The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

[MilitaryIndustrialComplex]

NATO's assumption seems to be that if there is a Russian invasion it will involved multiple layers, or echelons, of armored forces pushing forward on the battlefield to penetrate NATO defenses. And maybe to prevent such an attack they are sending dozens of Javelin and NLAW ATGMs to Ukraine.

However, this need not necessarily be the case. A Russian assault could well start with the launch of a few dozen cruise missiles (fired from land based mobile launchers, surface combatants and bombers) targeting high value targets in Ukraine. As opposed to Russia, NATO's IADS is primarily air based. Even if NATO's IADS picks up signature of these Russian cruise missiles, how will Ukraine intercept them?

Placing a few batteries of PAC-3 or even THAAD in Ukraine would have made sense.

 

[John Fedup]

NATO's assumption seems to be that if there is a Russian invasion it will involved multiple layers, or echelons, of armored forces pushing forward on the battlefield to penetrate NATO defenses. And maybe to prevent such an attack they are sending dozens of Javelin and NLAW ATGMs to Ukraine.

However, this need not necessarily be the case. A Russian assault could well start with the launch of a few dozen cruise missiles (fired from land based mobile launchers, surface combatants and bombers) targeting high value targets in Ukraine. As opposed to Russia, NATO's IADS is primarily air based. Even if NATO's IADS picks up signature of these Russian cruise missiles, how will Ukraine intercept them?

Placing a few batteries of PAC-3 or even THAAD in Ukraine would have made sense.

That would likely require US service members on the ground as there is no time for training. Not something most US pollies or citizens would be enthusiastic about.

 

[Feanor]

The more I look at these weapons systems being supplied to Ukraine, the more it seems like the west is sending Ukraine on a suicide mission, except there are other weapons being supplied that we don't know about, in a real Russian invasion, these NLAW and Javelin missiles will do absolutely nothing to stop the Russians, the Russians have been doing target practice in Syria for a long time now and the West knows well about it, if Russia is intent on invading Ukraine they will most likely use kalibre's and iskanders to soften targets inside Ukraine before the tanks begin to roll in. The Russians will be able to see what's happening on the ground almost in real time while the Ukraine will have to rely on intelligence coming from the west. Does anyone think the West or Ukraine have plans on how to stop kalibre's and iskanders from flying in?

They sure don't. Ukraine has a relatively large arsenal of S-300P and V systems (also some Buks but they're far less significant), which have decent air defense and missile defense capabilities, but both systems are old (1980s vintage), and Russia is intimately familiar with their characteristics, so at least hypothetically Russia should be able to destroy them relatively easily. However Russia has little experience in SEAD/DEAD missions, and Ukraine has a lot of SAMs. I think the ultimate outcome there is not in question, but the timeframe is largely a matter of how well Russia can execute.

NATO's assumption seems to be that if there is a Russian invasion it will involved multiple layers, or echelons, of armored forces pushing forward on the battlefield to penetrate NATO defenses. And maybe to prevent such an attack they are sending dozens of Javelin and NLAW ATGMs to Ukraine.

However, this need not necessarily be the case. A Russian assault could well start with the launch of a few dozen cruise missiles (fired from land based mobile launchers, surface combatants and bombers) targeting high value targets in Ukraine. As opposed to Russia, NATO's IADS is primarily air based. Even if NATO's IADS picks up signature of these Russian cruise missiles, how will Ukraine intercept them?

Placing a few batteries of PAC-3 or even THAAD in Ukraine would have made sense.

The relative cost of deploying these systems is huge compared to dumping a bunch of relatively simple ATGMs, and a few batteries would likely not be enough to stop a full Russian invasion, while pretty much useless if it's a "covert" invasion like last time.

Winter on Fire: Ukraine's Fight for Freedom - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I watched this on Netflix today and quite frankly as a human we need to give those poor people all the help we can

The thing is... there are documentaries from the other side portraying Ukrainian nationalists as monsters attacking their own people for political gain. Propaganda films should be consumed with caution and a grain of salt. Especially when you compare the scale of the Euromaidan and the anti-Maidan...

 

[Goknub]

The point of the NLAWs, Javelins and Stingers isn't to defeat a Russian invasion, it's to enable the post-invasion partisans to exact a high enough toll that eventually Russia will be forced to retreat or face an internal revolt. Think the support the Allies gave to the French Resistance in WW2.

The Afghan war helped lead to the collapse of the Soviet Union, demonstrating that occupying Ukraine would likely lead Russia to a similar fate is a key argument to persuade Putin to stand down. For how many years will Russian families be willing to see their sons come back in coffins from a bloody occupation before something breaks and Putin is dragged from his palace?

 

[Atunga]

The point of the NLAWs, Javelins and Stingers isn't to defeat a Russian invasion, it's to enable the post-invasion partisans to exact a high enough toll that eventually Russia will be forced to retreat or face an internal revolt. Think the support the Allies gave to the French Resistance in WW2.

The Afghan war helped lead to the collapse of the Soviet Union, demonstrating that occupying Ukraine would likely lead Russia to a similar fate is a key argument to persuade Putin to stand down. For how many years will Russian families be willing to see their sons come back in coffins from a bloody occupation before something breaks and Putin is dragged from his palace?

That's the same thing that was said about Syria and it didn't turn out that way at all, on the other hand, I think Ukraine will capitulate in the event of a full blown Russian invasion, Russia will control the air and make life very miserable for Ukraine, they will be bombed into confusion and will revolt against it's current leaders for not being wise enough to avoid a conflict with their powerful neighbour. If the Ukranian leadership is wise, they will negotiate directly with the Russians, Putin will be happy to receive Zelenksy in Moscow for a photo op

 

[Goknub]

On its own no, it's not guaranteed to work but with all the other threats such as sanctions maybe. The West's strategy is to provide as many deterrents as possible in the hope their collective effect will determine a Russian invasion. It's a high stakes game so no guarantee of any outcome.

If the Ukranian leadership is wise, they will negotiate directly with the Russians, Putin will be happy to receive Zelenksy in Moscow for a photo op

I highly doubt that. Putin's argument is that Ukraine is essentially a lost Russian province, negotiating directly would acknowledge that they are a separate entity. For Ukraine, the whole point of the standoff is to reduce Russian interference in their country. Putin has demonstrated a history of interference and offered nothing to indicate that would change. Any negotiation in Moscow would amount to establishing the terms of submission.

 

[Atunga]

On its own no, it's not guaranteed to work but with all the other threats such as sanctions maybe. The West's strategy is to provide as many deterrents as possible in the hope their collective effect will determine a Russian invasion. It's a high stakes game so no guarantee of any outcome.

I highly doubt that. Putin's argument is that Ukraine is essentially a lost Russian province, negotiating directly would acknowledge that they are a separate entity. For Ukraine, the whole point of the standoff is to reduce Russian interference in their country. Putin has demonstrated a history of interference and offered nothing to indicate that would change. Any negotiation in Moscow would amount to establishing the terms of submission.

The more the standoff continues, the more Ukraine will continue to hurt, the only way Ukraine can be at peace is to try and develop good relationships with Russia and the West. A sit down with Putin won't be establishing terms for submission, Ukraine is suppose to show some sort of neutrality so Russia can be sure the West wouldn't use Ukraine against her, Viktor Yushchenko and Yulia Tymoshenko didn't have good relationships with Putin but they manage to sort things out without Ukraine losing her sovereignty. after the maidan revolution in 2014, Putin waited for the new leaders to reach out to him but they didn't, instead they were busy cooking plans to end Russia's Crimea lease and they lost it

 

[Feanor]

I highly doubt that. Putin's argument is that Ukraine is essentially a lost Russian province, negotiating directly would acknowledge that they are a separate entity.

I'm not sure where you got this, but this is definitely wrong. Russia recognizes Ukrainian independence. Russian unwillingness to engage with Ukraine recently has had to do with Ukraine's negotiating position which amounts to "We're not implementing the Minsk Accords, and also you have to pull the plug on the rebels, and return Crimea". That's not a negotiation, that's an ultimatum, and one Ukraine is in no position to make.

For Ukraine, the whole point of the standoff is to reduce Russian interference in their country. Putin has demonstrated a history of interference and offered nothing to indicate that would change. Any negotiation in Moscow would amount to establishing the terms of submission.

The terms of submission have already been established. They are called the Minsk Accords. Unfortunately Russia is caught between a rock and a hard place and at least partly of its own making. Russia won the war, in two major campaigns; summer of '14, and winter of '14-'15. Russia got the terms they were happy with as a result. And then Ukraine simply refused to implement them. And any attempt by Russia to return to the ultima ratio regum are met with overwhelming diplomatic and economic pressure from the US and EU.

 

[Feanor]

The more the standoff continues, the more Ukraine will continue to hurt, the only way Ukraine can be at peace is to try and develop good relationships with Russia and the West. A sit down with Putin won't be establishing terms for submission, Ukraine is suppose to show some sort of neutrality so Russia can be sure the West wouldn't use Ukraine against her, Viktor Yushchenko and Yulia Tymoshenko didn't have good relationships with Putin but they manage to sort things out without Ukraine losing her sovereignty. after the maidan revolution in 2014, Putin waited for the new leaders to reach out to him but they didn't, instead they were busy cooking plans to end Russia's Crimea lease and they lost it

Putin definitely wasn't waiting for Yatsenyuk or Turchinov to reach out. They were unelected right wing radicals that forcibly took power. The official position of the Russian government was that they were not a legitimate government. Russia proceeded to throw support into the anti-Maidan to put pressure on the new government, and to showcase that they don't have the full support of the people. When that didn't prevent the west from treating the post-Maidan government as legitimate, Russia took Crimea, and even threw support behind the rebels that were born out of the anti-Maidan.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

The more the standoff continues, the more Ukraine will continue to hurt, the only way Ukraine can be at peace is to try and develop good relationships with Russia and the West. A sit down with Putin won't be establishing terms for submission, Ukraine is suppose to show some sort of neutrality so Russia can be sure the West wouldn't use Ukraine against her, Viktor Yushchenko and Yulia Tymoshenko didn't have good relationships with Putin but they manage to sort things out without Ukraine losing her sovereignty. after the maidan revolution in 2014, Putin waited for the new leaders to reach out to him but they didn't, instead they were busy cooking plans to end Russia's Crimea lease and they lost it

If Ukraine goes for the middle ground, it loses it sovereignty. The war started because it used its sovereignty and made a decision to re-orient to the west. What good is Ukrainian "independence" if it cannot make such decisions?

 

[Atunga]

Putin definitely wasn't waiting for Yatsenyuk or Turchinov to reach out. They were unelected right wing radicals that forcibly took power. The official position of the Russian government was that they were not a legitimate government. Russia proceeded to throw support into the anti-Maidan to put pressure on the new government, and to showcase that they don't have the full support of the people. When that didn't prevent the west from treating the post-Maidan government as legitimate, Russia took Crimea, and even threw support behind the rebels that were born out of the anti-Maidan.

I totally agree, prior to Zelensky becoming president, the Russians had some hope that relations will be better with Zelensky in office, there was a serious campaign in Russian media against Poroshenko, the Russians were disappointed that Zelensky refused to reach out, Russia has shown some flexibility when it comes to who Ukranians elect has their president, remember the orange revolution, when Yanukovych was declared president after run off elections, the elections were annulled and Yushchenko became president, Russia had to wait six more years to get their man Yanukovych into power

 

[Atunga]

If Ukraine goes for the middle ground, it loses it sovereignty. The war started because it used its sovereignty and made a decision to re-orient to the west. What good is Ukrainian "independence" if it cannot make such decisions?

That's not exactly right, there was a competition between what the EU was offering and what the Russian led customs union was offering, the then Ukrainian government after considering both options, went for the 15 billion the customs union offered, the west was disappointed by Yanukovych's decision and sponsored the maidan.. the question is, who exactly compromised Ukranian sovereignty? The Ukrainian government clearly chose the Russian customs union and the West had to topple him

 

[cdxbow]

That's the same thing that was said about Syria and it didn't turn out that way at all, on the other hand, I think Ukraine will capitulate in the event of a full blown Russian invasion, Russia will control the air and make life very miserable for Ukraine, they will be bombed into confusion and will revolt against it's current leaders for not being wise enough to avoid a conflict with their powerful neighbour. If the Ukranian leadership is wise, they will negotiate directly with the Russians, Putin will be happy to receive Zelenksy in Moscow for a photo op

Ukraine is not Syria.
I don't think Russia can afford a full scale invasion and would have trouble supporting it for a significant amount of time. Those body bags from Afghanistan were one of the factors in the collapse of the Soviet Union. I'm sure Mr Putin remembers that.

It's nice to find a bit of humour at this time. After Russia has surrounded the Ukraine with 120,000 troops, thousands of armored vehicles, missile launches, combat aircraft etc, the Kremlin has accused the US of heightening tensions after it put troops on alert to be ready to deploy to Europe if needed. “The United States is escalating tensions,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters. “We are watching these US actions with great concern.” Blacks white and whites black.

 

[STURM]

Those body bags from Afghanistan were one of the factors in the collapse of the Soviet Union. I'm sure Mr Putin remembers that.

No doubt he does but the circumstances with Afghanistan differ greatly. Russia accomplished its goals in Syria and the Crimea with minimal casualties; there's no reason to suggest a invasion of eastern Ukraine; including a land corridor to the Crimea will result in large numbers of casualties. Amidst all this mention of an ''invasion' it's unlikely that the Russians will aim for a complete takeover of the country.

