Jump to content

Ukraine 12: When is this an existential threat?


Ser Scot A Ellison

Recommended Posts

One of the most amazing combat videos I've seen. Ukrainians shot down a Ka-52 Alligator helicopter (the most modern in the Russian arsenal) with an anti-tank missile (Stugna-P, manufactured locally in Ukraine):

 

In the video, you can see them aiming away from the helicopter until the last second, to avoid activating its defenses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, the video from yesterday supposedly showing Ukrainian marines from Mariupol surrendering was likely faked by the Russians:

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1591385/Ukraine-latest-mariupol-surrender-video-russia-propaganda

Quote

 

“But the uniforms are too clean. Nobody is wounded. No one needs a shave and the t-shirts are all wrong.”

In an accompanying picture, Mr Pfarrer broke down the video further.

He highlighted that Ukrainian marines wear a green beret, as well as black and white striped undershirt - two items he states are “esteemed emblems of the naval infantry.”

He added: “Likely every one of these Marines would own one (or both) of these uniform items and proudly wear it into combat.”

However, not one of the so-called Marines in the video have these items.

The Navy Seal went on to add: “With the exception of two prisoners in the first row, wearing small pieces of tape, not one other of the ‘prisoners’ was wearing the blue and yellow recognition tape normally worn by Ukrainian combatants.

“It is HIGHLY unlikely that a freshly caught prisoner would be stripped of the exact markings that would distinguish him as an enemy.”

Another tell-tale detail that could easily be missed by a cursory glance are the ammunition pouches on the soldier’s clothing.

The pouches are clearly full, indicating that the “prisoners” have not been searched or cleared of any military equipment.

Mr Pfarrer said: “It is impossible that a prisoner of war would be allowed to carry an unopened pouch that might contain ammunition, a pistol or hand grenades.

 

Be very very sceptical of any videos published by the Russian side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Stugna-P was partially designed to target stationary helicopters, so whilst impressive, it's not operating wildly outside its parameters.

Quote

OSINT UK is reporting The Czech Republic has sent tanks and fighting vehicles to Ukraine:

Yup. Expect to see more vehicles sent into Ukraine in the coming days. I don't think the needle has moved yet for the jets though.

19 minutes ago, Gorn said:

Also, the video from yesterday supposedly showing Ukrainian marines from Mariupol surrendering was likely faked by the Russians:

Be very very sceptical of any videos published by the Russian side.

Whilst it's possible, several OSINT accounts have pointed out their uniforms and weapons are Ukrainian. They could come from captured soldiers of course, but faking the video seems pretty pointless (since the number of troops still fighting in Mariupol seems to be in the thousands, so 200 surrendering is hardly likely to make the whole lot give in).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As @Werthead mentioned in the last thread, portions of the Russian military are being redeployed back into the east, possibly without any refit at all.  But this sort of a redeployment of Russian forces from the north takes a lot time, since most of those units need to go north out of Urkaine, then east out of Belarus, then further east into Russia, and then south and probably a little west to get back into the fighting.  Even if the Russias skip any rest+refit for their units (which by all accounts are badly needed), it will still take a long time to move a big part of their army back to where it needs to be.

In comparison, Ukrainian units who had been defending the capital can move in a straight line from Kyiv to the Donbas area in just a few days (or less if it were an emergency).  This is why some people are concerned that Russia will ask for a ~2 week ceasefire to "negotiate", because in the short term, this redeployment will favor Ukraine and any progress in the Donbas is likely to be minimal.  But of course, the Ukrainians know this as well.   

This is a great example of the military concept of interior lines and why they are important in war. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ukrainian intelligence sources have said that Russian forces in the more secured areas of Mariupol are gathering civilian bodies killed by Russian attacks and will present them as having been killed by Ukrainian soldiers.

Ukraine and western sources have been good at getting out ahead of staged Russian provocations time and time again during and before this conflict.

Zelensky is to address the UN Security Council in the next few minutes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do find the comparisons to 1939 to be somewhat non-viable. In 1939 Germany had the best army in Europe (if not the largest) and Hitler had pulled off some stunning diplomacy (in the pact with Russia) so he only needed to face Poland, France and Britain. He also had a strong (on paper) ally with Italy and had effectively divided the other powers of Europe into neutrals and friendly countries he could pick off one at a time (he was surprised by France and Britain declaring war, but then flabbergasted when they did not invade western Germany when he was busy in Poland). The USA was not a factor. Hitler also had access to several of the best generals in the world.

2022 Russia, on the other hand, faces a completely unified Europe and NATO, backed by the full military force of the United States. It is outnumbered in conventional forces many, many times over, and it is out-qualified in terms of the quality of fighting troops and equipment many times over. Its generals and training are poor and show little sign of getting better in the immediate term. Russia's sole real ace in the hole is its nuclear arsenal, which is negated by the nuclear arsenals of several (not just one) of its opponents.

