Russia/Ukraine from Another Perspective (Relaunch Part Deux)

368,089 Views | 8274 Replies | Last: 22 hrs ago by PlaneCrashGuy
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PlaneCrashGuy said:

Teslag said:

What's stopping it is superior weaponry given to Ukraine for pennies on the dollar representing a fraction of our annual defense budget. This recent aid package won't be the last. Ukraine will eventually be admitted to NATO. Russia simply doesn't have the ability to maintain logistical lines that long nor the weapons to overcome defensive positions and stand off weapons. They simply don't exist in Russia's arsenal.

Ukraine got torched without nato aid because they had to get up close and personal to the Russians. That situation favors Russia with superior numbers. Ukraine no longer has to do that. They can sit at a distance and take out Russian supply lines and advancements. All the while using longer range ATACMS to hurt Russian rear support behind Russian lines. It's a pure defensive posture. Ukraine won't get any land. But they also won't lose any either.

And that's exactly why Russia was losing their **** over more US and NATO aid. Aid that will continue regardless of who wins the presidency.


Ukraine got smaller (by a little bit) today, and everyday for the last couple hundred days.

if you think Ukraine is going to suddenly stand up and hold the line, my only question is when?
Tanker123
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Russia is fighting a war of attrition. In general, Ukraine is stuck fighting the meat grinder. It is incapable of breaching Russian defenses to conduct movement to contact, flanking, and other offensive operations.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
One thing you also keep making a mistake with is focusing purely on the russian advance near Avdiika. Russia makes incremental gains there as you mention. The width of that advance is about 2 to 3 miles. The front is 600 miles long. So Ukraine is holding the rest of the 597 miles and was ceding about a mile or so of advance each month I that tiny area.

You need to grasp the enormity and size of the front in Ukraine. It's huge and Russia can't seem to penetrate any of it save for one tiny area.
PlaneCrashGuy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Teslag said:

When? They have been since April of 2022. Russian isn't patting themselves on the back over 5 miles in 5 months. They know full well they needed to do more. It's not sustainable and it had to have been a kick in the nuts being unable to do more with Ukraine drained of equipment and ammunition. Ukraine in the coming months will be receiving the recently approved aid. And it will be used.

If Russias plan is to take 10 miles a year in one tiny area on the front they may succeed…

In 400 years.

If you think they can increase that rate then by all means tell us. List the specific offensive weapons and logistical capabilities they have that will facilitate it in the face of NATO ranged attacks.


Make no mistake, I'm not claiming the situation at the front is going to change, but you are. You act like Russia's door has closed, so when will Uke defend a town and actually keep it? Uke recaptured much of the initial push, but have been on their heels ever since; slowly atrophying more of their land to Putin.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PlaneCrashGuy said:

Teslag said:

When? They have been since April of 2022. Russian isn't patting themselves on the back over 5 miles in 5 months. They know full well they needed to do more. It's not sustainable and it had to have been a kick in the nuts being unable to do more with Ukraine drained of equipment and ammunition. Ukraine in the coming months will be receiving the recently approved aid. And it will be used.

If Russias plan is to take 10 miles a year in one tiny area on the front they may succeed…

In 400 years.

If you think they can increase that rate then by all means tell us. List the specific offensive weapons and logistical capabilities they have that will facilitate it in the face of NATO ranged attacks.


Make no mistake, I'm not claiming the situation at the front is going to change, but you are. You act like Russia's door has closed, so when will Uke defend a town and actually keep it? Uke recaptured much of the initial push, but have been on their heels ever since; slowly atrophying more of their land to Putin.


Again this is incorrect. See above. The front is 600 miles long and 597 miles of it hasn't moved an inch in almost a year and a half. I'm saying the situation at the front will remain the same.

A stalemate.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Also want to say I appreciate the discussion tonight. Way more level headed and on point for both of us.
Tanker123
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If the war was a football game, Russia would have slow and strong lines especially on defense. The Ukraine OL can't out muscle the Russian DL so the RBs can't punch through . However, it can't pass because the passing game is non existing.
notex
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
In a football analogy the Russians are more like a Bill Walsh 49er's team in the 80's, doing some new things but also having overwhelming talent in the game, the equivalent of playing with 12 men on the field every snap. Massive production of artillery shells from ancient factories is what leads the statistical analysis, but it's not the complete picture.

