The War in the Ukraine

A

allyerse

New Member
Registered Member
Topazchen said:
What happens if they are given these weapons and Russia escalates and beats the sh1t out of them ? do they send F35s ?
Click to expand...
If these were shipped with how they would be outfitted in the US military, then it would be somewhat similar in capability to Ukraine's pre-war arty. In that best case it would still not be as good as having the pre-war army spawn back and would probably be used to take pot shots at Russians just as usual. However it seems that just like the M777, they will be shipped in gimped by the looks of things...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Certain advanced munitions fired by the MLRS can reach up to 190 miles, but “no long-range strike weapons are being considered” as part of the package, one administration official cautioned. Instead, the U.S. is weighing supplying rockets that can travel roughly between 20 to 45 miles, further than the shells fired by the M777 howitzers sent to Ukraine in May, which can reach about 15 miles.
Click to expand...

So If I were to make an educated guess if things are going how they are going now, then it is just the same old usual stuff, we will just continue to see artillery grinding and other attritional and positional type of fighting. One side having overall less men committed to the war yet more firepower fighting against the otherside with more manpower but lacking in fires and now mechanization. If artillery continues to be trickled in like this on the Ukrainian side, it will always be outmatched and have to resort to more asymmetrical tactics just as what we've seen with their tochka, MLRS, and SPGs which was especially prevalent early on in the war when they still had significant numbers. This isn't to say that it still isn't happening but it is just being done with far less than what those Ukrainian mechanized units would have on paper due to attrition.

Perhaps with more aid throughout the summer and fall, there can be more mechanized units formed in western Ukraine, I am thinking that if such a condition is fulfilled, then attempts at seizing Kherson alongside with the Crimean Canal could be attempted. However this thought is just something that could be plausible if western aid is enough to start arming whole units with vehicles and fires aside from those being fed into Donbass. Additionally in a few months we don't know how the war will go in the east or how things will be internationally.
 
manqiangrexue

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
Hey, is Putin gonna "beg for mercy" or do they all "fear the Russian might"? Which personality is it gonna be for you this week?
gadgetcool5 said:
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1529939191378984988

Ukraine will soon have deep strike capability into Russia. Russian command, logistics will be sitting ducks. Between this and the Patriot missile batteries,
Click to expand...
None of that can make any difference to the inevitable ending of a total Russian victory. The most they could do is push Russia into using high intensity weapons with disregard to civilian life, turning cities and areas into rubble to destroy systems that they cannot pinpoint, but I doubt that they can even have that much impact on Russia's operation. Every American shipment to Ukraine, it's, "Ohhhh, the Russians are really gonna get it now!" Then it makes no difference and America sends something else, and repeat.
gadgetcool5 said:
I actually feel sorry for the Russians at this point.
Click to expand...
We've all felt sorry for your identity crisis and multiple personality disorder since the first time we've read your posts.
 
Last edited:
T

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
Abominable said:
I missed this, but one of the few western analysts who isn't full "Ukraine is winning" has changed his assessment of the war. Pro-Russian channels are already calling him a Washington shill.
The short version is that while he still thinks that the Ukraine forces will be annihilated in the east, but the Ukraine will be using the time bought to create a new army armed with NATO weapons. The $40 billion provided by the west is a game changer, as it exceeds Russia's annual budget, and that Ukraine may be able to grind out a long term stalemate around the Dnieper. Weirdly he goes on to suggest Russia needs to "drastically escalate" their strategy for phase 3, that sounds very close to advising Russia use nuclear weapons against NATO.

That's definitely a possibility, but he's missing a few key points. Even ignoring the PPP disparity, a single transfer of $40 billion isn't the same as an annual budget. Russia's military has been built up with decades worth of military spending.

He's also missing the economic aspect. While Russian oligarchs and lots of businesses that were dependent on the west will be in trouble, the overall economic health of the country is fine. State revenues are higher than ever, and they are only going to get better with wheat prices and so on. Any economic problem Russia has is the exact same the west is experiencing through inflation.

All they need to do is maintain a war that is costing them what the Saudis are spending in Yemen. For America its much worse. This is costing them much more than Iraq or Afghanistan. Ukrainians are losing equipment at a much higher rate than US forces did, and everything Ukraine loses is going to need to be replaced or Ukraine loses combat effectiveness.

