The War in the Ukraine
- Thread starter SampanViking
- Start date
I am not going to say the bombing did not have an effect because it did. It stressed their economies. But war production never stopped. And in fact both Germany and Japan were producing more weapons than in early war. Problem is it is easier to replace weapons than lost combat veterans. And one thing the US typically "forgets" to mention is that Japan did not surrender after the first atomic bomb was dropped, but after the Soviet Union declared war on Japan. That is when they knew they were toast.
Especially when the Soviet launch Operation August Storm in Manchuria, that really break the Japanese as they planned to prolong the war by using China.
Peskov's words are worth nothing, ever since the Syrian war I realized Peskov has no authority to say anything. Because back at that time every time he talked it looked like he was just a random citzen speaking and not some one from the Kremlin, that is how little he is allowed to say.
The job of the Russian spokesman is not to reveal anything of significance, his job is to manage the image of Russia in front of the press.
Archival episode of the battle made by a Ukrainian soldier in the Kherson direction, presumably in September. In the video, Ukrainian BTR-70s received from Macedonia. The result of the battle at the end of the video.
The Russian calculation of the Tor-M2U air defense system showed the destruction of the UAV of the Ukrainian army. Usually, the work of SAM crews is not as interesting as the actions of combat units of other troops, since in most cases you cannot see the result. In this case, this is not the case, the moment of the UAV hit is shown on the screen of the air defense system, the UAV type could not be established. The Tor-M2U air defense system is a modification of the 2009 complex, the air defense system can direct missiles at 8 targets and simultaneously fire at 4 at a distance of up to 12 kilometers.
Ukraine received TRLG-230 MLRS from Turkey, as reported in the video, their first use. After the appearance of footage with the MLRS, the Turkish media denied this, it is reported that the installation on the video is most likely Azerbaijani. The TRLG-230 MLRS from the Turkish company Roketsan are quite new; 230 mm missiles were tested in 2020. The missile of this MLRS has a flight range of 70 km and, in the final section of the flight path, can be guided by a Bayraktar TB2 UAV laser beam or ground-based laser target designation. It is worth noting that the Bayraktar TB2 UAV is quite large and can be detected even by older versions of air defense systems, it will be difficult to carry out laser target designation with them in the air defense coverage area. The chassis of the Russian KAMAZ-63501 was used as a platform for the MLRS, and other chassis were reported to accommodate installations.
Russian troops fired MZ-21 incendiary shells at the positions of the Ukrainian army in the village of Nevelskoye near Donetsk. The peculiarity of the 9M22S shells is that the fire they caused cannot be extinguished. A magnesium-based combat incendiary mixture ignites upon burst and reaches a combustion temperature of up to 2700 degrees. Each incendiary shell carries up to 180 incendiary elements and inflicts damage on enemy personnel and lightly armored vehicles.
The Ukrainian army began to use Dingo ATF armored vehicles, some of them were seen in the photo of the Ukrainian Airborne Forces units. Earlier it was reported that Germany will transfer 50 of these machines to Ukraine. Dingo ATF entered service with Germany in 2003. The body of the Dingo-2 machine is made of armored steel and combined armor "MEXAS" and provides protection against bullets of 7.62 mm caliber and explosive devices up to 8 kg of TNT. The machine is produced in nine modifications and is in service with 7 countries. For fire support, a 7.62 mm MG-3 machine gun is used, which can be replaced with a 12.7 mm M2 machine gun or a 40 mm automatic grenade launcher. The vehicle is capable of carrying eight troops. The ATF "Dingo" armored car was created on the Unimog all-wheel drive chassis and has a speed of up to 90 kilometers per hour. The engine power is 237 hp. Power reserve - 1000 km.
The Russian calculation of the Tor-M2U air defense system showed the destruction of the UAV of the Ukrainian army. Usually, the work of SAM crews is not as interesting as the actions of combat units of other troops, since in most cases you cannot see the result. In this case, this is not the case, the moment of the UAV hit is shown on the screen of the air defense system, the UAV type could not be established. The Tor-M2U air defense system is a modification of the 2009 complex, the air defense system can direct missiles at 8 targets and simultaneously fire at 4 at a distance of up to 12 kilometers.
Ukraine received TRLG-230 MLRS from Turkey, as reported in the video, their first use. After the appearance of footage with the MLRS, the Turkish media denied this, it is reported that the installation on the video is most likely Azerbaijani. The TRLG-230 MLRS from the Turkish company Roketsan are quite new; 230 mm missiles were tested in 2020. The missile of this MLRS has a flight range of 70 km and, in the final section of the flight path, can be guided by a Bayraktar TB2 UAV laser beam or ground-based laser target designation. It is worth noting that the Bayraktar TB2 UAV is quite large and can be detected even by older versions of air defense systems, it will be difficult to carry out laser target designation with them in the air defense coverage area. The chassis of the Russian KAMAZ-63501 was used as a platform for the MLRS, and other chassis were reported to accommodate installations.