One of the sleeper stories of the war has been the extraordinary capability of Russian air defenses, with what had been thought to be mundane systems evolving to be able to intercept the most difficult targets. Russian SAMs are routinely downing GMLRS, Storm Shadows, and even AGM-88 HARMs. Russian air defenses in the Crimea have even been downing ATACMS, and EW elsewhere have reduced Excalibur ammo efficiency to 6 percent.

But most remarkable is the fact the Russians seem to have an absolutely bottomless supply of modern air defense missiles. Just last week the Russian MoD reported that they had shot down 1,715 aerial targets, some 95% of them drones. The Russian BDA reports are a good proxy for Russian ammunition consumption more than an accurate figure to trust on what they shot down. Even assuming 75% of the drones were engaged with small arms or EW, that's still some 400 antiaircraft missiles expended for the week.

And the Russians do this, week after week after week and they've been doing it for over two years now. And they've shown zero indication their air defense inventory is even under stress, missile systems are probably the one area where we've never seen them bring old systems back into service from the bunkers. Meanwhile the West is simply out of modern missiles and desperately trying to keep Ukraine going with systems from the 1960s like HAWK, Chaparral and improvised Sea Sparrow launchers, and helping the UFA cope by modifying/using ancient stuff like SA-5's.

Guided missiles are not simple items to make - they're very complex and require sophisticated manufacturing to tight tolerances. Western manufacturers have never produced them large quantities quickly, even at the height of the Cold War. And yet here the Russians are stamping out enough ammunition to keep their Buks and Pantsirs on the firing line after two years of a war featuring an order of magnitude more aerial targets than any previous conflict, and EW systems every 10km on a huge front.

In war materiel (sophisticated as well as simple/cheap), as well as manpower, the Russians are clearly winning. The trade sanctions aren't working, and the Ukrainians themselves report on the surge in weapons being used against them (going from 20 to 150 glide bombs a day):

PlaneCrashGuy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Well said. More on that here
FJB24
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RCI: "What 10 years of meddling have wrought (it's not Democracy)"
Quote:

While Biden's narrative is widely accepted by Washington's political establishment, a close examination of the president and his top principals' record dating back to the Obama administration reveals a different picture. Far from protecting democracy from Kyiv to Washington, their role in Ukraine looks more like epic meddling resulting in political upheaval for both countries.

Over the last decade, Ukraine has been the battleground in a proxy war between the U.S. and Russia a conflict massively escalated by the Kremlin's invasion in 2022. The fight erupted in early 2014, when Biden and his team, then serving in the Obama administration, supported the overthrow of Ukraine's elected president, Viktor Yanukovych. Leveraging billions of dollars in U.S. assistance, Washington has shaped the personnel and policies of subsequent Ukrainian governments, all while expanding its military and intelligence presence in Ukraine via the CIA and NATO. During this period, Ukraine has not become an independent self-sustaining democracy, but a client state heavily dependent on European and U.S. support, which has not protected it from the ravages of war.

The Biden-Obama team's meddling in Ukraine has also had a boomerang effect at home.
As well-connected Washington Beltway insiders such as Hunter Biden have exploited it for personal enrichment, Ukraine has become a source of foreign interference in the U.S. political system with questions of unsavory dealings arising in the 2016 and 2020 elections as well as the first impeachment of Donald Trump. After years of secrecy, CIA sources have only recently confirmed that Ukrainian intelligence helped generate the Russian interference allegations that engulfed Trump's presidency. House Democrats' initial attempt to impeach Trump, undertaken in the fall of 2019, came in response to his efforts to scrutinize Ukraine's Russiagate connection.
Quote:

Telizhenko says he was told to meet with veteran Democratic operative Alexandra Chalupa, who had also served in the Clinton White House. "The U.S. government and people from the Democratic National Committee are approaching and asking for dirt on a presidential candidate," Telizhenko recalls. "And Chalupa said, 'I want dirt. I just want to get Trump off the elections.'"

Starting in early 2016, U.S. officials leaned on the Ukrainians to investigate Paul Manafort, the GOP consultant who would become Trump's campaign manager, and avoid scrutiny of Burisma, as RCI reported in 2022. "Obama's NSC hosted Ukrainian officials and told them to stop investigating Hunter Biden and start investigating Paul Manafort," a former senior NSC official told RCI. In January 2016, the FBI suddenly reopened a closed investigation into Manafort for potential money laundering and tax evasion connected to his work in Ukraine.
Quote:

Just as Telizhenko has been effectively silenced in the U.S. establishment, so has the Ukrainian meddling that he helped expose. Capturing the prevailing media narrative, the Washington Post recently claimed that Trump has "falsely blamed Ukraine for trying to help Democratic rival Hillary Clinton," which, the Post added, is "a smear spread by Russian spy services." This narrative ignores a voluminous record that includes Ukrainian officials admitting to helping Clinton.

As the Biden administration successfully pressured Congress to approve its $61 billion funding request for Ukraine, holdout Republicans were similarly accused of parroting the Kremlin. Shortly before the vote, two influential Republican committee chairmen, Reps. Mike Turner of Ohio and Mike McCaul of Texas, claimed that unnamed members of their caucus were repeating Russian propaganda. Zelensky also asserted that Russia was manipulating U.S. opponents of continued war funding: "When we talk about the Congress do you notice how [the Russians] work with society in the United States?"

Now that Biden has signed that newly authorized funding into law, the president and his senior aides have been handed the means to extend a proxy war that they launched a decade ago and that continues to ravage Ukraine. In yet another case of Ukraine playing a significant role in domestic U.S. politics, Biden has also secured a boost to his bid for reelection. As the New York Times recently observed: "The resumption of large-scale military aid from the United States all but ensures that the war will be unfinished in Ukraine when Americans go to the polls in November."
This is a long piece but 100 percent sourced/accurate history.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Russian air defenses in the Crimea have even been downing ATACMS


Russia claims to have shot them down and offered no proof.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
notex said:

In a football analogy the Russians are more like a Bill Walsh 49er's team in the 80's, doing some new things but also having overwhelming talent in the game, the equivalent of playing with 12 men on the field every snap. Massive production of artillery shells from ancient factories is what leads the statistical analysis, but it's not the complete picture.

One of the sleeper stories of the war has been the extraordinary capability of Russian air defenses, with what had been thought to be mundane systems evolving to be able to intercept the most difficult targets. Russian SAMs are routinely downing GMLRS, Storm Shadows, and even AGM-88 HARMs. Russian air defenses in the Crimea have even been downing ATACMS, and EW elsewhere have reduced Excalibur ammo efficiency to 6 percent.

But most remarkable is the fact the Russians seem to have an absolutely bottomless supply of modern air defense missiles. Just last week the Russian MoD reported that they had shot down 1,715 aerial targets, some 95% of them drones. The Russian BDA reports are a good proxy for Russian ammunition consumption more than an accurate figure to trust on what they shot down. Even assuming 75% of the drones were engaged with small arms or EW, that's still some 400 antiaircraft missiles expended for the week.

And the Russians do this, week after week after week and they've been doing it for over two years now. And they've shown zero indication their air defense inventory is even under stress, missile systems are probably the one area where we've never seen them bring old systems back into service from the bunkers. Meanwhile the West is simply out of modern missiles and desperately trying to keep Ukraine going with systems from the 1960s like HAWK, Chaparral and improvised Sea Sparrow launchers, and helping the UFA cope by modifying/using ancient stuff like SA-5's.

Guided missiles are not simple items to make - they're very complex and require sophisticated manufacturing to tight tolerances. Western manufacturers have never produced them large quantities quickly, even at the height of the Cold War. And yet here the Russians are stamping out enough ammunition to keep their Buks and Pantsirs on the firing line after two years of a war featuring an order of magnitude more aerial targets than any previous conflict, and EW systems every 10km on a huge front.

In war materiel (sophisticated as well as simple/cheap), as well as manpower, the Russians are clearly winning. The trade sanctions aren't working, and the Ukrainians themselves report on the surge in weapons being used against them (going from 20 to 150 glide bombs a day):



Wow you really just plageriized that entire post word for word from this Russian Twitter account. At least give them credit next time

notex
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
There were parts I disagreed with/sounded like cheerleading so I edited it into my thoughts, hoping to pass the book report critics such as yourself who can't provide substantive feedback but like to think everyone agrees with you.