In fact, I've seen some people expressing the idea that the Ukrainian situation has allowed NATO and the West to avoid a direct confrontation with Russia in a more dangerous area like the Baltic States or Poland or Finland. If Ukraine had not effectively defected from the Russian sphere of influence in 2014 and had instead become Belarus Mk. II, then we by now have seen a mass-buildup along the borders of NATO countries followed by an invasion and a full-blown NATO-Russia war, with all the threats of nuclear escalation by now. Instead, Russia revealing its army can't even deal with Ukraine and getting itself into a quagmire in a third country makes the threat of a follow-up invasion of a NATO country much less likely.

That may be a "good" thing from international geopolitics, but it's obviously not a good thing for Ukraine, which is paying the price. There is also the remaining fear that Russia will escalate, despite the very strong messages from the US and other countries that doing so would lead to a much more dramatic response (so the NATO-Russia confrontation in this conflict might still be possible).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Werthead,

I recognize that this isn’t 1939.  Your point is well made.  However, a mouthpiece of the Russian State laying out an argument in favor of genocide is and should be shocking.

Russia, on paper, still has the second largest nuclear arsenal on the planet.  It also hasn’t been behaving particularly rationally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Reading the "Ukraine Plan" linked to in the other thread:  'nazi is in every sentence at least once, but not always jut once.  It's reading a horror script.

Yeah reading that link was deeply disturbing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Russia, on paper, still has the second largest nuclear arsenal on the planet.  It also hasn’t been behaving particularly rationally.

Absolutely, and the arguments for genocide are horrifying and I think will ensure that any hopes Russia has of the sanctions regime ending immediately after the conflict have long gone.

In terms of acting rationally, I think you can draw a line from Chechnya to Georgia to Crimea to the current invasion. In each case, Putin has executed a limited military operation (albeit on a larger scale to the previous one) with overwhelming superiority of firepower to bring about a politically desirable end, successfully, in each case moving so quickly that it was almost over before the international community could respond,and thus limiting their response. The same is true of Ukraine, with Plan A being a lightning strike on Kyiv to decapitate the leadership in a few days and Plan B being a more drawn out siege of Kyiv to do the same in a few weeks. If either plan had succeeded, than that would have shown the Russians behaving rationally. Not laudably or well, but from their POV, the operation made sense to achieve an objective.

The problem is that they got the entire plan wrong, dithered, but ultimately selected the most rational alternate option on the table (given that a full withdrawal and defeat is unacceptable): refocus on the one theatre where they can win and throw everything at that, and if they succeed, declare victory and go home for the inevitably painful rebuilding and recrimination phase. Again, a rational outcome. The fact their propaganda is scaring the living hell out of some other people and making them think that Russia is dangerous and out of control is a bonus, from the Russian POV.

So I think that Russia's ambitions and plans were within the bounds of rationality (at least from Putin's POV) and have just about stayed within those bounds, but the rational avenues out of this conflict are starting to close down. The real point of danger is if the Russian leaders (not the people) start buying their own propaganda and start behaving erratically to try to achieve what might ultimately be unachievable. The German generals at the end of WWII did have a good grip on what was really going on, but Hitler had checked out by that point and was moving imaginary armies that no longer existed around on maps to engage the advancing allied armies. Someone doing that with nukes is the real danger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not see how Ukraine accepts donetsk or anything of donbas going to Russian hands and I don't see how the west will refuse to give Ukraine what they need to take it back or even start attacking Russia directly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Werthead said:

I do find the comparisons to 1939 to be somewhat non-viable.

I don't think anyone is making the comparison in terms of Russia's threat to all of Europe. Instead, it's the comparison to what Russia is doing to civilians in territory it occupies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Fez said:

I don't think anyone is making the comparison in terms of Russia's threat to all of Europe. Instead, it's the comparison to what Russia is doing to civilians in territory it occupies.

Using the same playbook and justification language of Hitler and his enablers and cronies for genocide and oppression.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Fez said:

I don't think anyone is making the comparison in terms of Russia's threat to all of Europe. Instead, it's the comparison to what Russia is doing to civilians in territory it occupies.

And, as I think I had already expressed here, the very troubling indication that the Russian propaganda is switching from Authoritarian Dictatorship (whose purpose is to keep the people apathetic and apolitical in order to ensure the unchallenged authority of the dictator) to a fascist one (whose purpose is to activate the people to make them follow a singular ideology of superiority and conquest as the end game of national rivalries). The Russian people must getting whiplash from the messaging going from "There is no war!" to "Even if there is, the Ukrainians had it coming!".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Toth said:

...The Russian people must getting whiplash from the messaging going from "There is no war!" to "Even if there is, the Ukrainians had it coming!".

That really does have to be triggering cognitive dissonance in at least few minds, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure it's terribly hard for the Russian propagandists to deal with.  It started out as a special military action to root out the pro-west nazis.  NATO is escalating the situation and the Ukrainian Nazis are very well entrenched in Ukrainian society, and thus now Russia needs to respond more forcefully. 

It's bullshit, but it's not a particularly hard line of logic to follow. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...