for Europe, not for the US.

If Ukraine falls, Russia will seriously consider attacking the Baltics, Poland, Bulgaria and Finland as per Dugin's manifesto (which Putin has endorsed). Letting Ukraine fall would only embolden Russia and lead to more bloodshed instead of less.

And if Ukraine falls, China will invade Taiwan and eviscerate the tech industry of both Europe and the USA. That's between 10% and 20% of our respective economies gone, just like that.

J.D. Vance should be smart enough to realise that it's not in America's interests to let either country fall; at least the fall of Taiwan would cripple America's economy big time. And yeah, I've heard, Trump's boasted that they would never let Taiwan's semiconductor industry fall in Chinese hands, but what exactly is going to stop Taipei from taking the hint and seeking a Hongkong-like solution with China? Why would they just sit by when America destroys their industrial base and national wealth? Taiwan isn't a big country. If the US won't help them, they'll be inevitably forced to make common cause with Beijing.

Well, he should be smart enough, his book showed a lot of insight, but he's apparently lost alot of his brain from the whiplash his conversion from Trump critic ("America's hitler") to loyal fanboy must have caused him. The stuff that he said just a few days shy of the invasion, that he hadn't joined the military to defend trans-rights in Ukraine … great demagoguery. Putin had already said why he'd attack Ukraine. It's just a land-grab.

It's staggering to observe, really. A bunch of isolationists and simple-minded businessmen are about to hand the crown to China and lead America into an isolation which might have brought some benefits 120 years ago but in this globalised world will prove to be a wrecking ball to America's economy. It's just weird. Like Trump's asking, what did Taiwan ever repay us with? The answer is: cheap labour. Taiwan is the reason that every American seven-year-old has a smartphone now. Well, bad example, because that's probably not a good thing, but you know what I mean.

It's like that man is unable to see the world in anything else but quarter-end accounts.

It's like the world is regressing back into an age where history was shaped by the whims and stupidity of monarchs. Or we're looking at a very elaborate plot by Russia and China to sabotage America from within by paying the right people to make decisions that amount to self-mutilation.

 

[Mike1976]

No one is denying the first, but the second half of the sentence is misleading, and I think you know this very well.

This is not just a "foreign powerplay". Not for Europe, not for the US.

If Ukraine falls, Russia will seriously consider attacking the Baltics, Poland, Bulgaria and Finland as per Dugin's manifesto (which Putin has endorsed). Letting Ukraine fall would only embolden Russia and lead to more bloodshed instead of less.

And if Ukraine falls, China will invade Taiwan and eviscerate the tech industry of both Europe and the USA. That's between 10% and 20% of our respective economies gone, just like that.

*Sigh* how many times do I have to keep repeating myself with you and Musashi ...

Elections are voted in by people, not governments/politicians. Politicians might care deeply about grand strategy, people voting care about their every day lives. And that's what I keep saying while the two of you keep countering with grand strategy which is a complete non-issue in people's minds.

If Ukraine has to fall in order for every day life to become more affordable then it's an "oh well" for almost all people.

The Dutch government wants to add an extra airfield, several new/renovated bases and extra ammunition depots. A preliminary location study came out a week ago.

Do you think the people near the proposed sites have since been jumping for joy that the national defence is finally taken seriously while shouting "Slava Ukraini!" or are they massively complaining (+ filing official challenges and lawsuits if the plans are pushed through) about cost, pollution, noise disturbance, stench, increased traffic, destruction of nature and in case of war having a massive bullseye painted on their communities?

Yeah, purely the latter. National defence is a non-issue, do you think the defence of a nation on the other side of Europe is something people care about. As long as other things that people actually care about are addressed by the government people tolerate money being sent to Ukraine. If people are given the choice between non-essential spending that benefits them or money to Ukraine they will almost all choose themselves 100%.

But no let's drop everything to go save Ukraine!

*Two years later*
Why are they all voting for parties who don't care about Ukraine?!?

The people of Ukraine are in voter's minds just as much as the people of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya etc ever were. Hardly if at all.

If you want to make an election drama out of one issue with voters, foreign policy is the least impactful of them all.

(Perhaps unless you're a US tax payer and already paying 3/4 of the national defence of other countries who don't care about you, actively work against you or downright hate you)

 

[Fluff]

No one is denying the first, but the second half of the sentence is misleading, and I think you know this very well.

This is not just a "foreign powerplay". Not for Europe, not for the US.

If Ukraine falls, Russia will seriously consider attacking the Baltics, Poland, Bulgaria and Finland as per Dugin's manifesto (which Putin has endorsed). Letting Ukraine fall would only embolden Russia and lead to more bloodshed instead of less.

And if Ukraine falls, China will invade Taiwan and eviscerate the tech industry of both Europe and the USA. That's between 10% and 20% of our respective economies gone, just like that.

J.D. Vance should be smart enough to realise that it's not in America's interests to let either country fall; at least the fall of Taiwan would cripple America's economy big time. And yeah, I've heard, Trump's boasted that they would never let Taiwan's semiconductor industry fall in Chinese hands, but what exactly is going to stop Taipei from taking the hint and seeking a Hongkong-like solution with China? Why would they just sit by when America destroys their industrial base and national wealth? Taiwan isn't a big country. If the US won't help them, they'll be inevitably forced to make common cause with Beijing.

Well, he should be smart enough, his book showed a lot of insight, but he's apparently lost alot of his brain from the whiplash his conversion from Trump critic ("America's hitler") to loyal fanboy must have caused him. The stuff that he said just a few days shy of the invasion, that he hadn't joined the military to defend trans-rights in Ukraine … great demagoguery. Putin had already said why he'd attack Ukraine. It's just a land-grab.

It's staggering to observe, really. A bunch of isolationists and simple-minded businessmen are about to hand the crown to China and lead America into an isolation which might have brought some benefits 120 years ago but in this globalised world will prove to be a wrecking ball to America's economy. It's just weird. Like Trump's asking, what did Taiwan ever repay us with? The answer is: cheap labour. Taiwan is the reason that every American seven-year-old has a smartphone now. Well, bad example, because that's probably not a good thing, but you know what I mean.

It's like that man is unable to see the world in anything else but quarter-end accounts.

It's like the world is regressing back into an age where history was shaped by the whims and stupidity of monarchs. Or we're looking at a very elaborate plot by Russia and China to sabotage America from within by paying the right people to make decisions that amount to self-mutilation.

Russia may have a ‘plan’ for what happens after Ukraine.

NATO seems fairly relaxed about Russia, some modest updating, and more ammo seem to be the order of the day. It looks as if neither side can ‘win’. Russia would love to freeze it, spend 3 years rebuilding their army, for another crack, meanwhile west would slowly supply more tech to Russia, allowing more tanks and aircraft to be modernised.

 

[HorniePonie]

*Sigh* how many times do I have to keep repeating myself with you and Musashi ...

Elections are voted in by people, not governments/politicians. Politicians might care deeply about grand strategy, people voting care about their every day lives. And that's what I keep saying while the two of you keep countering with grand strategy which is a complete non-issue in people's minds.

If Ukraine has to fall in order for every day life to become more affordable then it's an "oh well" for almost all people.

The Dutch government wants to add an extra airfield, several new/renovated bases and extra ammunition depots. A preliminary location study came out a week ago.

Do you think the people near the proposed sites have since been jumping for joy that the national defence is finally taken seriously while shouting "Slava Ukraini!" or are they massively complaining (+ filing official challenges and lawsuits if the plans are pushed through) about cost, pollution, noise disturbance, stench, increased traffic, destruction of nature and in case of war having a massive bullseye painted on their communities?

Yeah, purely the latter. National defence is a non-issue, do you think the defence of a nation on the other side of Europe is something people care about. As long as other things that people actually care about are addressed by the government people tolerate money being sent to Ukraine. If people are given the choice between non-essential spending that benefits them or money to Ukraine they will almost all choose themselves 100%.

But no let's drop everything to go save Ukraine!

*Two years later*
Why are they all voting for parties who don't care about Ukraine?!?

The people of Ukraine are in voter's minds just as much as the people of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya etc ever were. Hardly if at all.

If you want to make an election drama out of one issue with voters, foreign policy is the least impactful of them all.

(Perhaps unless you're a US tax payer and already paying 3/4 of the national defence of other countries who don't care about you, actively work against you or downright hate you)

Voters are often like children. They choose instant gratification over what is good for them in the long term.

 

[muck]

@Mike1976

If a government's sole purpose is to implement the policies supported by its own electorate, whatever the cost to the rest of the population and the whole country, how come everyone – including Donald Trump, I might add – criticises the Merkel administration for being so shortsighted as to having allowed Germany to become reliant on Russian energy imports?

Merkel gave her voters cheap gas, consequences be damned.

How is ignoring the threat posed by Russia now any different from that? The way I see it, Trump and the likes of Vance do exactly what they'd accused Merkel of doing: They risk their country's mid-to-long term future just to secure votes.

Yes, ordinary folks have other priorities than Russia right now, they worry about their immediate living situation, and a responsible government has to address their worries. However. The inability of many people to appreciate the gravity of the current geopolitical situation is an objective failure on their part as well as on the part of the ruling class. Pre-1990, for example, none except the far left doubted the USSR posed a clear and present danger to their safety. (The irony being that unlike present-day Russia, the USSR didn't lay claim to new territories.)

What's changed?

What's changed is that a growing rift has appeared in Western societies between the masses and the ruling elites where, as a matter of principle, a large percentage of the former doubt everything the latter says and does. Part of that mistrust is justified, not least because of an increasingly paternalistic inability of the elites to explain their policies and respect the masses' worries.

But the rift is also being exploited and artificially widened by the likes of Trump to further their own interests.

In a representative democracy, the government is to seek the best for the whole nation and react flexibily when a crisis appears. Populism isn't inherently a bad thing. But it does become a bad thing if the populist would rather collect some brownie points now than convince his supporters that a foreseeable crisis needs to be dealt with. Nikki Haley was on the right track, as far as I'm concerned.

What are we arguing here about? No one in this forum – not you, not e.g. @Chazman and not me neither – would ever disagree that the shortsighted and self-destructive policies pushed by urban left-wing populism need to be opposed regardless of whether or not they reflect a majority vote. Majorities can get it wrong, too. What exactly are you criticising me for, then?

 

[Soldier35]

The Ukrainian army published footage of attempts to intercept Russian Mi-8 and Mi-35 helicopters with FPV drones; the drone models were not disclosed. According to experts, it is difficult for FPV drones to shoot down a helicopter due to the difference in speeds and powerful air flows from the rotors. In addition, FPV drones have a weak automatic stabilization system; it is not designed for powerful wind currents and cannot stabilize the drone’s flight. It is worth noting that there is a possibility of destroying a helicopter if the drone flies towards the helicopter on a collision course and dives down, or uses remote detonation of ammunition.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Mike1976]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Mike1976]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Mike1976]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Mike1976]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Mike1976]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[NebrHogger]

Scouring depots for T-55s that will start? I will NOT be amazed to see T-34s in use at some point.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Mark Sman]

Scouring depots for T-55s that will start? I will NOT be amazed to see T-34s in use at some point.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Now that is embarasing. In a cold hearted way the Russians could use these and barely trained conscripts to try a Meat and Metal Wave type of attack if you don't care about losing a dozen at a time.

That isn't even up to Warsaw Pact standards.

 

[Chazman]

Scouring depots for T-55s that will start? I will NOT be amazed to see T-34s in use at some point.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Imagine if the US invaded Mexico, and 2.5 years later were refurbishing M-48 tanks.

 

[muck]

Imagine if the US invaded Mexico, and 2.5 years later were refurbishing M-48 tanks.

Now imagine you'd be refurbishing M-48 tanks not because you've actually run out of your modern kit, but because you don't give a rat's arse about the lives of your soldiers. Mediazona recently showed that Russia still has some 3.000 T-72/80/90.

They just don't care.

It really begs the question what kind of person volunteers to fight under such circumstances. Heck, I'm not sure if I'd be willing to defend my own country if my government continuously were to withhold the necessary equipment from me. Nevermind volunteering to fight abroad.

 

[TheKiwi]

Covert Cabal did some pretty good analysis on Russian tank park numbers. Most of those 3000 left are the ones that are beyond any economic repair. You might (maybe) be able to cannibalize 4-5 tanks to get one working one.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Mark Sman]

Now imagine you'd be refurbishing M-48 tanks not because you've actually run out of your modern kit, but because you don't give a rat's arse about the lives of your soldiers. Mediazona recently showed that Russia still has some 3.000 T-72/80/90.

They just don't care.

It really begs the question what kind of person volunteers to fight under such circumstances. Heck, I'm not sure if I'd be willing to defend my own country if my government continuously were to withhold the necessary equipment from me. Nevermind volunteering to fight abroad.

Yeah, here in the US there are valid complaints about the state of the military and the state of post service medical etc.

But it is nothing compared to the valid complaints that Russian service members must endure. Like comparing Apples to no Apples at all.

 

[Chazman]

Now imagine you'd be refurbishing M-48 tanks not because you've actually run out of your modern kit, but because you don't give a rat's arse about the lives of your soldiers. Mediazona recently showed that Russia still has some 3.000 T-72/80/90.

They just don't care.

It really begs the question what kind of person volunteers to fight under such circumstances. Heck, I'm not sure if I'd be willing to defend my own country if my government continuously were to withhold the necessary equipment from me. Nevermind volunteering to fight abroad.

I think the newer tanks left are in very bad shape. I've read they have also run short of autoloader and gun elevation parts, let alone sophisticated sensors.

 

[muck]

Mediazona arrived at the conclusion that Russia is capable of producing 1,500 main battle tanks per annum, with 30-50 from new parts and 1,470-1,450 from refurbished or cannibalised vehicles. Many of them will be garbage, but their quality might not be as big of an issue as we may think. I mean, the Russians obviously don't give a damn about crew survivability, and tactics-wise they're mostly used as assault guns anyway. Tank-on-tank engagements remain extremely rare. A T-55 isn't automatically a lesser threat to an Ukrainian trench compared to a T-90 …