Ukrainian War Developments

[james smith esq]

EU countries will provide Ukraine with 'fighter jets' under Brussels funding, says @JosepBorrellF
​

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1498030112230592512

I’d say that this is rather escalative!

 

[Topazchen]

This has me convinced that the degree of western support relies heavily on how well your own forces are doing, and to always remember that past performance is not indicative of future performance. This post goes into the political problems of this intervention and why it is not going according to Russian ideal:

Point 1:

On day 1-3, western public opinion was of no intervention, condemnation, sanctions, but essentially abandonment of Ukraine because of Russian quick gains, gaining air superiority, and destruction of Ukrainian supply lines with long range standoff fire. Russia was making unprecedented (literally, without historical precedent) gains.

After day 3, Russians are getting bogged down by surprising Ukrainian resistance, air superiority was not converted into air supremacy, they are failing to control the narrative, and they made mistakes. Yes, Russians are holding back (more on that in point 2) but that only represents a political mistake rather than a purely military mistake. This emboldened foreign adversaries of Russia which decided to do weapons sales, sending 'volunteers' and even talk of direct intervention.

The problem with Russia is that they're on a ticking clock due to foreign intervention. They have a dilemma: do they carpet bomb/shell for a few weeks to soften the enemy, or do they risk heavy casualties, a PR failure and foreign intervention?

This reminds me of when KMT tried doing this in the Battle of Shanghai. They failed because they did not slow down the Imperial Japanese Army sufficiently, foreigners were uninterested and thus KMT simply wasted their German equipped divisions. Same is true for KMT resistance against CPC. There was little pro-KMT intervention because despite all their intervention they were still doomed, foreigners lost interest, and that was their end.

Point 2:

Russia got too arrogant by its previous successes in Georgia, Syria and Ukraine. They thought a little carpet bombing, some PGM strikes and wiping out encircled units with tanks, combined with propaganda, is enough to get the rest to surrender on contact. This is a good strategy against confused, divided enemies to reduce the cost of military adventure. However, they did not consider what Ukraine has been doing since 2014.

Since 2014, Ukraine has been getting more and more radicalized. Unfortunately, by taking Crimea and splitting Donetsk and Luhansk, Russia actually lost popular support from the rest of Ukraine by taking away mobile Russian speaking minorities. So Ukraine lost territory, but they gained political advantage by now demographically consolidating around the pro-west Ukrainian speaking right. It also gave Russia a false sense of security by making them think they had enough popular support to disintegrate opposition on contact. Actually, they themselves got rid of all the weak units that would disintegrate on contact... and left only the hardened ones.

The other part is, they are unable to defend their narrative and are still allowing enemy points of view to shape the discussion. They have neither been able to promote their own point of view or silence the enemy point of view. This is a total loss on the information front which again, results in problems from point 1: going from tepid opposition and condemnation to active resistance.

Lessons for the future:

1. Winning or losing is snowballing. If you win hard, it keeps foreign opinion down and shuts up opposition. But if you start losing even a little, you will soon find foreign weapons, insurgents or even a no fly zone near you.

2. Do not assume adversaries are going to surrender upon attaining mere air superiority and a little carpet bombing. Only air supremacy and total devastation will do. This is going to result in bad PR but...

3. Media control is absolutely vital. If your side has no hope of shaping the narrative then don't even try to, just go for it. Holding back means failure because they sure won't hold back and you'll be demonized just the same.

4. Prior success could harden enemy resolve which is important when considering foreign intervention. Russian past successes set them up for bigger obstacles today.

5. Never underestimate nationalism. Do not assume that a democracy is actually a democracy, it could simply be a fascist state in disguise, and while fascist states often fail over the long run, they can still deal significant damage before going down.

Overtaken by evens. Kiev mayor has confirmed to AP that they are completely Sorrounded and I suspect that was the plan all along.
Russia wants Ukraine intact and has no time for messy urban warfare.

It's just that the interweb is very pro Ukraine and Kiev's propaganda army is doing a stellar job.

The Russian plan is to lay siege, have fire control and wait. Pretty sure Ukraine will be suing for peace in a week or two

 

[horse]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1497922195787554824

I think this is fake.

It is that old joke.

There are 10 pigeons sitting on a telephone wire.

You take a gun, and shoot one of them.

How many are left?

None, because they all flew away!

After several rounds of automatic gunfire, the birds are chirping in protest in that video.

 

[Abominable]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1498029493033881601

Um, are we about to see 'Flying Cossacks?'

