#16 Ukraine the brave, the whole World is watching!

[Luzifer's right hand]

6 hours ago, Toth said:

In another forum where I'm following the Ukraine war discussion, the voices of the doomsayers are getting louder and louder because of Ukraine's massive artillery disadvantage with dwindling ammunition stocks and only pitifully small numbers of western artillery to replace the much larger number of Soviet pieces. All the while Russia keeps grinding on.

There is also quite a bit of arguing going on about Germany's role in the support. Especially with the SPD really making itself suspicious with the chancellor warning of nuclear war to explain his hesitancy and the defense minister aggressively dodging the question of whether Ukraine should win. Some users insist Germany already did plenty in terms of giving money (that Ukraine isn't allowed to spend on heavy weopons) and small arms ammunition and helmets and mouldy GDR stuff in the first weeks and months of the war and as such we did our part and can't bring more and those who criticize the government for its dragging feet are attacked as mindless haters. Meanwhile others (myself included) are very frustrated because Ukraine needs all the heavy equipment it can get and our only donation will soon be 7 howitzers and 50 complicated and horribly outdated AA tanks without ammunition. Yay, go Germany!

How the fuck are we the fourth biggest weapons exporter in the world again and now that it's needed we are dragging our feet? And what the fuck is wrong with the SPD?

The SPD is just realistic when it comes to voters I believe. Most people don't care about other people especially if they are foreigners and prefer to see Ukraine conquered asap because the conflict is making things more expensive. 

Just like with COVID-19 the swing to egoism is completely expected. If others are hurt or perish it is unimportant in the grand scheme of things. Our entire western lifestyle is based on that. Just look at the horrible body count of the 2022 football world cup. People will celebrate a game (I'm sure this board will have a forum for it again)and not give a shit about the people who died for it.

This is just how the world works.

[Darzin]

31 minutes ago, Werthead said:

There was an analysis today saying that a single "big push" of aid to Ukraine could have a huge impact because the degree to which Russia is relying on artillery is fairly dangerous - in a war it's a bad idea to rely on just one tactic - and their manpower situation is more tenuous than they are presenting it as. A big push could swing things in Ukraine's favour again, but it has to be big and the aid has to be sustained. There's a risk that the war is entering a "boring" stage (or has been in one for several weeks) where there are no major movements on a daily basis so people lose interest. Obviously that won't happen in Eastern Europe, but there is a bigger danger of France and Germany's foot-dragging spreading, and the UK and US getting distracted by internal events.

Well then the US should try to go for that. It does seem that Russia would be wide open sons artillery.

[Maithanet]

1 hour ago, Werthead said:

I think it's also starting to cause arguments in countries like Poland, the Baltics, Slovakia and the Czech Republic, who are overwhelmingly pro-Ukraine, but some are now thinking of what happens if Russia takes all of Ukraine and is on their borders with them having sent vast chunks of their military to be captured or destroyed in Ukraine. If they think sending that stuff will stop that, they'll do it, but if any bet-hedging starts, that's going to be a problem.

That kind of argument seems incredibly foolish to me.  The harder the invasion and occupation of Ukraine is, the less likely that Russia will be able to embark on this kind of imperialistic project again.  Russia has lost a ton of stuff (and will certainly lose a lot more before this is over), and is going to need to replace it with modern (much more expensive) equipment.  No matter what happens in Ukraine, Russia is not going to be able to go on another offensive war like this for many years, probably over a decade.  The idea that if the cupboard is a bit bear that Russia will take advantage makes no sense, Russia is already scraping the bottom of the barrel (deploying tanks, APCs and artillery that are 50+ years old).  The more problems any NATO country can create for Russia's Ukrainian folly, the safer they are. 

I really, really hope that another big round of funding is coming from the US.  Not that it would solve everything, but another 20 HIMARS, a huge order of rocket and 155mm ammunition and a bunch of spare parts to keep them running sounds like it would be enough to meaningfully change the war.  There are VAST geostrategic benefits of Russian imperialism failing miserably. 

[Werthead]

1 hour ago, Maithanet said:

That kind of argument seems incredibly foolish to me.  The harder the invasion and occupation of Ukraine is, the less likely that Russia will be able to embark on this kind of imperialistic project again.  Russia has lost a ton of stuff (and will certainly lose a lot more before this is over), and is going to need to replace it with modern (much more expensive) equipment.  No matter what happens in Ukraine, Russia is not going to be able to go on another offensive war like this for many years, probably over a decade.  The idea that if the cupboard is a bit bear that Russia will take advantage makes no sense, Russia is already scraping the bottom of the barrel (deploying tanks, APCs and artillery that are 50+ years old).  The more problems any NATO country can create for Russia's Ukrainian folly, the safer they are. 

I agree, I've just seen the argument doing the rounds.

Quote

 

I really, really hope that another big round of funding is coming from the US.  Not that it would solve everything, but another 20 HIMARS, a huge order of rocket and 155mm ammunition and a bunch of spare parts to keep them running sounds like it would be enough to meaningfully change the war.  There are VAST geostrategic benefits of Russian imperialism failing miserably. 

 

A positive sign might be this joint French-German-Italian visit to Ukraine this month. All three countries have been accused of not stepping up (fairly or not) and this might be a sign of them wanting to do more to support Ukraine.

[Loge]

Regarding the lack of 152 mm ammo, can't NATO mass-produce them? Might help more than give Ukraine cannon they aren't really trained with. Not sure if I read this here or elsewhere but I have seen complaints about howitzers donated to Ukraine wearing down fast because of improper use and lack of maintenance and Ukrainians being wasteful with the missiles donated by the West. 

[Maithanet]

5 minutes ago, Werthead said:

A positive sign might be this joint French-German-Italian visit to Ukraine this month. All three countries have been accused of not stepping up (fairly or not) and this might be a sign of them wanting to do more to support Ukraine.

Yes, I'm hoping that will be a meaningful visit and not just a photo op.  If those three countries were to make commitments of support to match the UK/US in terms of percentage of GDP, that would be many billions of additional aid for Ukraine. 

[kiko]

29 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Yes, I'm hoping that will be a meaningful visit and not just a photo op.  If those three countries were to make commitments of support to match the UK/US in terms of percentage of GDP, that would be many billions of additional aid for Ukraine. 

It might actually reduce the aid. Not sure about France and Italy though. What they should do commit is damn heavy weapons. Let the Saudis throw stones for a while and reroute the stuff to the Ukraine. 

[Werthead]

36 minutes ago, Loge said:

Regarding the lack of 152 mm ammo, can't NATO mass-produce them? Might help more than give Ukraine cannon they aren't really trained with. Not sure if I read this here or elsewhere but I have seen complaints about howitzers donated to Ukraine wearing down fast because of improper use and lack of maintenance and Ukrainians being wasteful with the missiles donated by the West. 

A lot of the NATO stuff I think is fine to train and use. A lot of the artillery is reportedly much easier to train on and use than the old Soviet stuff. There are questions about how much needs special maintenance equipment and how much of that has been supplied. I believe there have also been questions raised about some high-end NATO equipment and how it can stand up to long-term attritional use on a battlefield. Some of this stuff was not envisaged being in use in a WWII-style all-out slug match.

I believe there are several factories in former Soviet counties that can make 152mm ammunition but only one, in the Czech Republic, is operational. That's churning out stuff ASAP and getting it into Ukraine, but presumably Russia has much larger quantities in storage and more construction capability. Those kind of shells can be created domestically, they're not reliant on foreign equipment impacted by the sanctions.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

2 hours ago, Luzifer's right hand said:

The SPD is just realistic when it comes to voters I believe. Most people don't care about other people especially if they are foreigners and prefer to see Ukraine conquered asap because the conflict is making things more expensive. 