Russian troops fired MZ-21 incendiary shells at the positions of the Ukrainian army in the village of Nevelskoye near Donetsk. The peculiarity of the 9M22S shells is that the fire they caused cannot be extinguished. A magnesium-based combat incendiary mixture ignites upon burst and reaches a combustion temperature of up to 2700 degrees. Each incendiary shell carries up to 180 incendiary elements and inflicts damage on enemy personnel and lightly armored vehicles.
The Ukrainian army began to use Dingo ATF armored vehicles, some of them were seen in the photo of the Ukrainian Airborne Forces units. Earlier it was reported that Germany will transfer 50 of these machines to Ukraine. Dingo ATF entered service with Germany in 2003. The body of the Dingo-2 machine is made of armored steel and combined armor "MEXAS" and provides protection against bullets of 7.62 mm caliber and explosive devices up to 8 kg of TNT. The machine is produced in nine modifications and is in service with 7 countries. For fire support, a 7.62 mm MG-3 machine gun is used, which can be replaced with a 12.7 mm M2 machine gun or a 40 mm automatic grenade launcher. The vehicle is capable of carrying eight troops. The ATF "Dingo" armored car was created on the Unimog all-wheel drive chassis and has a speed of up to 90 kilometers per hour. The engine power is 237 hp. Power reserve - 1000 km.
I empathize that being from Ukraine, you experience this in a more personal level, but to say that this war was unnecessary is, like so many in the West, dismissive of Russian interests and Russian security concerns. It is precisely this attitude that got us into this war in the first place.
No one enter into a war lightly. Unlike Saddam Hussain, Putin has a vast spy network around the world and is well aware of the implications of starting a war in Ukraine. After the disastrous war in 2014 where Ukrainian forces were defeated, Minsk II agreement was signed, which later Ukraine reneged. Ukraine was still bombarding Donbass in Feb, 2022, right before the war started.
NATO rebuilt the Ukrainian military after 2014 and was basically running it, NATO did not have to keep bombarding Donbass and push this all the way to the Russian border. Russia was not in a position to invade Europe. Admitting Ukraine into NATO or not makes little difference when the end result is the same. Ukraine was under de facto NATO control. Now it was true that Russia was not in immediate danger, but countries wax and wane over time and Russia could experience harder time in the future. With Ukraine controlled by NATO and Ukrainians on the Russian side of the border, you have a recipe for a color revolution if and when Russia grows weaker. America will feel the same way if Canada outlaw English and had its army run by the Chinese bombing the English speaking portion of the country who did not agree to this outlawing of English.
Even with all this, after the start of the war, Putin wanted a negotiated settlement with Ukraine in March. An agreement was within reach when the British PM flew to Ukraine and stopped the deal.
Putin started this war because he sees a weak moment in the West and also he know that countries like China and India are big enough to resist the sanctions by the West. This was not the case in 2014. Putin grasp a historic opportunity to address a long term security concern for Russia. Every step of the way, Ukraine has the opportunity to turn back, but chose not to do it. It is likely that after a long war, what is left of Ukraine will descend into civil war or anarchy. It is even possible that Ukraine as a country will cease to exist. All this could have been prevented if the country would honor the agreement that it signs.
For those of you who think Russia started this invasion of Ukraine unprovoked and that NATO only had benign intentions perhaps you should read this RAND report.
It predates the conflict and details every single action the US has done since to attempt to destabilize the region around Russia including the attempted coups in Belarus and Kazakhstan.
The Russians won't be waiting until the US surrounds Russia with extensive armed opponents and invades them directly. Probably by staging revolts inside Russia proper and then going inside Russia with some "peacekeeping" pretense like they did in several places like Libya.
It predates the conflict and details every single action the US has done since to attempt to destabilize the region around Russia including the attempted coups in Belarus and Kazakhstan.
The Russians won't be waiting until the US surrounds Russia with extensive armed opponents and invades them directly. Probably by staging revolts inside Russia proper and then going inside Russia with some "peacekeeping" pretense like they did in several places like Libya.
Interesting, do you know how the Soviet Union was born ?
It was nothing else just the Russian empire with new name.
A lot of people misconstrue what Putin said. He is ok with these former Soviet countries remaining independent politically. What he does not want is NATO aligned and heavily militarized forces on Russia's borders. He pointed out to the relation between Germany and Austria but of course reporters in the West choose to ignore what he said.
There is also this RAND report from 2019. I will put some quotes here:
"From a U.S. policy standpoint, Belarus’ unrest might present an opportunity to extend Russia by aiding the opposition, removing a long-standing Russian-allied dictator, and supporting liberalization. This aid to Lukashenko’s opposition could come in a variety of forms, ranging from public declarations of support by U.S. leaders to more direct financial and organizational assistance helping the opposition parties reach the end state of being a free and democratic Belarus.
...
