Ukraine 15 - Si vis pacem, para bellum

[Maithanet]

15 minutes ago, Matrim Fox Cauthon said:

Because when Russia is on the verge of trying to annex Kherson, Ukraine will need some breakthrough in the south in order to avoid losing vast swaths of their sea border. 

They will need a breakthrough eventually, but they aren't going to go off half cocked.  It's not like Russia's claim to Kherson will be any more legitimate two months from now. 

[Maithanet]

I guess this qualifies as good news?

 

[cock_merchant]

This Ukrainian defence and defiance is admirable and inspirational. 

[Hereward]

Much as I hate Boris Johnson, and doubt his motives, I’m proud that the UK has signed a treaty pledging to defend Sweden and Finland from attack. I just hope our word is better than in recent treaties.

[Werthead]

8 minutes ago, Hereward said:

Much as I hate Boris Johnson, and doubt his motives, I’m proud that the UK has signed a treaty pledging to defend Sweden and Finland from attack. I just hope our word is better than in recent treaties.

It was a powerful statement, backed up by the United States already saying they will also back up Finland and Sweden from the start of the application process.

Although the treaty does say that we would provide aid to Sweden and Finland, which may or may not include boots on the ground. It's not quite the same as the full Article 5 commitment.

[Hereward]

3 minutes ago, Werthead said:

It was a powerful statement, backed up by the United States already saying they will also back up Finland and Sweden from the start of the application process.

Although the treaty does say that we would provide aid to Sweden and Finland, which may or may not include boots on the ground. It's not quite the same as the full Article 5 commitment.

No, but it’s implicit, and every bit as binding as the Treaty of London. Let’s just hope the outcome is different and Russia doesn’t regard it as a mere “scrap of paper” as Germany did.

[Werthead]

This was the second attempt to cross this river, reportedly the first attempt was almost as bad in terms of losses.

 

[Gorn]

I think it's easier to round it up and say they've lost a BTG (battalion tactical group). Which they did - sure, many soldiers probably survived, there might be some trucks and armored transports that remained undamaged - but that unit is destroyed for all practical purposes.

One less.

[Maithanet]

6 hours ago, Werthead said:

This was the second attempt to cross this river, reportedly the first attempt was almost as bad in terms of losses.

Absolutely crazy thread about the preparation that went into that victory.

 

[Toth]

5 hours ago, Maithanet said:

Absolutely crazy thread about the preparation that went into that victory.

 

Well, the series of events seems plausible, the "1500 Russians dead" thing more like wishful thinking though.

[SeanF]

13 hours ago, Hereward said:

Much as I hate Boris Johnson, and doubt his motives, I’m proud that the UK has signed a treaty pledging to defend Sweden and Finland from attack. I just hope our word is better than in recent treaties.

I see Die Linke are blaming Johnson for sabotaging the prospects of a ceasefire in Ukraine.

We should return to naming Die Linke the SED.

[Loge]

3 hours ago, SeanF said:

I see Die Linke are blaming Johnson for sabotaging the prospects of a ceasefire in Ukraine.

We should return to naming Die Linke the SED.

Forget about Die Linke. The real problem in Germany are the Social Democrats. They're ones blocking aid for Ukraine.

 

18 hours ago, Maithanet said:

They will need a breakthrough eventually, but they aren't going to go off half cocked.  It's not like Russia's claim to Kherson will be any more legitimate two months from now. 

I wonder about Putins plan to annex these territories. Once he has done that he can't return them without admitting defeat. The population in the "peoples republics" seems to have cooled on the idea of joining Russia for good, after having lived under Russian rule for eight years.

[Werthead]

Russia has responded to Finland joining NATO by saying it's a threat but, interestingly, that they will impose a "symmetrical" response based on what military infrastructure is placed on their borders. So far Finland has indicated it won't actually have any need for more infrastructure because its military capabilities are already extremely impressive and more than capable of slowing down or defeating a Russian conventional attack.

That's a great deal less bellicose a response from Russia than was expected.

ETA: Medvedev has come out saying it raises the risk of war, but then again in like Week 1 of the war he was threatening to declare war on France after a fairly mild criticism of the invasion from the foreign minister, so who knows.

[JoannaL]

18 hours ago, Hereward said:

Much as I hate Boris Johnson, and doubt his motives, I’m proud that the UK has signed a treaty pledging to defend Sweden and Finland from attack. I just hope our word is better than in recent treaties.

That is exactly the question: Is the UK word still good? Just this week they are planning to break the brexit treaty (northern Ireland protocoll, which the Johnson goverment signed itself). So they are breaking a treaty with Finland (as a member of the EU) but tell them that they are surly on their side. It could go like this

"sure we signed that we would help you, but we didnt know that it means that we really need to help you"

As in: "sure we signed a treaty that we will install border checks on goods in Northern Ireland, but we didn't know that it means that we really need to install border checks in Northern Ireland"

Personally I think it is easier to comply with border checks on goods than to send soldiers into war.

[broken one]

31 minutes ago, JoannaL said:

Personally I think it is easier to comply with border checks on goods than to send soldiers into war.

 Let's not question everything, this is kinda like sawing the branch we all sit on.

[Maithanet]

6 hours ago, Toth said:

Well, the series of events seems plausible, the "1500 Russians dead" thing more like wishful thinking though.

Yeah, but 1,500 casualties is possible, if optimistic.  

[Gorn]

42 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Yeah, but 1,500 casualties is possible, if optimistic.  

Some guy in Daily Kos comments crunched the numbers:

Quote

 

6x tanks, 14x BMP, 7x MTLB, and 5+ vehicles?

OK

6 tanks = 18 crew

14 BMP = 42 crew and 112-140 passengers depending on what model it was if fully loaded

7 MTLB = 14 crew and 77 passengers

Call it about 300 in the armored vehicles, assuming all were destroyed in a way that left nobody alive, entirely possible on a river (anybody wounded might have drowned).

The other vehicles, I dunno, call it 350.

As others have stated any infantry out in the open on the bridge are also probably dead, from shrapnel+drowning.  1150 seems high to me unless they were just packed in, riding on outside of vehicles etc, or maybe standing around just on the other side of the bridge and got caught in an artillery pattern.

Thing is though, that 350 is the very best of the BTG, highest skilled, longest service, actually combat trained etc.  Not cannon fodder conscripts.  So even if we’re seeing “antiquity war casualty inflation”, if those vehicle numbers are anything close to accurate that is a devastating strike.

Very little in modern war can do that  much damage and not have most casualties be wounded or missing, rather than dead.   But a bridge crossing under airstrike/artillery where the bridge sinks under you into a river in spring?   That is not a place anybody wants to be and most casualties will be KIA.

 

Considering that there are supposed to be less than a hundred Russian BTGs in Ukraine now, even with a downsized, more realistic estimate, that's about 1% of their active troops gone in a single action. More if you only count frontline soldiers who actually shoot at the enemy.

[Gorn]

Looks like a final count was reached at last, 73 vehicles. 1500 casualties is possible now, and there was definitely more than 1 BTG there.

 

 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

So, the Russians are targeting farmers on tractors working in their fields now.

 

[Zorral]

The Age of the Drone replaces the former Age of the Tank?

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/05/16/the-turkish-drone-that-changed-the-nature-of-warfare

Annals of War
May 16, 2022 Issue
The Turkish Drone That Changed the Nature of Warfare
The Bayraktar TB2 has brought precision air-strike capabilities to Ukraine and other countries. It’s also a diplomatic tool, enabling Turkey’s rise.

Quote

 

...  Turkey’s arms industry has grown tenfold in the past twenty years, and most of the country’s military equipment is now manufactured locally. “The Bayraktars, and particularly the TB2s, have turned into the flagship of the Turkish defense industry,” Alper Coşkun, a former Turkish diplomat, told me.

Turkey borders Iran, Iraq, Syria, Armenia, Georgia, and the European Union, and it faces Russia across the Black Sea. Donelli told me that the shifting allegiances and complex politics of the region reminded him of Europe in the days before the First World War. ...