Just like with COVID-19 the swing to egoism is completely expected. If others are hurt or perish it is unimportant in the grand scheme of things. Our entire western lifestyle is based on that. Just look at the horrible body count of the 2022 football world cup. People will celebrate a game (I'm sure this board will have a forum for it again)and not give a shit about the people who died for it.

This is just how the world works.

I'd add a qualifier there. They are realistic, when it comes to their voters. This supporting Ukraine versus staying out is a generational thing. The SPD have the oldest voters among the parties forming the current goverment. 

But generally speaking, wasn't there a lead article in Der Spiegel a few weeks ago?I think it was even freely available in English.

That gave some explanation why Germany's response sucked so hard.

[Maithanet]

23 minutes ago, kiko said:

It might actually reduce the aid. Not sure about France and Italy though. What they should do commit is damn heavy weapons. Let the Saudis throw stones for a while and reroute the stuff to the Ukraine. 

?  Do you mean that as a result of the Ukraine meeting that Germany/Italy/France will reduce their commitments?  That doesn't seem likely. 

If you mean that Ger/Fra/Ita are already committing more of their GDP to aid for Ukraine than US/UK, that is not what I'm seeing.  This source was last updated in mid-May, but it shows the US and UK at around 0.2% of GDP in support for Ukraine, whereas France is under 0.1% and Germany/Italy are below that. 

[Corvinus85]

On the subject of Germany's role I see they've unveiled their new main battle tank, the KF51 Panther. That name is sure to trigger some Russians.

[Maithanet]

1 minute ago, Corvinus85 said:

On the subject of Germany's role I see they've unveiled their new main battle tank, the KF51 Panther. That name is sure to trigger some Russians.

Why would they name it that?  Ugh. 

[Toth]

13 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Why would they name it that?  Ugh. 

If they called it Jaguar, the Brits would have sued.

Also it should be noted that it is not supposed to be Germany's future main battle tank. Rheinmetall got pissed that the actual order to design a new one for 2035 was given to KMW and a French company to create a joint one (because that went so well the last time with the Tiger helicopter...) and so they went off and did their own thing with blackjack and hookers, aiming to get countries operating Leopards to buy the Panther as an upgrade. And really, as far as everything I read, it's "just" a slighly lighter Leopard with a bigger gun and an autoloader, supposedly specifically designed to crack T-14s if the Russians ever get around to building those.

[Corvinus85]

10 minutes ago, Toth said:

If they called it Jaguar, the Brits would have sued.

Also it should be noted that it is not supposed to be Germany's future main battle tank. Rheinmetall got pissed that the actual order to design a new one for 2035 was given to KMW and a French company to create a joint one (because that went so well the last time with the Tiger helicopter...) and so they went off and did their own thing with blackjack and hookers, aiming to get countries operating Leopards to buy the Panther as an upgrade. And really, as far as everything I read, it's "just" a slighly lighter Leopard with a bigger gun and an autoloader, supposedly specifically designed to crack T-14s if the Russians ever get around to building those.

And supposedly with a better defense system against anti-tank weapons like the Javelin, though I'll believe that when I see it.

[DMC]

4 hours ago, Maithanet said:

I really, really hope that another big round of funding is coming from the US.  Not that it would solve everything, but another 20 HIMARS, a huge order of rocket and 155mm ammunition and a bunch of spare parts to keep them running sounds like it would be enough to meaningfully change the war.  There are VAST geostrategic benefits of Russian imperialism failing miserably. 

The bill passed last month is expected to last through September.  Both Biden and McConnell were pretty clear on that:

Quote

McConnell said there was no way to know how long the $40 billion package would last, but said he expected it to provide support for a "significant period of time." The Biden administration first pitched its version of the aid package, which was initially smaller, to last through the current fiscal year ending on Sept. 30.

Gotta say expecting more funding/weapons already does sound a lot like the well-intentioned mission creep and "give them an inch they take a mile" MIC crap Ripp has been so worried about the past few months.