Whatever. Sorry to have triggered you. This is exactly why I don't post often. Signing off for the day…
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
You didnt edit it into your thoughts. You copied it word for word and didn't cite the source at all.
Get Off My Lawn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wow. Apparently I missed when we decided to give away ATACMS to this loser war. Freaking stupid to deplete low inventory ammunition. And the very definition of asymmetric war with Russia massing cheap artillery rounds while we spend up to $1.7M/shot. Even worse if true that Russia has been able to shoot these down.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
We sent them ATACMS last fall and the Ukes used the limited numbers quite well. The new aid package provides not only substantially more of them, but longer range versions which can hit targets behind Russian lines and opens up the entire Crimea peninsula to their effects.

And no, the Russians haven't been able to shoot them down...

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2024/04/30/ukraine-war-live-updates-latest-news-on-russia-and-the-war-in-ukraine.html

Quote:

In a Google-translated update on Telegram, Russia's defense ministry said that air defense systems had, in the past 24 hours, "shot down ... six ATACMS operational-tactical missiles made in the USA." It added that Ukrainian drones and French-made "Hammer" guided bombs had also been shot down.

The ministry did not provide evidence for the claim.

Just more Russian MOD tomfoolery.
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
In a big surprise to no one, Xi Jinping is in Serbia on the anniversary of the Nato bombardment. Oh wait, no it's not, at all. "Some damn thing in the balkans…"



Americans have no vital national security interests in Ukraine, or the caucuses.



I think it remains plausible the Russian breakout will be slow, then sudden all at once. Note this is not a definitive prediction.

Grapes
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Teslag said:

Grapes said:

Teslag said:

I'm fairly certain it's already known Russia won't accept a deal freezing current lines and allowing Ukraine to join NATO.


Or just don't have Ukraine as part of NATO. Maybe try that.



Ukraine has a right to join whatever they want. It also ensures no future Russian invasion


Sure and Russia has the right to be threatened by NATO and take action to address it.

So here we are.

Or….

Maybe if the US didn't overthrow the Ukrainian gov't and claim NATO membership a fait accompli, Crimea would still be part of Ukraine and thousands of Ukrainians and Russians wouldn't be dead today.

It can only be the evil Russians fault though, right?

PlaneCrashGuy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
notex said:

There were parts I disagreed with/sounded like cheerleading so I edited it into my thoughts, hoping to pass the book report critics such as yourself who can't provide substantive feedback but like to think everyone agrees with you.

Whatever. Sorry to have triggered you. This is exactly why I don't post often. Signing off for the day…


It was a good post. Ignore her.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

Sure and Russia has the right to be threatened by NATO and take action to address it.

Russia isn't doing this because they feel threatened by NATO. They are doing it because they simply want Ukraine to be a part of Russia.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PlaneCrashGuy said:

notex said:

There were parts I disagreed with/sounded like cheerleading so I edited it into my thoughts, hoping to pass the book report critics such as yourself who can't provide substantive feedback but like to think everyone agrees with you.

Whatever. Sorry to have triggered you. This is exactly why I don't post often. Signing off for the day…


It was a good post. Ignore her.

Of course you think it was a good post. It was word for word the Tweet you posted passed off as his own words.
PlaneCrashGuy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Grapes said:

Teslag said:

Grapes said:

Teslag said:

I'm fairly certain it's already known Russia won't accept a deal freezing current lines and allowing Ukraine to join NATO.


Or just don't have Ukraine as part of NATO. Maybe try that.



Ukraine has a right to join whatever they want. It also ensures no future Russian invasion


Sure and Russia has the right to be threatened by NATO and take action to address it.

So here we are.

Or….

Maybe if the US didn't overthrow the Ukrainian gov't and claim NATO membership a fait accompli, Crimea would still be part of Ukraine and thousands of Ukrainians and Russians wouldn't be dead today.

It can only be the evil Russians fault though, right?




A while back someone framed it by saying Russia lost and flipped the table over. I think it would be more accurate to say Russia up the ante.
PlaneCrashGuy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Teslag said:


Quote:

Sure and Russia has the right to be threatened by NATO and take action to address it.

Russia isn't doing this because they feel threatened by NATO. They are doing it because they simply want Ukraine to be a part of Russia.


And the reason they want Ukraine to be part of Russia is because they feel threatened by NATO. You're making a distinction without a difference.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Incorrect. The NATO threat is typical Russian propaganda to use as an excuse for a simple land grab. NATO has always been on their borders. They have always been in range of NATO weapons. And this war has already increased NATO's border with Russia.

