Русский корабль - иди нахуй

[JesusSweatDuck 17779]

35 minutes ago, Schulz2.0 said:

 

Of course there's a military vehicle flipped upside down at the end.  

[Mullet Free 40]

This video is only tangentially related to the war, but Zeihan’s tone has changed. Mentions a couple times that it’s still Russia’s war to win. A long way from saying Crimea was set to fall a few months ago. 
 

 

[MagicSoccerSpray 1725]

14 minutes ago, Mullet Free said:

A long way from saying Crimea was set to fall a few months ago.

 

I don't remember him saying anything like that. That sounds like something Hertling or Hodges would say.

[statsman 5352]

1 hour ago, locodos said:

The thing is that we sent them something like 2x the number of artillery shells that the cannons we sent them can fire.  The barrels are only rated for so many rounds...  Is there a fudge factor?  Sure...  but if they need more "shells" they actually need a whole new round of artillery from soup to nuts.

 

A wise man said, “You don’t go into proxy war with the proxy army you want; you go to proxy war with the proxy army you have”. 
 
Maybe we should increase production of artillery cannon. 

[MagicSoccerSpray 1725]

3 hours ago, Handcruser said:

I wish we would send those other shells that contain hundreds of mini-explosives…..whatever they are called. I know they are hell to cleanup but would be insanely beneficial during the offensive. Maybe we have sent them and they’re going to be a surprise.

 

They've already been sent and used in Vuhledar. Very effective and there are lots of vids of tanks exploding on them as they are being deployed behind columns in fields that were already "cleared".

[MissingInAction 24262]

1 hour ago, Schulz2.0 said:

 

[BamaATL 15732]

In so far as Crimea is concerned, I don't think it falls barring the dissolution of Russia, which is possible.  The naval base in Sevastopol is a last stand sort of thing for the Russians, not to mention the logistical challenges of invading Crimea.  At the end of the day, Ukrainian expulsion of Russian forces in Kherson and Zaporizhzhia Oblasts may well be the reality with which we are faced.  It's conceivable that the Donbas could also be liberated, but all of this will have to happen in the next six months in my opinion.  That is certainly a lot to have to happen in a short time frame.  Internal discord in Russia could certainly change the calculus here, but the reality looks like pre-war borders are realistic (I don't like it either).  The shitter is, that while Russia doesn't need the energy that comes with Crimea, Ukraine could sure as hell use it economically.  Without discord internally in Russia, the best case scenario I see for Ukraine is a settlement with Crimea and the energy rights going to Ukraine in return for Gibraltar like rights for Russia for the naval base in Sevastopol (and that seems hugely unlikely at the moment, part of all this mind you, has been a prolonged effort by Russia to squeeze Ukraine economically).   

Mind you, I'm rooting for the Russians to be swept from the field entirely, but I think it's best to temper some expectations.  

[InkaUtexas 24820]

The offensive will stabilize lines, push the Russians back, but will not end the war. This is a multi-year slugfest. 

I hope I am wrong and we can get to reconstruction. 401 days into a 3 day op. Putin remains the master planner.

 

 

[Mullet Free 40]

28 minutes ago, MagicSoccerSpray said:

 

I don't remember him saying anything like that. That sounds like something Hertling or Hodges would say.

 

[Pescado_Rojo 19192]

2 hours ago, locodos said:

The thing is that we sent them something like 2x the number of artillery shells that the cannons we sent them can fire.  The barrels are only rated for so many rounds...  Is there a fudge factor?  Sure...  but if they need more "shells" they actually need a whole new round of artillery from soup to nuts.

 

I'm pretty sure spare barrels have been part of the "Parts & Accessories" line items we've been sending. I saw something a while back about a repair depot near Lviv there they were rebarreling artillery. 

[NorthLoop 13906]

6 hours ago, KYHorn said:

Trump gtfo quickly

[MillerEP 30232]

 

[MillerEP 30232]

 

[BamaATL 15732]

Well, that's one way to go

 

[MillerEP 30232]

 

[MillerEP 30232]

Ukraine received $1.8 billion from Canada - Ministry of Finance

[MillerEP 30232]

 

[MillerEP 30232]

 

[bolverk 28886]

33 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

 

The defection story is worth a read: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1641274347233988608.html

[MagicSoccerSpray 1725]

1 hour ago, Mullet Free said:

 

 

Thanks, now I remember. I assume he was assuming the Ukrainians would get the stuff they needed to conduct more offensive operations during the winter, which they didn't. Sigh. Still looking forward to seeing what they've got ready for the spring, as I think the Russians are weaker than they seem. Here's to hoping.

[locodos 5147]

1 hour ago, statsman said:

A wise man said, “You don’t go into proxy war with the proxy army you want; you go to proxy war with the proxy army you have”. 
 
Maybe we should increase production of artillery cannon. 

1. No matter which BS propaganda location you picked up this idea, the US did not start or is engaged in a proxy war.  Fucking Russians attacked a democracy in Europe and have openly stated neo colonial aims in regard to Eastern Europe.  That's it, that's the end of the story
2. Slightly more than half the US seems to be ok arming Ukraine so that they can defend themselves from annihilation and perhaps genocide.  Like the French did for us.  We are sending mostly old equipment that would otherwise cost the US to "exercise" and keep ready... so besides transportation this stuff is old sunk cost
3. Now that we are clearing out old inventory it is indeed time to be sure that the entirety of the defense supply chain is inside the continental US
4. If the Russians die to American arms wielded by Ukrainians (good) then they can blame Putin and the Oligarchs, and if they want it to stop they should retreat to pre-2014 borders ...  and the US/Allies will to arm the Ukrainians would be gutted.

 

I live in S Florida and there are shit load of Russians here enjoying the good life.  I am conflicted about whether they should be deported en masse or if it's better that their yuppy asses are here spending money instead of home being conscripted.  Just got back from lunch and the table behind me was 3 young blond women speaking russian(?) lots of "Da"s and comparing the stuff they just bought.   But my ignorant ears can't determine if they're Russian or Ukrainian or some other Slavic language, but there is at least one house in my hood with Fuck Ukraine flag... so that's nice.

 

Slava Ukraini!

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11486]

defection story involving zero defections is a little below pulitzer level

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11486]

3 minutes ago, locodos said:

1. No matter which BS propaganda location you picked up this idea, the US did not start or is engaged in a proxy war.  Fucking Russians attacked a democracy in Europe and have openly stated neo colonial aims in regard to Eastern Europe.  That's it, that's the end of the story
2. Slightly more than half the US seems to be ok arming Ukraine so that they can defend themselves from annihilation and perhaps genocide.  Like the French did for us.  We are sending mostly old equipment that would otherwise cost the US to "exercise" and keep ready... so besides transportation this stuff is old sunk cost
3. Now that we are clearing out old inventory it is indeed time to be sure that the entirety of the defense supply chain is inside the continental US
4. If the Russians die to American arms wielded by Ukrainians (good) then they can blame Putin and the Oligarchs, and if they want it to stop they should retreat to pre-2014 borders ...  and the US/Allies will to arm the Ukrainians would be gutted.

 

I live in S Florida and there are shit load of Russians here enjoying the good life.  I am conflicted about whether they should be deported en masse or if it's better that their yuppy asses are here spending money instead of home being conscripted.  Just got back from lunch and the table behind me was 3 young blond women speaking russian(?) lots of "Da"s and comparing the stuff they just bought.   But my ignorant ears can't determine if they're Russian or Ukrainian or some other Slavic language, but there is at least one house in my hood with Fuck Ukraine flag... so that's nice.

 

Slava Ukraini!

seems very proxy war to me. i don't think that is a bad thing.  it is just a nato adjacent objective.  no one (here) is saying we started it, but we are more than happy to use it to eliminate one of the world's biggest threats.

[RDCanecutter 25767]

1 hour ago, InkaUtexas said:

401 days into a 3 day op. Putin remains the master planner.

Gilligan's Island ran for three seasons.

[locodos 5147]

4 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

seems very proxy war to me. i don't think that is a bad thing.  it is just a nato adjacent objective.  no one (here) is saying we started it, but we are more than happy to use it to eliminate one of the world's biggest threats.

Russians want to frame it as a proxy war with the West and they had no choice but to bring the fight...  That's all bullshit.

From the internet...so it must be true...  Proxy war "a war instigated by a major power which does not itself become involved."

 

Edited March 31, 2023 by locodos

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11486]

that's conflating two different things -- is it a proxy war; why is it happening.  it's happening because russia chose to fight.  it'll stop the second russia chooses to stop.

 

proxy war is just a term to describe the sort of conflict that exists in the nuclear age when superpowers avoid fighting each other by involving themselves in other disputes where they are aligned.  it's agnostic -- to me at least -- to any fault between the parties.

[locodos 5147]

2 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

that's conflating two different things -- is it a proxy war; why is it happening.  it's happening because russia chose to fight.  it'll stop the second russia chooses to stop.

 

proxy war is just a term to describe the sort of conflict that exists in the nuclear age when superpowers avoid fighting each other by involving themselves in other disputes where they are aligned.  it's agnostic -- to me at least -- to any fault between the parties.

Just know your repeating and reinforcing Russian talking points

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11486]

jlawokay.gif

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11486]

On 3/13/2022 at 9:40 PM, Goredho said:

Russia finding itself in a proxy war with the US but as one of the fucking proxies is almost worth WWIII.

 

On 7/11/2022 at 12:47 PM, Rimbo said:

Standard Cold War proxy war. Except Russia somehow idiotically forgot the "proxy" part.

 

On 10/21/2022 at 12:10 PM, dimyh said:

I'm conflicted...clearly we are engaged in a proxy war but not sure if it should be called the USA-Iran proxy war or the USA-Taliban proxy war. Either way those are some sick bastards willing to fight to the last Russian.

 

On 3/19/2022 at 3:25 PM, Ag with kids said:

The fact they're having to pull them out in Ukraine is crazy.  This is a proxy war and our proxy is doing WAY better than anyone expected.

 

On 2/27/2022 at 7:22 PM, troph said:

All of this “no troops” talk but Putin said any interference would lead to… make no mistake this is a proxy war directly with Russia. It’s not two proxies, they are in it neck deep and we are using Ukraine as a proxy, justified for sure but a decade of training, recruiting, preparing, equipping and now we are their supply chain. This is a US proxy war against Russia directly. And our success (taking NOTHING away from Zelensky and his military) is going to lead to an escalation to deescalate unless Putin gets territory and more. That’s not going to happen, so we need to be prepared. If he isn’t taken out the chance of tactical nukes in Ukraine are probably greater than 50/50. 

 

On 4/25/2022 at 8:05 PM, Parliament said:

Foreign Ministry Lavrov says @NATO is "essentially" engaging in war with #Russia through a proxy which it is arming.

Dang!  They figured out our dastardly plan!

 

On 4/12/2022 at 10:31 PM, ShaggyBevo RIP said:

Or we in the mother of all proxy wars and will eventually act in accordance once all the necessary pieces are in place. Giving NATO everything needed to fight RU is the first step required for entering into this war.

 

On 3/26/2022 at 2:29 PM, Bateshorn said:

After that dude was roasted on Twitter a month ago for saying look to your Gen X elders for guidance on a Cold War, I sure do spend a lot of time explaining proxy wars and such to my Millenial colleagues. 

 

On 3/17/2022 at 5:26 PM, Hefeweizen said:

What a gaping vagina.  It’s a proxy war.  Next were the Baltics, at which point nukes would fly, so yes this is the place to stomp on his toes using St Javelin  instead of whipping out article 5.

 

On 3/20/2023 at 7:01 PM, Bevo said:

I think this is how Russians feel but in reality this is a proxy war.  The entire Western World is fighting against Russia using the West's older weapons and an army from a country with a population of 40 million. Ukraine is also fighting with one arm tied behind its back as it can't use weapons that can reach deep into Russia and can't enter the Russian mainland.

 

 

(etc. etc. etc.)  it's a pretty common term.  

[MillerEP 30232]

 

[statsman 5352]

38 minutes ago, MagicSoccerSpray said:

 

Thanks, now I remember. I assume he was assuming the Ukrainians would get the stuff they needed to conduct more offensive operations during the winter, which they didn't. Sigh. Still looking forward to seeing what they've got ready for the spring, as I think the Russians are weaker than they seem. Here's to hoping.

From your lips to God’s ears. I remember what Schwarzkopf said- “The enemy gets a vote, too”. 
 
This is what I know about high level strategy- the way to win a narrow victory in an important fight is to prepare a plan to overwhelm the enemy. Bring a lot more and a lot faster to the fight. If you do that, you have a shot at a narrow win. Bringing enough to give you a good chance at a win will get you beat. 
 
I want Ukraine to win (especially since our president- and I am proud he did it- said that we are with them until the end. I want us to give them as much as they need, even if that is more than we can give them under current constraints. 

[locodos 5147]

12 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(etc. etc. etc.)  it's a pretty common term.  

So is using clip instead of magazine...  

The Russians want the black sea, fertile land, nuclear infrastructure, mining resources, pipeline routes to their markets and that's why they are attacking.  This is a Russian war.

I'm not going to argue with you further if you feel the Russians are fighting American hegemony via a proxy war so be it.

Enjoy comrade talking points:

https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-putin-united-states-moscow-5cc322a7ef3b0407c529ebf8bb1fbfd2

[MillerEP 30232]

 

[Hefeweizen 5210]

I think this has transitioned from proxy war to one step away from conventional war.  With NATO up in his grill and Ukraine about to mount a major offensive, expect something wild soon.

[Schulz2.0 28616]

1 hour ago, MagicSoccerSpray said:

 

Thanks, now I remember. I assume he was assuming the Ukrainians would get the stuff they needed to conduct more offensive operations during the winter, which they didn't. Sigh. Still looking forward to seeing what they've got ready for the spring, as I think the Russians are weaker than they seem. Here's to hoping.

Zeihan has been saying he sees it as Russia's war to win for a long time. He also thought Ukraine would fall within the first few weeks of the war. He's basing Russia likely winning off their total population in a war of attrition and the expectation that Russia can't be this retarded for an indefinite period.

[MillerEP 30232]

 

[956 Worldwide 33957]

I don’t like the term proxy war but I’ll concede that the edges get fuzzy and it can be described as one in good faith.  
 

I think that given the stakes on both sides and war aims of Russia, this is just best described as an interstate war of conquest. Russia’s actions in Donbas between 2014 and 2022 could be described as a proxy war against Ukraine, and perhaps we can put NATO there too although our involvement was disproportionately small compared to the examples below.  Afghanistan was a proxy war by the USSR and U.S., as was Vietnam- neither the U.S. or USSR sought to invade, occupy, and take either of those nations’ territories for their own, it was a test of will and support for ostensible Allies/puppets competing to be the sole legitimate government. The Spanish Civil War was both a real civil war and a proxy war between the USSR and Nazi Germany. 
 

I think we can agree that Germany against the UK was very different than those conflicts, even as Lend-Lease started to flow.  By describing Ukraine as a proxy war, we lose sight of the more important characteristic— this is a predatory war of conquest launched by one sovereign state against another. 

[Pescado_Rojo 19192]

3 minutes ago, Schulz2.0 said:

Zeihan has been saying he sees it as Russia's war to win for a long time. He also thought Ukraine would fall within the first few weeks of the war. He's basing Russia likely winning off their total population in a war of attrition and the expectation that Russia can't be this retarded for an indefinite period.

My biggest fear is that this draws out long enough for Russia to stumblefuck their way into something that works well enough for them to regain a bit of initiative or blunt the Ukrainian offensive. 

[Deej 76081]

7 minutes ago, Schulz2.0 said:

the expectation that Russia can't be this retarded for an indefinite period.

[956 Worldwide 33957]

9 minutes ago, Pescado_Rojo said:

My biggest fear is that this draws out long enough for Russia to stumblefuck their way into something that works well enough for them to regain a bit of initiative or blunt the Ukrainian offensive. 

One of Russia’s strategic advantages is its population’s willingness to tolerate almost anything. But when Russia breaks, it breaks all the way.  
 

This is my concern with foreign policy mandarins’ unwillingness to contemplate Russia simply breaking.  They are willing to go that far, and if we aren’t willing to let them go there, fast— they will win. 
 

The world does not need the Russian Federation in its current incarnation and can survive its collapse just like we survived the collapse of the USSR and before that the Tsarist Empire. Focus on what we want a world around Russia to look like. 

Edited March 31, 2023 by 956 Worldwide

[Trey3216 15298]

42 minutes ago, locodos said:

So is using clip instead of magazine...  

The Russians want the black sea, fertile land, nuclear infrastructure, mining resources, pipeline routes to their markets and that's why they are attacking.  This is a Russian war.

I'm not going to argue with you further if you feel the Russians are fighting American hegemony via a proxy war so be it.

Enjoy comrade talking points:

https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-putin-united-states-moscow-5cc322a7ef3b0407c529ebf8bb1fbfd2

The Russians are fighting a real war.  We are fighting against them via proxy.   Ukraine is a sovereign defender of their homeland in war against the aggressor.   But make no mistake, this war would not still be going on if we were not proxy fighting on Ukraine’s side via aide, training, $$, sanctions exacted, etc.  

 

that is not a Russian talking point, it’s a fucking fact.  

[MillerEP 30232]

^We noticed that they were suppressing Ukraine news, this confirms it

[atomheartbevo 88750]

1 hour ago, Schulz2.0 said:

Zeihan has been saying he sees it as Russia's war to win for a long time. He also thought Ukraine would fall within the first few weeks of the war. He's basing Russia likely winning off their total population in a war of attrition and the expectation that Russia can't be this retarded for an indefinite period.

1 hour ago, Pescado_Rojo said:

My biggest fear is that this draws out long enough for Russia to stumblefuck their way into something that works well enough for them to regain a bit of initiative or blunt the Ukrainian offensive. 

The good news is that even with Russia's population, they don't have the infrastructure, both back at home (in terms of production) and in the field (moving ammo/parts/troops) around to truly blunt too much - their inability to take Bakhmut after nearly 9 months is telling.  Ukraine also has the advantage of shorter/internal lines of movement (fuel, ammo, troops), whereas Russia has to move troops and ammo and fuel around the periphery both because of the layout, but also to avoid HIMARS.

If Russia can't solve something as simple as their truck problem by now, I don't think they can solve it in the future.  They should have been able to throw a ton of resources into truck production and flood the field with simple trucks to help move stuff around and make their forces more mobile than they are.  And if you dig into the production of their more complex equipment (on this page or the previous, their counter-battery radar systems were profile), some of those production lines were shut down years, even decades ago, and you know they didn't properly store all of the equipment or spares (and/or the corruption inherit in Russia's manufacturing ensures most/all ended up on the black market).

Oh, and Russia should have been able to immediately ramp up artillery shell and simple unguided rocket production, and yet they couldn't.

[gyroprotagonist 2591]

5 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

 They should have been able to throw a ton of resources into truck production and flood the field with simple trucks to help move stuff around and make their forces more mobile than they are.  

they are waiting on those chips for the backup camera and seat warmers like the rest of us

[Gatorubet 29391]

I assume that these will be used in defensive positions as non-mobile artillery. This 50 or 60 year old technology will not be super effective against a modern main battle tank’s armor, but their HE shells pack a punch, and as part of a defensive fortified position, they will be of some use to the defenders as artillery,  I guess.  APCs will fear a hit. 

Putting the respective ability of this artillery aside, the more important aspect is that Russia is forced to use 60 year old equipment and technology because they are flat fucking out of their modern stuff. The longer this goes on the older kit they have to use. Conversely, the longer this goes on the more and better and more modern equipment Ukraine gets.

Sounds good to me.

 

[atomheartbevo 88750]

9 hours ago, statsman said:

The WSJ had another story about the Bakhmut defenders needing shells. I wish we (the US) would increase shell production to where Ukraine could fling them around like a U.S. unit. 