Moreover there's the economic cost. Ukraine today is under full naval blockade and has had a lot of their industry damaged. The oil, food and other supplies they they need to stay alive will need to be provided for loans they will never be able to pay back. The $40 billion America sent in aid won't last them through summer in my opinion. I think this war will cost America alone $100 billion a year in aid, which is much more than America was spending in Iraq and Afghanistan combined.

We don't know what Putin's plan is. A long drawn out war may be better than a short one if it bankrupts America. That certainly would be better than advising Putin to start escalating the war and risk turning into a nuclear exchange, which is what it sounds like to me. A lot of his articles get translated into Russian and posted on pro-Kremlin channels. Given his former military rank I'm sure people in the Kremlin will be listening to what he has to say.
Click to expand...

Alex Mercouris has also mentioned that none of the so called training is actually happening in said countries, that only $4 to 6 billion in the $40 billion aid package goes to weapons and training for the Ukrainians, the rest goes to NGOs and even aid packages to other countries, as well as replenishing inventories in the US alone.

Alex also said that the tactics Scott mentioned, while rational, is also brutal, inhumane and cruel. It does not make sense that you are trading away experienced battle hardened soldiers that have been trained in addition for years by NATO personnel and trained long under Soviet doctrines, for those that are trained under 40 days. This is not to mention the cannon fodder effect will have a devastating effect on Ukrainian morale and spread throughout its armed forces.

Frontline Ukrainian soldiers have way way more hard core battle experience than NATO soldiers and the training should be the other way around. We have seen Western trained armies in South Vietnam and Afghanistan collapse quickly. We have seen the Western trained Iraqi Army unable to handle ISIS, and the Western trained Saudi Army unable to handle the Houthis.

Not worth losing all those experienced soldiers just for every inch of ground. Look what happened to the German armed forces in WW2 once they lost their experienced soldiers. Look what happened to the Japanese forces in the Pacific. Look what happened to Chiang Kai Sek and his Nationalist forces once he lost his elite German trained soldiers. These sacrifices were made just to hold ground. Another common theme with the three is the persistent promises of reserves being created in the back with wonder weapons that is somehow going to turn the tide.

All this is happening while the Russians are gaining more hard core battle experience by the day, which can be thought and spread to the rest of their army.
 
Last edited:
B

B.I.B.

Captain
Tam said:
Alex Mercouris has also mentioned that none of the so called training is actually happening in said countries, that only $4 to 6 billion in the $40 billion aid package goes to weapons and training for the Ukrainians, the rest goes to NGOs and even aid packages to other countries, as well as replenishing inventories in the US alone.

Alex also said that the tactics Scott mentioned, while rational, is also brutal, inhumane and cruel. It does not make sense that you are trading away experienced battle hardened soldiers that have been trained in addition for years by NATO personnel and trained long under Soviet doctrines, for those that are trained under 40 days. This is not to mention the cannon fodder effect will have a devastating effect on Ukrainian morale and spread throughout its armed forces.

Frontline Ukrainian soldiers have way way more hard core battle experience than NATO soldiers and the training should be the other way around. We have seen Western trained armies in South Vietnam and Afghanistan collapse quickly. We have seen the Western trained Iraqi Army unable to handle ISIS, and the Western trained Saudi Army unable to handle the Houthis.

Not worth losing all those experienced soldiers just for every inch of ground. Look what happened to the German armed forces in WW2 once they lost their experienced soldiers. Look what happened to the Japanese forces in the Pacific. Look what happened to Chiang Kai Sek and his Nationalist forces once he lost his elite German trained soldiers. These sacrifices were made just to hold ground. Another common theme with the three is the persistent promises of reserves being created in the back with wonder weapons that is somehow going to turn the tide.

All this is happening while the Russians are gaining more hard core battle experience by the day, which can be thought and spread to the rest of their army.
Click to expand...
Alex said very much the same thing I watched in one of his live streams. He also mentioned that Ukrainian soldiers were also surrendering or retreating/deserting without fighting and wondered were these the early signs of an army about to crumble.
 
Coalescence

Coalescence

Senior Member
Registered Member
Atomicfrog said:
Common, they had hover 400 Multiple rocket launchers at the start of this war... do you think that a couple of dozen will make a difference ?
Click to expand...
They would also be a high priority target for Russia's missile forces as well. What I'm concerned is if the Ukrainian military will limit their use of it in the battlefield, or they will try to strike within Russian territory. If they did the latter, its going to escalate things between NATO/US and Russia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top