That's why it was dumb. But I get why they needed the NATO boogeyman to sell to their people.
PlaneCrashGuy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Teslag said:

Incorrect. The NATO threat is typical Russian propaganda to use as an excuse for a simple land grab. NATO has always been on their borders. They have always been in range of NATO weapons. And this war has already increased NATO's border with Russia.

That's why it was dumb. But I get why they needed the NATO boogeyman to sell to their people.


You're making up this grand conspiracy as to what their "real" motives are, but its all in your head and will be ignored as such.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm just basing it on Putin's 7,000 word rambling essay. I figured I'd just go to the source.
PlaneCrashGuy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Teslag said:

I'm just basing it on Putin's 7,000 word rambling essay. I figured I'd just go to the source.


Go ahead and quote Putin then. Tell us what specifically he said that left you with this impression.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/66181

Here you go. Read it yourself. I won't do one of your petty back and forths in an effort to derail. You wanted the source, I gave it to you.
PlaneCrashGuy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Teslag said:

http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/66181

Here you go. Read it yourself. I won't do one of your petty back and forths in an effort to derail. You wanted the source, I gave it to you.


You yourself described it as rambling. Good faith requires you to at least articulate what specific parts you are talking about.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Again, not getting into one of your back and forth derails.
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Lengthy analysis here about whether Germany is still a 'reliable Nato ally:'
Quote:

Today's title question was both asked and answered yesterday by our friend Jim Geraghty at National Review. The title of his piece was, "Germany's not the reliable NATO ally Joe Biden makes it out to be." Well, that seems fairly straightforward, but what's the reasoning behind that conclusion? We work pretty closely with Germany in both military and diplomatic matters and have for a very long time. West Germany was accepted into NATO in 1955 and that was expanded following the country's reunification in 1990. There have been some bumps along the way, but the Germans have generally been team players. But Geraghty lists six reasons (or "problems") with Germany that lead him to believe that the German government isn't quite so committed to restraining Russian expansion as we might like to believe.
I personally could give two farts about nato allies but the war, if viewed as I do, as a proxy one where China is weakening the US and Europe via green energy etc. and as well the proxy conflict in Ukraine, to strengthen her position industrially makes sense, as Scholz just got back from groveling with Xi ostensibly about green commie stuff, and the Germans couldn't really give a positive view net of their 'alliance with America' at this point.

After nordstream, I am sure most of them at this point know this is being highly manipulated. Their financial institutions, and actions with regard to long range weapons etc, speak for themselves. If Kiev goes through with their threat to cut off gazprom shipments across their territory when the contracts expire later this year, I expect a pivot from Central Europe, quickly.

Many detailed points within the link/linked article.
Tanker123
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I would not characterize the Russians as innovative nor possessing acumen in warfare. Its best tactics and Center of Gravity is replicating WWI trench warfare.
Grapes
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Teslag said:

Again, not getting into one of your back and forth derails.


This is basically the essence of the entire discussion. Thats not a derail.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
But that's not how he operates. It's a 7,000 word essay, meant to be taken not in parts, but as a whole.

But that won't be good enough for him. He'll hyperfocus on one quote, then go back and forth nitpicking 3 or 4 times. Then shift the goal post to something else, then nitpick that 4 or 5 times. Then another goal post move. Toss in a couple of personal attacks and maybe a vaccine reference. This will happen over the course of 3 or so pages and the result will be on a tangent so far removed from the original discussion that it's completely off the rails. Then I will be banned for it.

So I'm not playing the game. I'm basing my point on Putin's essay as a whole. He can read it or not. He can come to a different conclusion that Putin isn't an imperialist nutjob dictator. Up to him. But what I'm not doing is playing his game again.
YouBet
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Pointed out in the article but the whole affair is dirty. We are as bad as Germany is. Your post earlier that we've eased sanctions on Russia while simultaneously fighting a proxy war with them. Germany still trades with Russia despite sanctions due to Ukraine.

I think we are actually worse than Germany at this point. We simultaneously support both sides of almost every major conflict going right now. We support both sides in the Ukraine War in one way or another and we openly and vocally support both Israel and Hamas while castigating and funding Iran all at the same time.

Yes, the world is not black and white but we go out of our way to make it gray, unnecessarily.
First Page Last Page
Page 217 of 237
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.