Ukraine 18: Pump up the S-300’s… Dance Dance…

[Wilbur]

Beau has thoughts on Ukraine:  

 

[Wade1865]

1 hour ago, Wilbur said:

Beau has thoughts on Ukraine:  

I’m no war scholar; and frankly, the concept in relation to government puzzles me. Despite being a former student-practitioner (RA; FA, AR, IN), informed by limited conventional training as well as extended unconventional warfighting, I remain uncertain.

Beau seems off in his conception of policy and war, a confusion that is potentially dangerous in the hands of men with political influence; e.g., Alexander Dugin or Robert McNamara.

Quote

YouTube Beau: “War isn’t about the fighting on the ground. War is a continuation of politics by other means.”

Wut? Dafuq? Fr?

Conceptually, I understand war is a continuation of policy by other means. Soldiers are the “fighting on the ground.” Correspondingly, Soldiers are an “other means.” Furthermore, the purpose of Soldiers is the destruction of the enemy’s will and capacity to fight.

In other words, governments practice politics; which determines goals; that informs policy; executed by way of Soldiers; whose purpose is to destroy will and capacity; in order to secure victory in war.

Wut? Dafuq? Fr?

[Gorn]

11 hours ago, Wade1865 said:

I’m no war scholar; and frankly, the concept in relation to government puzzles me. Despite being a former student-practitioner (RA; FA, AR, IN), informed by limited conventional training as well as extended unconventional warfighting, I remain uncertain.

Beau seems off in his conception of policy and war, a confusion that is potentially dangerous in the hands of men with political influence; e.g., Alexander Dugin or Robert McNamara.

Wut? Dafuq? Fr?

Conceptually, I understand war is a continuation of policy by other means. Soldiers are the “fighting on the ground.” Correspondingly, Soldiers are an “other means.” Furthermore, the purpose of Soldiers is the destruction of the enemy’s will and capacity to fight.

In other words, governments practice politics; which determines goals; that informs policy; executed by way of Soldiers; whose purpose is to destroy will and capacity; in order to secure victory in war.

Wut? Dafuq? Fr?

War results are determined by political goals. If Putin's political war goal is annexation/subjugation of Ukraine and overthrow of its government, then Russia has lost this war (so far). If Putin's political war goal is taking control of Kherson and Mariupol, then Russia has won this war (so far).

Simple change of goals produces a radically different war result, even though exact same thing happened on the ground.

[Wade1865]

48 minutes ago, Gorn said:

War results are determined by political goals. If Putin's political war goal is annexation/subjugation of Ukraine and overthrow of its government, then Russia has lost this war (so far). If Putin's political war goal is taking control of Kherson and Mariupol, then Russia has won this war (so far).

Simple change of goals produces a radically different war result, even though exact same thing happened on the ground.

Gorn -- thank you; I think I understand. You clarified a gap in my perception when describing it in terms of Russia's political war goals (moderated by, "so far").

[Werthead]

Looks like some heavy fighting outside Izium, where the Russians remain bogged down after four months. Unclear if it was an attempted Russian advance or another Ukrainian raid, but it looks like the Russians lost at least a T-72.

Australian Bushmasters are now in full service in the Donbas and seem to be doing a solid job of protecting their crews.

Looks like the Zaporizhzhia nuclear station has been disconnected from the grid, which Ukraine has been anticipating for a while.

After all the concern yesterday, it looks like it ended up being a damp squib. Russia launched around 24 missile and artillery attacks, more than in some considerable time, but they ended up being intercepted or didn't do much damage. Interestingly, Shoigu was saying that Russia was deliberately toning down the tempo of attacks to avoid civilian casualties (something they have given precisely zero shits about to date) and not, for example, because their ammo dumps keep mysteriously disappearing.

On that score, looks like Ukraine launched a massive HIMARS attack on some target with three batteries emptying full payloads on an unknown part of the front. Precisely on what is unclear, so far.