[Maithanet]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

The bill passed last month is expected to last through September.  Both Biden and McConnell were pretty clear on that:

Gotta say expecting more funding/weapons already does sound a lot like the well-intentioned mission creep and "give them an inch they take a mile" MIC crap Ripp has been so worried about the past few months.

But my understanding is that all of the money/weapons authorized by that bill have not yet been actually allocated/shipped to Ukraine.  I'm hoping that more will be delivered soon, and such deliveries will include the much needed heavy artillery.  I don't  see this as a mission creep issue at all. Ukraine's position is deteriorating (at least in the short term) and it's quite possible that additional funds will be needed to achieve the mission that we set out to accomplish - assisting Ukraine in maintaining its military and negotiating an end to this war that Ukraine finds satisfactory. 

[Werthead]

4 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

But my understanding is that all of the money/weapons authorized by that bill have not yet been actually allocated/shipped to Ukraine.  I'm hoping that more will be delivered soon, and such deliveries will include the much needed heavy artillery.  I don't  see this as a mission creep issue at all. Ukraine's position is deteriorating (at least in the short term) and it's quite possible that additional funds will be needed to achieve the mission that we set out to accomplish - assisting Ukraine in maintaining its military and negotiating an end to this war that Ukraine finds satisfactory. 

The US and UK rocket artillery is a fairly sophisticated bit of kit and needs a reasonable amount of training. They've been doing that for about a fortnight but it might be a bit longer before it can be deployed, which might be too late for Severodonetsk and Luhansk, and maybe the Donbas as a whole, unless they can use it to spearhead a counterattack. I don't think 4 batteries (even with multiple units per battery, plus the similar UK models) will be able to do that by itself.

I believe some of the artillery they already have can be upgraded to a GPS-guided, rocket-assisted model with longer ranges (~50 miles) which the Netherlands is apparently working on, which can be done more quickly.

But still, the Russians have 900 artillery pieces. They don't need to destroy 100% of them overnight and reducing that capability is going to have a positive impact even if it's by 20% or something. But that's a metric fuckton of hardware that needs to be seriously degraded to give Ukraine a viable chance of an overall victory and retaking its lost ground.

There is some concern that Russia's willingness to test-fly its Su-54s recently might be a sign that they're going to risk using them to destroy any advanced rocket artillery the west sends, if they are confident that Ukraine's AA can't hit them.

[DMC]

3 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

But my understanding is that all of the money/weapons authorized by that bill have not yet been actually allocated/shipped to Ukraine.  I'm hoping that more will be delivered soon, and such deliveries will include the much needed heavy artillery. 

Sure, if you're talking about the US allocating the funding/aid that's already been authorized towards specific weapons/whatever over the next few months that's cool.  Because I agree, while I don't know for sure, I'm assuming (and I would hope) there's still plenty earmarked in the bill that hasn't been allocated/distributed yet.  Just saying suggestions for additional aid seems quite premature at this time -- and hence representative of some of the standard concerns about the MIC and the west's influence, etc.

[Padraig]

There is a post in the below article from today about how Ukraine has only gotten 10% of pledged arms.  Possibly an exaggeration (reflecting a certain amount of panic, as Russia seems to be winning right now) but a clear indication that there is still a lot of arms outstanding.

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-europe-61792068

Hard to know whether those arms will ever arrive in time.  But Putin is probably feeling much more confident right now about his war of conquest.

 

[JGP]

I fucking hate him. Just can't describe. 

It feels like the West has accepted the rules of the game, which is something I don't like. Part of why I had to pull back a little. Also part is I'm rather hawkish on it, which I shouldn't be given the privilege I have to, but I can't stand to watch. I still check in and catch up, but what the fuck. It's Putin that's made the rules malleable. If there are countries willing, in whatever form of partnership, they should become more active. Move in, secure the west of Ukraine, then slow advance. 

Call that motherfucker. 

His offramp is out of Ukraine.