 

[Feanor]

If Ukraine goes for the middle ground, it loses it sovereignty. The war started because it used its sovereignty and made a decision to re-orient to the west. What good is Ukrainian "independence" if it cannot make such decisions?

I'm not sure it was Ukraine that made the decision. Rather it was a small group of unelected right wing radicals that came to power after the Euromaidan, and promptly made strong moves intended to force the country down a certain path. Remember, Turchinov and Yatsenyk hail from Svoboda, a border-line neo-Nazi group (they cleaned up their website during the Euromaidan, before that it had lines on there about cleansing Ukraine from Russians and Jews). Neither Svoboda nor Right Sector, could win an election in Ukraine. So who really made the decision?

 

[Feanor]

Ukraine is not Syria.
I don't think Russia can afford a full scale invasion and would have trouble supporting it for a significant amount of time. Those body bags from Afghanistan were one of the factors in the collapse of the Soviet Union. I'm sure Mr Putin remembers that.

Unlike Ukraine, Syria had a friendly government, and a population that wasn't really hostile, and was tired of the war. Russian troops also didn't patrol the streets, or fight front line battles. The Syrians did that (with some help from Iran, Hezbollah, and Iraq).

I think you hit the nail on the head here. Russia has what it takes to defeat the Ukrainian military in a conventional battle. Russia doesn't have what it takes to successfully occupy/annex large swathes of Ukraine's territory.

 

[swerve]

...Russia has shown some flexibility when it comes to who Ukranians elect has their president, remember the orange revolution, when Yanukovych was declared president after run off elections, the elections were annulled and Yushchenko became president, Russia had to wait six more years to get their man Yanukovych into power

What the fuck? You're praising Russia for not imposing their choice of government on Ukraine?

That's not something anyone deserves praise for. It should be taken for granted.

 

[Atunga]

What the fuck? You're praising Russia for not imposing their choice of government on Ukraine?

That's not something anyone deserves praise for. It should be taken for granted.

No, am not praising Russia or the West for invents in Ukraine, am of the opinion that the two brothers should talk, no matter how hard it may be and sort out issues them selves. No matter how much we try to sugar coat it, Ukraine remains a strategically important country to Russia, except your trying to tell me that Russia is not allowed to have interests of it's own?

 

[Feanor]

Crotia's president just fired off that Crotia refuses to participate in a Russo-Ukrainian war, and will recall any of their soldiers in joint NATO units if there is any risk of them being involved. He also called the Euromaidan a coup d'etat, and that Ukraine doesn't belong in NATO. Curiously enough he also blames the current crisis on US domestic politics. This is the second major figure in the EU/NATO that's spoken out against the US position in the crisis (the last was a German Admiral that was promptly forced to resign).

It will be curious to see if the US manages to herd cats and get all of NATO/EU aligned on this or not. Realistically, from a standpoint of national interests, much of Europe would be better off taking the Croatian stance, but I suspect many conversations will take place behind the scenes to avoid this.

Croatian President Says Ukraine Should Not be Part of NATO - Total Croatia

Addressing the press after he visited the Kraš confectionery company, Milanović said that Croatia would in no way be involved in the crisis if it escalated and that there would be no Croatian soldiers in that scenario. Ukraine does not belong in NATO, the Croatian head of state said, adding that...

www.total-croatia-news.com

 

[John Fedup]

Crotia's president just fired off that Crotia refuses to participate in a Russo-Ukrainian war, and will recall any of their soldiers in joint NATO units if there is any risk of them being involved. He also called the Euromaidan a coup d'etat, and that Ukraine doesn't belong in NATO. Curiously enough he also blames the current crisis on US domestic politics. This is the second major figure in the EU/NATO that's spoken out against the US position in the crisis (the last was a German Admiral that was promptly forced to resign).

It will be curious to see if the US manages to herd cats and get all of NATO/EU aligned on this or not. Realistically, from a standpoint of national interests, much of Europe would be better off taking the Croatian stance, but I suspect many conversations will take place behind the scenes to avoid this.

Croatian President Says Ukraine Should Not be Part of NATO - Total Croatia

Addressing the press after he visited the Kraš confectionery company, Milanović said that Croatia would in no way be involved in the crisis if it escalated and that there would be no Croatian soldiers in that scenario. Ukraine does not belong in NATO, the Croatian head of state said, adding that...

www.total-croatia-news.com

I imagine some in the US would like to apply the Croatian stance to Europe and move on to the Indo-Pacific and let Europe sort its own “stuff “.