How are Ukrainian pilots going to suddenly learn how to fly western fighter jets?

This sounds a lot like NATO planning on sending their own airforce in Ukrainian livery. Time find a nuclear bunker....

 

[KYli]

I think PRC's neutral stance is very enlightened. China is implicitly against Russian invasion of Ukraine. China is just not willing to hurt its own interest to sanction others. The west has called it a 'pro-Russia neutral.' But to me, that's a pro-China position.

I don't think the CCP or the Chinese elites in general is as petty as you are. If China need to get that money back, the Chinese don't need the Russians to get it done.

China is neutral to the extent of the war itself. China might not consider Russian action justified or appropriated but at the same understand why Russia did what it did.

However, it doesn't mean China isn't supportive of Russia. China has no interest to be the only major power to face off the entire Western powers and their lackeys. Besides, what the Western Powers did to Russia today would certainly going to do to China tomorrow.

And no, China might not be petty but China remembers. To this day, China still remembers NATO bombed its embassy in Serbia.

 

[james smith esq]

How are Ukrainian pilots going to suddenly learn how to fly western fighter jets?

This sounds a lot like NATO planning on sending their own airforce in Ukrainian livery. Time find a nuclear bunker....

I’ve been digging mine since Friday!

 

[solarz]

Popular support for a government's position in matters of foreign affairs is the rationale and strength behind the nationalist movement. When private citizens diverge in their individual management of foreign affairs the nation's foreign policy becomes weak and ineffective, often to the detriment of its own people.

ROFLMAO!

By that logic, China should have nuked Japan long ago!

 

[anzha]

How are Ukrainian pilots going to suddenly learn how to fly western fighter jets?

I bet they send the Mig-29s from Europe that are left over and being replaced. Something like 50 of them?

This sounds a lot like NATO planning on sending their own airforce in Ukrainian livery. Time find a nuclear bunker....

In WW2, the United States sent fighter squadrons to China - the Flying Tigers - prior to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. April 1941. They were all American volunteer pilots who flew under Chinese livery.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

That's what the reference (or crack) about the 'Flying Cossacks' was referencing.

 

[asif iqbal]

The problem is that delays and weak information control have made foreign intervention politically feasible and actual physical losses and positioning have made it militarily conceivable. If RAF was able to at least stop fixed wing strikers by day 3, it would've gone much better for them, but they did not.

But yes, they have also done many things right:

1. surrounding major cities and bombarding them into submission without allowing them reprieve or a break. They're now going into war of attrition mode - which they will win - rather than the COIN/hybrid warfare mode they've slipped into since Chechnya.

2. cutting all links between east and west Ukraine by either blowing or allowing the Ukrainians to blow bridges on the Dnieper river.

3. taking control of highways and countryside first rather than simply rushing cities to deny strategic depth and resupply.

We all know bombing cities into submission does not work, its simply goes against human nature

Russians did at the start use telecommunications by spreading mis-information and each Ukrainian soldier got a text saying laying down your arms you will die for nothing and it seemed to work on Day 1 and even Day 2

but the Blitzkrieg did not work due to poor planning and logistics and Russia quickly lost the tactical advantage

also they allowed Zelebskyy to become a international star via Twitter and social media and internet caught on it went viral

after all these years of hacking and cyber attacks Russia had ZERO plans for taking down the social media warfare

however there is one underlaying issue

Russia should not have invaded with 3 armies into Ukraine, very very big mistake

it should have at most taken those partial regions of Donestk and Luhansk

if it really wanted to they could have taken whole regions of Donestk and Luhansk

but whole Ukraine? a huge mis-judgement and tactical error

 

[pmc]

this is 100% a problem. RAF lacks sufficient tankers to maintain continuous tactical air coverage over Ukraine which is the 2nd largest country in Europe (Russia is 1st). Ukraine typically would be unable to take advantage of that because it has no AWACs and its radar stations were taken down on day 1.

However, they did not account for foreign AWAC intervention, which they should have, and they're still unable to sever lines of communication between Ukraine and EU which allows data feeding to Ukrainian military.

Flankers and MIG-31 can stay up the air 4.5 hours easily. Su-34 with external fuel tanks much more. . Syrian airbase is designed to handle now 200 planes and dual runways and deal with drones. how difficult it is when your next to Turkish border. who had own AWACS/ Drones to see flight lines and can inform insurgents living next door.
this Ukraine is much easier operation.