In a zero-sum world, denying Russia its one and only true ally would be a clear geopolitical and ideological gain for the West. It would bring an end to “Europe’s last dictatorship,” a long-standing U.S. policy goal. Moreover, it would undermine Russia’s attempt to create an EEEU in competition with the EU, complicate any Russian attempt to employ military force against the Baltic States, and further isolate Kaliningrad."
"Russia’s commitment in Eastern Ukraine is its greatest point of external vulnerability; local opposition is active and Ukraine is a larger and more capable adversary than any of the other states where Russian troops are committed.
...
Any increase in U.S. military arms and advice to Ukraine would need to be carefully calibrated to increase the costs to Russia of sustaining its existing commitment without provoking a much wider and even more violent conflict.
...
Finally, any geopolitical moves to extend Russia would also need to consider other options that (for reasons of length and resources) were
not considered here in depth—namely, intensifying NATO’s cooperation with Sweden and Finland, pressuring Russia’s claims in the Arctic,
and checking its influence in the Arctic.
...
The successful 2013–2014 Euromaidan protests in Ukraine that led to the fall of the Yanukovich government touched off a dramatic Russian response for many reasons, but among these was the concern that these protests could provide a demonstration effect for anti-regime protests in Russia.
...
Expanding U.S. assistance to Ukraine, including lethal military assistance, would likely increase the costs to Russia, in both blood and treasure, of holding the Donbass region. More Russian aid to the separatists and an additional Russian troop presence would likely be required, leading to larger expenditures, equipment losses, and Russian casualties. The latter could become quite controversial at home, as it did when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan.
...
Alternatively, Russia might counter-escalate, committing more troops and pushing them deeper into Ukraine. Russia might even pre-
empt U.S. action, escalating before any additional U.S. aid arrives. Such escalation might extend Russia; Eastern Ukraine is already a drain. Taking more of Ukraine might only increase the burden, albeit at the expense of the Ukrainian people. However, such a move might also come at a significant cost to Ukraine and to U.S. prestige and credibility. This could produce disproportionately large Ukrainian casualties, territorial losses, and refugee flows. It might even lead Ukraine into a disadvantageous peace."
Read and be enlightened. I read it back when it came out and I thought it was sheer lunacy. But every single thing they say in the frickin report has been happening since. This is clearly the US's playbook for this confrontation with Russia.
"From a U.S. policy standpoint, Belarus’ unrest might present an opportunity to extend Russia by aiding the opposition, removing a long-standing Russian-allied dictator, and supporting liberalization. This aid to Lukashenko’s opposition could come in a variety of forms, ranging from public declarations of support by U.S. leaders to more direct financial and organizational assistance helping the opposition parties reach the end state of being a free and democratic Belarus.
...
In a zero-sum world, denying Russia its one and only true ally would be a clear geopolitical and ideological gain for the West. It would bring an end to “Europe’s last dictatorship,” a long-standing U.S. policy goal. Moreover, it would undermine Russia’s attempt to create an EEEU in competition with the EU, complicate any Russian attempt to employ military force against the Baltic States, and further isolate Kaliningrad."
"Russia’s commitment in Eastern Ukraine is its greatest point of external vulnerability; local opposition is active and Ukraine is a larger and more capable adversary than any of the other states where Russian troops are committed.
...
Any increase in U.S. military arms and advice to Ukraine would need to be carefully calibrated to increase the costs to Russia of sustaining its existing commitment without provoking a much wider and even more violent conflict.
...
Finally, any geopolitical moves to extend Russia would also need to consider other options that (for reasons of length and resources) were
not considered here in depth—namely, intensifying NATO’s cooperation with Sweden and Finland, pressuring Russia’s claims in the Arctic,
and checking its influence in the Arctic.
...
The successful 2013–2014 Euromaidan protests in Ukraine that led to the fall of the Yanukovich government touched off a dramatic Russian response for many reasons, but among these was the concern that these protests could provide a demonstration effect for anti-regime protests in Russia.
...
Expanding U.S. assistance to Ukraine, including lethal military assistance, would likely increase the costs to Russia, in both blood and treasure, of holding the Donbass region. More Russian aid to the separatists and an additional Russian troop presence would likely be required, leading to larger expenditures, equipment losses, and Russian casualties. The latter could become quite controversial at home, as it did when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan.
...
Alternatively, Russia might counter-escalate, committing more troops and pushing them deeper into Ukraine. Russia might even pre-
empt U.S. action, escalating before any additional U.S. aid arrives. Such escalation might extend Russia; Eastern Ukraine is already a drain. Taking more of Ukraine might only increase the burden, albeit at the expense of the Ukrainian people. However, such a move might also come at a significant cost to Ukraine and to U.S. prestige and credibility. This could produce disproportionately large Ukrainian casualties, territorial losses, and refugee flows. It might even lead Ukraine into a disadvantageous peace."
Read and be enlightened. I read it back when it came out and I thought it was sheer lunacy. But every single thing they say in the frickin report has been happening since. This is clearly the US's playbook for this confrontation with Russia.
Last edited: