Russia and its “Special Operation” in Ukraine

[KentVillan]

1 hour ago, HanoiVillan said:

Studies suggested that perhaps a million people died an earlier death due to the Iraq war IIRC, a that was *before* the rise of Isis, if you were to include them as a consequence of the invasion it would be even higher. 

I don't know how many people have died in Ukraine, I guess it is less than a million, but then the war has been much shorter. 

I'm not sure whether there is any value in comparing them though. Starting an illegal and unjustified war is the supreme International crime, it's not really a question of body count. 

Oh I agree, and maybe Vietnam is indeed the best equivalent example here.

My post was just in response to all the “But but Iraq” stuff doing the rounds from people defending Putin’s aggression.

Ultimately I think Vietnam, Iraq and Ukraine are / were all reprehensible acts of superpower aggression. Sensible people should be able to take US’s side on Ukraine while also opposing it on previous conflicts.

It’s annoying when you see people make apologies for Putin on this because they hate America.

[HanoiVillan]

9 minutes ago, KentVillan said:

Ultimately I think Vietnam, Iraq and Ukraine are / were all reprehensible acts of superpower aggression. Sensible people should be able to take US’s side on Ukraine while also opposing it on previous conflicts.

It’s annoying when you see people make apologies for Putin on this because they hate America.

I completely agree. People should be able to evaluate situations on their own merits, rather than applying templates from other events. 

[Mandy Lifeboats]

I was listening to a very good radio discussion about Russia.  This expert opinion seemed to explain why Russia is losing so many tanks and is reluctant to deploy their best tanks to Ukraine.  

The modern Russian tanks are smaller than NATO tanks because they have automatic loading of ammunition.  This is quicker and more efficient than doing it by hand.  But the loading mechanism is linear and all shells are in a row that encircles the turret.  If one of those shells is triggered by anti tank weapons the tank effectively self destruct in a massive chain reaction which blows the turret off.  Tanks without an Auto Loader store the shells in an armoured compartment that is designed to channel any blast outside the tank. This massive and proven flaw in the Russian tanks will be with them for decades.  Their top of the range tank has an automatic turret that will turn and automatically destroy incoming missiles.  But its untested in real conflict.  If it fails the Russians are effectively lacking a credible battle tank for the next decade.  

 

[magnkarl]

2 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

I think it's possibly more massive for the US.

There's a bit of a gap I think developing in what is in the interests of the Ukraine (ending the war as quickly as possible through a negotiated peace that stops the killing) and the US (prolonging the war and continuing to damage Russia).

Of course, it might be that if enough arms are supplied, then the war can be ended quickly by Ukraine on the battlefield or that they can establish a bigger advantage that helps their negotiating position - but personally I think that anything that looks likely to prolong this war probably isn't a good thing.

 

 

I think this sort of condescending Western thinking is deadly for small countries around the world. If the thoughts you apply here are pushed out then essentially the rule of brute force, nazisim and genocide wins the day no matter what. Ukraine wants to fight, it doesn't need this laissez faire attitude from us that it's better for them if they give up. That means that Putin will come back in another 5 years and take the rest of their country.

There's higher tech equipment many NATO countries can give them. Penguin systems from Norway to kill off the Azov Fleet, more anti-air and guided missiles to take out Russia's supply lines. We cannot let Russia essentially copy what Hitler did in 1939, or else Russia will never stop.

Arm Ukraine to the teeth so Putin has no offensive capability left besides nukes, he knows what happens if he uses these.

Edited April 7, 2022 by magnkarl

[Jareth]

Some commentators think this is headed to a cold war situation with a win for Putin in the East of Ukraine to sell at home, and then a new border between Russia and Ukraine along the stolen region - supposedly then with both sides armed to the teeth along that border. Personally I think that sort of conclusion is merciful compared to prolonged fighting. Surely now is the time, rapidly, to get the other countries neighbouring the region into Nato or heavily armed with Nato weapons, before Russia can regroup and plot their next venture. 

[KentVillan]

18 minutes ago, Jareth said:

Some commentators think this is headed to a cold war situation with a win for Putin in the East of Ukraine to sell at home, and then a new border between Russia and Ukraine along the stolen region - supposedly then with both sides armed to the teeth along that border. Personally I think that sort of conclusion is merciful compared to prolonged fighting. Surely now is the time, rapidly, to get the other countries neighbouring the region into Nato or heavily armed with Nato weapons, before Russia can regroup and plot their next venture. 

Makes sense, but the only problem with this scenario is that the Cold War was actually a pretty awful and not very peaceful period... and there was the constant threat of nuclear war.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_proxy_wars#Cold_War_proxy_wars

Quote

This is a list of proxy wars. Major powers have been highlighted in bold.

 

War	Dates	Combatant 1	Combatant 2	Result
Chinese Civil War	1944–1949[27]	CPC  PLA[16][17] Supported by:  Soviet Union	KMT  NRA Supported by:  United States	Combatant 1 Won

 

...

Afghan Civil War

1989–1992

Democratic Republic of Afghanistan Supported by  Soviet Union (until 1991)

Mujahideen Supported by  United States  Pakistan  China[221]  Saudi Arabia

Combatant 2 Won

The Wikipedia list of "Cold War proxy wars" lists over 60 separate conflicts, starting with the Chinese Civil War and ending with the Afghan Civil War that were fought between forces backed by Western powers on one side and Communist powers on the other.

I am starting to wonder whether the received wisdom that Ukraine will put Xi off invading Taiwan may be wrong. He may simply use Ukraine as a helpful lesson in how *not* to handle an invasion of Taiwan, how the West will likely react diplomatically, and so on. He may feel he has more information now on the best strategy, and feel he needs to move quickly.

[Amsterdam_Neil_D]

1 hour ago, Mandy Lifeboats said:

I was listening to a very good radio discussion about Russia.  This expert opinion seemed to explain why Russia is losing so many tanks and is reluctant to deploy their best tanks to Ukraine.  

The modern Russian tanks are smaller than NATO tanks because they have automatic loading of ammunition.  This is quicker and more efficient than doing it by hand.  But the loading mechanism is linear and all shells are in a row that encircles the turret.  If one of those shells is triggered by anti tank weapons the tank effectively self destruct in a massive chain reaction which blows the turret off.  Tanks without an Auto Loader store the shells in an armoured compartment that is designed to channel any blast outside the tank. This massive and proven flaw in the Russian tanks will be with them for decades.  Their top of the range tank has an automatic turret that will turn and automatically destroy incoming missiles.  But its untested in real conflict.  If it fails the Russians are effectively lacking a credible battle tank for the next decade.  

 

This is why there are loads of pictures of Russian tanks with the turrets blown off and not next to the tank.  Western tanks have a sort of blast wall between the ammo and troops which seems fair enough from a health and safety point of view 

The Russian "Design" reduces the personnel needed in the tank but 25 % but also means that any mechanical fixes or anything outside the tank etc are 1 man down in a conflict situation.  It also reduces the height significantly on the battlefield (I think they are almost a meter shorter than western tanks).

[bickster]

46 minutes ago, Amsterdam_Neil_D said:

This is why there are loads of pictures of Russian tanks with the turrets blown off and not next to the tank.  Western tanks have a sort of blast wall between the ammo and troops which seems fair enough from a health and safety point of view 

The Russian "Design" reduces the personnel needed in the tank but 25 % but also means that any mechanical fixes or anything outside the tank etc are 1 man down in a conflict situation.  It also reduces the height significantly on the battlefield (I think they are almost a meter shorter than western tanks).

Wanna see how high the turret flies?

 

[magnkarl]

Scenes of Hostomel airport where most of Putin's elite airborne divisions were wiped out on the first day of the invasion by expert artillery fire. The thread continues in the tweet.

Scarily for Russia, their losses so far seem to be mainly of professional soldiers. The quality that Russia can back fill with won't be nearly as 'good'. Not that it seems the average Russian soldier is very good either way.

[magnkarl]

And here's some Russians "withdrawing" (aka running away), from Kiev, getting ambushed by one tank, then getting hit by said directed artillery fire, turning tail and running back towards Kiev..

Comical Ali would be proud of the term withdrawal here.

 

Edited April 7, 2022 by magnkarl

[Genie]

12 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

And here's some Russians "withdrawing" (aka running away), from Kiev, getting ambushed by one tank, then getting hit by said directed artillery fire, turning tail and running back towards Kiev..

Comical Ali would be proud of the term withdrawal here.

 

It was nice of the Russian leadership to tell Ukraine that the troops around Kyiv were going to withdraw so they could get in position to blow them up in the process. Very considerate.

[bickster]

21 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

Scenes of Hostomel airport where most of Putin's elite airborne divisions were wiped out on the first day of the invasion by expert artillery fire. The thread continues in the tweet.

Scarily for Russia, their losses so far seem to be mainly of professional soldiers. The quality that Russia can back fill with won't be nearly as 'good'. Not that it seems the average Russian soldier is very good either way.

You can see what is left of the Antonov An-225 in the background of some of the other photos in the Thread

[sharkyvilla]

Whatever happened to @villakram?  I'd love to know his take on things.

[sidcow]

10 minutes ago, sharkyvilla said:

Whatever happened to @villakram?  I'd love to know his take on things.

Would be time to sit back and get the popcorn out.

[Anthony]

41 minutes ago, Amsterdam_Neil_D said:

This is why there are loads of pictures of Russian tanks with the turrets blown off and not next to the tank.  Western tanks have a sort of blast wall between the ammo and troops which seems fair enough from a health and safety point of view 

The Russian "Design" reduces the personnel needed in the tank but 25 % but also means that any mechanical fixes or anything outside the tank etc are 1 man down in a conflict situation.  It also reduces the height significantly on the battlefield (I think they are almost a meter shorter than western tanks).

The ammo carousel is a factor, but much, much more important is the way you use tanks, i.e. avoiding them being hit in the first place.

NATO does a lot of training. Like, really a lot. Tanks with infantry. Infantry with air support. Navy bombardment with infantry. Navy air power with infantry, and all of this with intel being shared live.

It's mainly about the intel on the ground. Soldiers on foot in many ways lead on tactical decisions. They call in airstrikes, artillery/naval bombardment. They are the point of the spear, with the tank supporting and being supported by the infantry.

What this means is that NATO has learnt how to get the best out of a tank, that is, you protect it with infantry all around it, then it will be able to support the infantry with that big pointy thing on the turret. The infantry protect the tank from things it can't defend itself against and the tank destroys things the infantry can't destroy. Important to note that all this needs reliable secure communication. And training.

The Russian (and for the most part ex Soviet) way of doing things is almost the opposite. Don't train the troops too much, else they will be a threat to your authority. To this end you must constantly reinforce the fact they they are not supposed to think, just take orders.  A) Use the threat of overwhelming firepower to achieve your aims. B ) If that doesn't work, use overwhelming and indiscriminate firepower to utterly destroy everything, including people and infrastructure. This Russian campaign started with A and got hit with NATO trained resistance. Which for the most part battered them. They are now moving to B.

Was going to write more and edit, but I gotta go!

[magnkarl]

German intelligence saying they've intercepted communication between Russian soldiers in Bucha, openly talking about interrogating civilians, then executing them. One Russian laughs about having shot an old man on a bike. If there's any justice in the world...

[Awol]

25 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

German intelligence saying they've intercepted communication between Russian soldiers in Bucha, openly talking about interrogating civilians, then executing them. One Russian laughs about having shot an old man on a bike. If there's any justice in the world...

… then it won’t be coming from Germany.

 

[Amsterdam_Neil_D]

18 minutes ago, Awol said:

… then it won’t be coming from Germany.

Not a great look from them.  They know how this goes and every minute of delay someone else dies.

Tick tock

[Awol]

Russia’s version of BBC1 still pushing the line that “there will be no Ukraine, there will be no such state.” Putin’s hawks strut to please him, but leave him no way to climb down short of removing Ukraine from the international system.

 

[PussEKatt]

Why is the rest of the world applying sanctions in drips and drabs ? why didnt the rest of the world hit Russia with the hardest sanctions possable right from the start.Even now Germany is pissing about.Hit them with everything we have and do it now.They do not deserve anything less than that.