Granted, when I was in the Army, it was back in the early/mid-90s, before Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq II and while my MOS was a field artillery MOS,  I was on the scouting end of field artillery (in an infantry unit), and did not see how much ammo we moved around etc. on a day-to-day basis.  Still, I feel confident in saying that we were not setup to fire in the manner and the amounts that we see in Ukraine back then, and I think that is still the case through today.

I'm way oversimplifying, but a typical scenario for us back then was that we would move into an area, we'd reach a point where some officer decided we needed to bring artillery into the equation.  If we had M109s (self-propelled, Paladins), they'd stop, fire and move out, or if it was towed, they'd find a suitable spot, setup, fire, and then breakdown and move out - either way, they didn't hang around in any one spot too long both because of potential counter-battery fire, but also because we were usually pushing forward and could hit the limits of their range, putting us in danger.  This was back in the 90s though, when we were still setup to fight the Soviet Union (sometimes it takes a while to change mindsets/strategies), and it had proven successful against Iraq in '91 (which was based on Soviet equipment/tactics).  We didn't have HIMARs, but M270 MLRS used the same ammo and therefore had the same ranges (but we didn't interact as much).

Still, I had friends who continued on, and in Afghanistan/Iraq, we did have stationary artillery units, including M777s when they came into service, at various bases, but even then, they did not fire in the frequency that we see in Ukraine.  It was more about breaking up small attacks, etc. and used more in a defensive role, with the Air Force being used a lot to create separation.  They were definitely not firing to the point where they were wearing out barrels within months.

Anyways, my long-ass story is that our artillery was used more in a "tactical" role, and we relied on the Air Force for the longer-range and/or heavier stuff, and that continued through Afghanistan/Iraq, where we were not facing enemies with aircraft and heavy artillery, and we could not have imagined a near-World War I return to trenches or the slugfests of WWII.

Ukraine on the other hand, is having to use its artillery in both a tactical and strategic role (although that's more HIMARS/M270).  They don't have the luxury of 500lb bombs being dropped by aircraft on targets, so they are having to try and reduce those targets with much smaller weapons (artillery), and are having to fire a lot more.

Our production was reduced during/after the 1990s, and this was a case of "equip/train like the last war you fought in", and our ammo production has been adequate to keep our forces supplied for the fights we anticipated them being in since the 90s and up through now - we won't be using barrel artillery against the Chinese.

We have ramped up production though, and a lot of people are apparently surprised that the US military has ammo production plants - if you've had to drive north of Dallas into Oklahoma towards Missouri/Arkansas, you might have passed through McAlester, Oklahoma and saw the signs for an ammo plant - they make bombs for the Air Force there.

[ABSR 5266]

2 hours ago, Trey3216 said:

The Russians are fighting a real war.  They are fighting a war of aggression and conquest against another sovereign state.  A war they started and they can end at any time by leaving the country they invaded.  We are fighting against them via proxy.  The US, NATO and other "free" countries are providing supplies and support to the invaded country (Ukraine). Ukraine is a sovereign defender of their homeland in war against the aggressor.   But make no mistake, this war would not still be going on if we were not proxy fighting on Ukraine’s side via aide, training, $$, sanctions exacted, etc.  if Russia stopped fighting it and left.   The US, NATO or other countries are NOT invading Russia, and the ability to stop the war will happen with a Ukrainian victory of pushing out the invaders, or ... Russia stopping the war and leaving.

The US/NATO did not start the war.  The US/NATO can't stop the war (although they could make it harder for Ukraine to successfully continue). But Russia can end the war at any time and not lose one inch of territory (as recognized by treaties they have signed i.e. get the fuck out of Crimea)

That is not a Russian talking point, it’s a fucking fact.  

Fixed it.

Edited March 31, 2023 by ABSR

[MillerEP 30232]

 

[Walser 1088]

4 hours ago, locodos said:

but there is at least one house in my hood with Fuck Ukraine flag...

WUT.

Point me in the general direction and we will have some words. And by words I mean I will bar egress before I torch it.

In all seriousness I cannot imagine the backlash those Orcs would receive here in Austin.

[atomheartbevo 88750]