[The Anti-Targ]

First, that I know of, New Zealand soldier killed in the Ukraine-Russia war. The soldier was on long term unpaid leave from the army, though that still technically means he is in the army. The NZDF banned all military personnel from travelling to Ukraine, so he went there against orders, and without telling anyone. Still, there has been widespread public recognition and praise of his support for the Ukrainian war effort. Apparently there are several NZ ex-military serving in Ukraine, though pretty much all are in support roles. The deceased soldier is the only one known to have been on the front lines.

The line coming from the NZDF about him being on unpaid leave and acting against orders to all military personnel is to ensure the optics are right in that the NZDF is definitely not putting boots on the ground. There is no way we want Russia to be able to use some kind of pretext to say NZ has declared war on Russia.

[Gorn]

17 hours ago, Werthead said:

Looks like the Zaporizhzhia nuclear station has been disconnected from the grid, which Ukraine has been anticipating for a while.

It seems that the disconnection from the load came as a surprise to the plant personnel actually running it, and that a Fukushima-type meltdown was averted only thanks to their quick reaction.

In an electrical grid, production and consumption must always be in balance, and suddenly cutting a power generating station from the grid without shutting it down first is a big no-no. It's an extra big no-no if it's a nuclear plant.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

22 minutes ago, Gorn said:

It seems that the disconnection from the load came as a surprise to the plant personnel actually running it, and that a Fukushima-type meltdown was averted only thanks to their quick reaction.

In an electrical grid, production and consumption must always be in balance, and suddenly cutting a power generating station from the grid without shutting it down first is a big no-no. It's an extra big no-no if it's a nuclear plant.

The Russians are fucking idiots… aren’t they?

[Werthead]

49 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

The Russians are fucking idiots… aren’t they?

Congratulations, you've cut to the heart of the matter.

[A wilding]

The Russians are bullies who specialise in brinkmanship. The idea is to convince people that they are capable of anything to make them cower. This has always been how they operate.

[Wade1865]

RUS is conducting a (nationwide) marketing campaign to draw in recruits via billboards, websites, and public transportation; as well as mobile recruiting centers. Advertisements say they'll get around $2-6000 USD per month. A new US Army recruit makes less than $2000 USD / mo in base pay.

Someone with the WSJ determined RUS units were generally at about 80-85% strength. US Army doctrine (dtd 1997) classifies units as GREEN when at 85% or higher (combat capable); AMBER, at 70-84% (combat capable; minor deficiencies); and RED, at 50-69% (combat ineffective; major losses or deficiencies).

[Maithanet]

Basically everything I have read has Russian unit strength at well below 80-85%.  I've read multiple accounts, including from Russian sources, that many units are below 50% and that it is common for units to be between 60-70%. 

There are a lot of reasons for this, many of them having nothing to do with casualties or desertion.  Plenty of Russian officers say that they are full strength, but are actually only at 70-80%, and then just pocket the remaining pay. 

Hell, one of the Russian defectors estimated (admittedly, with only his personal experience) that the Russian invasion was actually more like 100k troops, not the 180k typically quoted, simply because Russian units are nowhere near full strength. 

[Werthead]

Looks like continued fighting outside Izium. I think it was an attempted Russian advance basically halted by Ukrainian forces armed with ATGM, and as the advanced halted they were then zeroed by Ukrainian artillery. Russia seems to be moving heavier reserves into the area. In what is becoming a familiar Ukrainian tactic, whenever Russia moves large troop formations to a front-facing position, Ukraine immediately engages them, preventing them from going on the offensive.

Additional hits on the Kakhovka Dam. The Ukrainians are playing a difficult game here, since they obviously don't want to blow up the entire dam and flood the region, but they also need to deny the Russians using the damn as a crossing point. It looks like they've found a sweet sport of explosive ordinance to crater the top of the dam without breaching it.

The Antonivskyi Bridge in Kherson is also taking another pounding.

[Kalbear]

Brilliant longform article series from WaPo continues - this time focusing on the specific strategies used to save Kyiv

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/interactive/2022/kyiv-battle-ukraine-survival/?itid=ap_paulsonne

Quote

 

The Ukrainians tried to force the mass of Russian troops into narrow stretches of terrain — dirt roads that were impassable, thawing fields or swamps that would ensnare vehicles and force greater fuel consumption. Vehicles that stayed on asphalt were targeted by fast-moving Ukrainian troops. Bridges and crossings were mined and blocked.

“We would force them to take certain routes, where we would then blast them and cut them off,” said Maj. Gen. Viktor Nikolyuk, the top commander for Ukrainian forces in the northern part of the country.

The strategy drew admiring plaudits at the Pentagon.

“Coming down that avenue of approach was something like 30 battle groups. A single Ukrainian brigade stopped them. I don’t know who that commander was, but he stopped them in their tracks,” Gen. Mark A. Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, later said.

“They couldn’t get off the road. Their junior officers didn’t have any initiative,” Milley said of the Russians. “This guy was like a buzz saw, just chewing them up.”

 

 

[Maithanet]

 

Pretty crazy image.  This is what Russian ammo caches have been reduced to by himars.  In all likelihood these were transported outside thier boxes and then deposited here.  FYI, ammo that gets sand and mud on it will wear out the artillery barrels very quickly, and often quite explosively.  This is an army falling apart.

[Wade1865]

3 hours ago, Werthead said:

 

I really have a lot of respect for their meme magic

[Werthead]

1 hour ago, KalVsWade said:

Brilliant longform article series from WaPo continues - this time focusing on the specific strategies used to save Kyiv

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/interactive/2022/kyiv-battle-ukraine-survival/?itid=ap_paulsonne

 

The most interesting part of the analysis is 9,000 Ukrainian troops killed and 7,000 missing (presumed dead or KIA). So add on the same injured and you have Ukrainian casualties running at around 50% of Russian casualties. Which is higher than you'd hope, but also nowhere near as bad as it could have been (though still horrible, of course).

This article also makes clear a rather horrible but important fact: Ukraine lost a huge amount of troops in the opening days of the war from the territorial reserve, who lacked experience. Those who survived and won the battle became veterans very quickly. The Russians, on the other hand, lost most of their veterans very quickly in the fighting in the airport and on the approaches to Kyiv.

[Jace, Extat]

1 hour ago, Werthead said:

 

This article also makes clear a rather horrible but important fact: Ukraine lost a huge amount of troops in the opening days of the war from the territorial reserve, who lacked experience. Those who survived and won the battle became veterans very quickly. The Russians, on the other hand, lost most of their veterans very quickly in the fighting in the airport and on the approaches to Kyiv.

Barbarossa says what?

[Wade1865]

13 hours ago, Firebrand Jace said:

Barbarossa says what?

15 hours ago, Werthead said:

The most interesting part of the analysis is 9,000 Ukrainian troops killed and 7,000 missing (presumed dead or KIA). So add on the same injured and you have Ukrainian casualties running at around 50% of Russian casualties...

...[Darwinism in Action].

Firebrand Jace et al. -- it shows just how bloody conventional war can be, as you two illustrated. The counterinsurgent wars US Army regulars experienced were nowhere near as lethal (for Americans ). Even though RUS had some experience fighting the Chechens and Syrians, it wasn't adequate against a West-leaning state increasingly receiving significant pieces of US hardware and some training. My advice to any potential recruit is, don't fight conventionally.

Here's the typical (warning; uncensored) example of Troops in Contact involving RUS Soldiers these past 6 months. Events like these are not something I take lightly.

I genuinely thank God I was born an American imperialist running dog, fighting for the moneyed interests; and not a RUS or PRC fighting for the bare necessities of life.

[Wilbur]

19 hours ago, Maithanet said:

 

Pretty crazy image.  This is what Russian ammo caches have been reduced to by himars.  In all likelihood these were transported outside thier boxes and then deposited here.  FYI, ammo that gets sand and mud on it will wear out the artillery barrels very quickly, and often quite explosively.  This is an army falling apart.

I also feel like the activity of throwing live shells into a big pile on the ground contains more basic, inherent risks, and doesn't provide much evidence of a sense of self-awareness or self-preservation on the part of the ammo handlers.