74OA said:

---

Send seized Iranian arms shipments to Ukraine. (Naw, makes too much sense.)

BOATLOADS

---

Eliminatus said:

---

74OA said:

---

Send seized Iranian arms shipments to Ukraine. (Naw, makes too much sense.)

BOATLOADS

---

Damn WaPo paywall. Look at them wanting recompense for their efforts. Losers.

Assuming we have a bunch of stuff that we are not expected to give back and we will never use ourselves? If so, hell yeah send that stuff.

But yeah, too much sense.

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

War sucks. It's a nasty business. In polling, however, it would seem Ukrainians are solidly behind this war and they get to decide if it is fought. And, with total mobilization, extraordinary measures got security come into play.

We did the same things here in WWII: conscriptions and drafts, major internal security. Control of political narratives directed towards winning the war. Suspension of some liberties under wartime powers. It happens in most any nation threatened existentially. Ukraine doesn't want to become part of the Russia that has systematically abused them and treated them as second class persons, and is openly willing to commit atrocities and war crimes against them.
Why should they be expected to submit and be defeated, subjugated, and oppressed if they can make the case to others that they deserve otherwise and it is in global best interests to prevent that versus allowing it.

The USA and Britain specifically made a political obligation to guarantee Ukrainian sovereignty if it yielded up Soviet era nuclear weapons. Thousands of them. And they did that. Should they then be cut loose, making the west faithless liars?

I think Ukraine is owed some support as long as they intend to resist of their own free will rather than surrender.

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

War sucks. It's a nasty business. In polling, however, it would seem Ukrainians are solidly behind this war and they get to decide if it is fought. And, with total mobilization, extraordinary measures got security come into play.

We did the same things here in WWII: conscriptions and drafts, major internal security. Control of political narratives directed towards winning the war. Suspension of some liberties under wartime powers. It happens in most any nation threatened existentially. Ukraine doesn't want to become part of the Russia that has systematically abused them and treated them as second class persons, and is openly willing to commit atrocities and war crimes against them.
Why should they be expected to submit and be defeated, subjugated, and oppressed if they can make the case to others that they deserve otherwise and it is in global best interests to prevent that versus allowing it.

The USA and Britain specifically made a political obligation to guarantee Ukrainian sovereignty if it yielded up Soviet era nuclear weapons. Thousands of them. And they did that. Should they then be cut loose, making the west faithless liars?

I think Ukraine is owed some support as long as they intend to resist of their own free will rather than surrender.

---

Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksiy Reznikov was very happy after the Ramstein meeting with NATO and indicated to journalists that Ukraine will receive fighter jets.

That big smile says it all

🇺🇦 pic.twitter.com/MmuYkbiqOX

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) February 14, 2023

Men have been seen in the City of Baranavichy in Belarus that have Uniforms and Equipment that appear to identify with the Wagner Group; it is not yet confirmed whether these are indeed Members of the Private Military Group but if they are this could indicate that they are… https://t.co/SUGxuBrUZB

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) February 15, 2023

74OA said:

---

Today's SITREP.

---

fullback44 said:

---

74OA said:

---

Today's SITREP.

---

My personal opinion is that the US and NATO are allowing the Russians to build up as many forces as it can in the regions before the longer range weapons are give Ukraine .. when the US and NATO finally does your probably going to see massive deaths of Russian troops .. it's coming is my thoughts ..just like what happened in the Kherson region

---

revvie said:

---

fullback44 said:

---

74OA said:

---

Today's SITREP.

---

My personal opinion is that the US and NATO are allowing the Russians to build up as many forces as it can in the regions before the longer range weapons are give Ukraine .. when the US and NATO finally does your probably going to see massive deaths of Russian troops .. it's coming is my thoughts ..just like what happened in the Kherson region

---

With either the GLSDB or ATACMS Ukraine can target every railway coming in Eastern Ukraine and we have seen how proficient the orcs are utilizing truck transport.

---

Eliminatus said:

---

I know I have been very critical of the Russian seemingly piece meal attacks in the area but even I will say they really don't have many options. What can you do really when you have a largely foot mobile force in an area under 24/7 surveillance that you cannot truly dupe with on call artillery just waiting for you to bunch up? On paper the answer is of course to use armor to spearhead attacks but we are now seeing f'ing field artillery used to pick off point targets. In addition to all the other anti tank goodies. Think that is one of the larger changes we have seen implemented on a grand scale. Then you mix in inexperience and incompetence and man, the Russians are not in a good place.

I am just trying to armchair QB from their perspective and I can't think of any feasible large scale options for them either with the realities they are facing on the frontlines. Can't really mass troops and can't mass armor. Lose/lose?

Which all goes back to that original massive miscalculation that took most of us by surprise I think. Russias inability to gain air superiority. Without that to harry Uke long distance fires….

So I guess the small squad level near suicidal rushes probably IS the best tactic Russia can use. Especially when you factor in the last variable of training and equipment.

Just trying to think from the other side of the coin.

Thoughts?

---

Quote:

---

The Washington Post reported that US officials have privately signaled to Ukraine that Western security aid to Ukraine is finite, however. The Washington Post reported on February 13 that an anonymous US government official stated that US government officials are trying to "impress upon [Ukrainian officials] that [the US Government] can't do anything and everything forever."[3] The Washington Post also reported that US officials stated that recent Western aid packages for Ukraine "represent Kyiv's best chance to decisively change the course of the war."[4]

Western reporting indicates that there continue to be Western concerns about Ukraine's determination to hold Bakhmut. The Washington Post also reported that US defense planners assess that Ukrainian forces are unable to simultaneously defend Bakhmut and launch a spring counteroffensive and have urged Ukraine to prioritize the spring counteroffensive over defending Bakhmut.[5] ISW continues to assess that Ukraine's decision to defend Bakhmut is likely a strategically sound effort despite its costs for Ukraine.[6] Ukraine's defense of Bakhmut has forced the Kremlin to expend much of the Wagner Group as a force and commit high-value Russian airborne forces to sustain attritional advances.[7]

Ukrainian defense of Bakhmut has degraded significant Russian forces and will likely set favorable conditions for a future Ukrainian counteroffensive. Had Russian troops taken Bakhmut without significant Ukrainian resistance they could have hoped to expand operations in ways that could have forced Ukraine to construct hasty defensive positions in less favorable terrain. Therefore, Ukraine's defense of Bakhmut and undertaking an effort to set conditions for a counteroffensive are likely complementary, not mutually exclusive, activities considering that Russian forces would have continued their offensive beyond Bakhmut had Ukraine yielded the city earlier.

---

Eliminatus said:

---

I know I have been very critical of the Russian seemingly piece meal attacks in the area but even I will say they really don't have many options. What can you do really when you have a largely foot mobile force in an area under 24/7 surveillance that you cannot truly dupe with on call artillery just waiting for you to bunch up? On paper the answer is of course to use armor to spearhead attacks but we are now seeing f'ing field artillery used to pick off point targets. In addition to all the other anti tank goodies. Think that is one of the larger changes we have seen implemented on a grand scale. Then you mix in inexperience and incompetence and man, the Russians are not in a good place.

I am just trying to armchair QB from their perspective and I can't think of any feasible large scale options for them either with the realities they are facing on the frontlines. Can't really mass troops and can't mass armor. Lose/lose?

Which all goes back to that original massive miscalculation that took most of us by surprise I think. Russias inability to gain air superiority. Without that to harry Uke long distance fires….

So I guess the small squad level near suicidal rushes probably IS the best tactic Russia can use. Especially when you factor in the last variable of training and equipment.

Just trying to think from the other side of the coin.

Thoughts?

---

nortex97 said:

---

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraine-situation-report-front-lines-quite-stable-top-us-general-says

---

Lots of weird reports about the Missile Attack tonight with a good number of the Missiles said to be “Spoofs” by either Electronic Warfare methods or even Missiles without Warheads, this was most likely an attempt to exhaust Ukrainian Air Defenses.

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) February 16, 2023

⚡️Russian forces strike critical infrastructure in Lviv Oblast.

Russian forces struck critical infrastructure in Lviv Oblast in the early hours of Feb. 16, regional Governor Maksym Kozytskyi reported on Telegram.

There are no casualties, according to the governor.

— The Kyiv Independent (@KyivIndependent) February 16, 2023

Quote:

---

Russia's costly military campaign in Ukraine has likely significantly depleted Russian equipment and manpower reserves necessary to sustain a successful large-scale offensive in eastern Ukraine. UK Defense Secretary Ben Wallace told the BBC that the UK had not seen the Russian "massing of a single force to punch through in a big offensive" and noted that Russians are now trying to advance in Donbas at a "huge cost."[1] Wallace estimated that Russia could have committed up to 97 percent of its army to the fight in Ukraine and that its combat effectiveness has decreased by 40 percent due to an "almost First World War level of attrition" that measures Russian advances in meters in human wave attacks. ISW cannot independently confirm Wallace's estimates, but his observation that Russia lacks sufficient mechanized combat power for a breakthrough aligns with previous ISW assessments that the conventional Russian military must undergo significant reconstitution before regaining the ability to conduct effective maneuver warfare.[2] Wallace's observations also suggest that Russia does not have untapped combat-ready reserves capable of executing a large-scale offensive, which is also ISW's assessment.

Russia's inability to regenerate expended mechanized vehicles in the short term further restricts Russian maneuver warfare capabilities. The International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) reported that Russia lost about 50 percent of its T-72B and T-72B3M tanks and many T-80 tanks, forcing Russian forces to rely on older equipment.[3] Wallace noted that two-thirds of Russia's tanks are destroyed or unusable. The UK Ministry of Defense assessed that the Kremlin likely recognizes that Russia's low industrial output is a "critical weakness," and that Russian production is not meeting the Kremlin's long-term requirements.[4] Deputy Chairman of the Russian Security Council Dmitry Medvedev, for example, called for increased production of weapons and modern tanks on February 9.[5] The Norwegian Intelligence Service (NIS) noted that Russia is still capable of producing large quantities of small arms, missiles, and tanks but that its defense industry base (DIB) will continue to struggle to offset the effects of Western sanctions.[6] The NIS added that Russia will also need to undergo an extensive effort to set up new production lines and will need time to recruit and train workers.

Some Russian defense firms continue to complain that they do not have sufficient personnel to support the intensified industrial effort, while Russian pro-war milbloggers noted that Russia needs to immediately embark on modernization and personnel recruitment efforts to solve issues with tank production.[7] Such measures are unlikely to increase the Russian defense industry's capacity to produce tanks rapidly and at scale, and would certainly not do so in time to affect the outcome of the current Russian offensive or of a Ukrainian counter-offensive launched in the coming months. The timely Western provisions of tanks and armored vehicles to Ukraine would further offset Russia's ability to conduct mechanized warfare as Russia struggles to restart its defense production in the immediate term. Ukraine likely continues to have a window of opportunity to initiate large-scale counteroffensives over the next few months, but its ability to do so likely rests heavily on the speed and scale at which the West provides it the necessary materiel, particularly tanks and armored vehicles.

---