Русский корабль - иди нахуй

[Zonahorn 8079]

 

[KYHorn 17107]

NYT report on the leaked documents and how they might impact intelligence sharing.

Leaked Documents Reveal Depth of U.S. Spy Efforts and Russia’s Military Struggles

The information, exposed on social media sites, also shows that U.S. intelligence services are eavesdropping on important allies.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/08/us/politics/leaked-documents-russia-ukraine-war.html?campaign_id=190&emc=edit_ufn_20230408&instance_id=89758&nl=from-the-times&regi_id=141347410&segment_id=129952&te=1&user_id=5edae170e2c7f9e85eb5207073ecafed

Spoiler

WASHINGTON — A trove of leaked Pentagon documents reveals how deeply Russia’s security and intelligence services have been penetrated by the United States, demonstrating Washington’s ability to warn Ukraine about planned strikes and providing an assessment of the strength of Moscow’s war machine.

The documents paint a portrait of a depleted Russian military that is struggling in its war in Ukraine and of a military apparatus that is deeply compromised. They contain daily real-time warnings to American intelligence agencies on the timing of Moscow’s strikes and even its specific targets. Such intelligence has allowed the United States to pass on to Ukraine crucial information on how to defend itself.

The documents lay bare the American assessment of a Ukrainian military that is also in dire straits. The documents, from late February and early March but found on social media sites in recent days, outline critical shortages of air defense munitions and discuss the gains being made by Russian troops around the eastern city of Bakhmut. The intelligence reports show that the United States also appears to be spying on Ukraine’s top military and political leaders, a reflection of Washington’s struggle to get a clear view of Ukraine’s fighting strategies.

The material reinforces an idea that intelligence officials have long acknowledged: The United States has a clearer understanding of Russian military operations than it does of Ukrainian planning. Intelligence collection is often difficult and sometimes wrong, but the trove of documents offers perhaps the most complete picture yet of the inner workings of the largest land war in Europe in decades.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Continue reading the main story

 

American officials said while the documents offer hints about U.S. methods to collect information on Russian plans, U.S. intelligence agencies do not yet know if any of their sources of information will be cut off as a result of the leak. American officials have conceded they have lost some sources of information since the war began, but the new documents appear to show that America’s understanding of Russian planning remains extensive.

The State of the War

• Leaked Documents: A trove of classified Pentagon documents reveals how deeply Russia’s security and intelligence services have been penetrated by the United States, demonstrating Washington’s ability to warn Ukraine about planned strikes.
• In the South: The Ukrainian military said that the Russian authorities were preparing to evacuate civilians from Moscow-controlled territories in southern Ukraine before a potential counteroffensive by Ukrainian forces.
• Macron in China: President Emmanuel Macron of France concluded a three-day visit to China, during which he had been expected to seek Beijing’s involvement in helping to end the war. But a joint statement with China’s leader, Xi Jinping, said little about the conflict.
• Finland’s Entry to NATO: The Nordic country officially became the military alliance’s 31st member, in what amounts to a strategic defeat for President Vladimir Putin of Russia.

But the leak has the potential to do real damage to Ukraine’s war effort by exposing which Russian agencies the United States knows the most about, giving Moscow a potential opportunity to cut off the sources of information.

 

• Dig deeper into the moment.

Special offer: Subscribe for $1 a week for the first year.

 

The leak has already complicated relations with allied countries and raised doubts about America’s ability to keep its secrets. After reviewing the documents, a senior Western intelligence official said the release of the material was painful and suggested that it could curb intelligence sharing. For various agencies to provide material to each other, the official said, requires trust and assurances that certain sensitive information will be kept secret.

The documents could also hurt diplomatic ties in other ways. The newly revealed intelligence documents also make plain that the U.S. is not just spying on Russia, but also its allies. While that will hardly surprise officials, making such eavesdropping public always hampers relations with key partners, like South Korea, whose help is needed to supply Ukraine with weaponry.

Senior U.S. officials said an inquiry, launched Friday by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, would try to move swiftly to determine the source of the leak. The officials acknowledged that the documents appear to be legitimate intelligence and operational briefs compiled by the Pentagon’s Joint Staff, using reports from the government’s intelligence community, but that at least one had been modified from the original at some later point.

 

One senior U.S. official called the leak “a massive intelligence breach,” made worse because it lays out to Russia just how deep American intelligence operatives have managed to get into the Russian military apparatus. Officials within the U.S. government with security clearance often receive such documents through daily emails, one official said, and those emails might then be automatically forwarded to other people.

Another senior U.S. official said tracking down the original source of the leak could be difficult because hundreds, if not thousands, of military and other U.S. government officials have the security clearances needed to gain access to the documents. The official said that the Pentagon had instituted procedures in the past few days to “lock down” the distribution of highly sensitive briefing documents. The documents posted online were photographs of folded papers, some with images of a magazine behind them, information that may help investigators.

The documents show that nearly every Russian security service appears penetrated by the United States in some way. For example, one entry, marked top secret, discusses the Russian General Staff’s plans to counter the tanks NATO countries were providing to Ukraine, including creating different “fire zones” and beginning training of Russian soldiers on the vulnerabilities of different allied tanks.

Another entry talks about an information campaign being planned by the GRU, Russia’s military intelligence unit, in Africa trying to shape public opinion against the United States and “promote Russian foreign policy.”

While some of the intelligence briefs offer analysis and broad warnings of Russian plans, others are the kind of actionable information that Ukraine could use to defend itself. One entry talks about the Russian Defense Ministry formulating plans to conduct missile strikes on Ukraine’s forces at specific sites in Odesa and Mykolaiv on March 3, an attack that the U.S. intelligence agencies believed would be designed to destroy a drone storage area, an air defense gun and kill Ukrainian soldiers.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Continue reading the main story

 

Still another entry discusses a report in February disseminated by Russia’s National Defense Command Center about the “decreased combat capability” of Russia’s forces in Eastern Ukraine.

While the documents were compiled by the Pentagon’s Joint Staff, they contain intelligence from many agencies, including the National Security Agency, the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research, and the Central Intelligence Agency. Some of the material is labeled as having been collected under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or F.I.S.A., noting that its further distribution is not allowed without the permission of the attorney general.

One section of the documents is labeled as being the C.I.A. Operations Center Intelligence Update from March 2. That section discusses intelligence on how the Russian ministry of defense had considered steps to counter accusations that it had not been supplying munitions to Wagner group troops in Ukraine “according to a signals intelligence report.”

The documents reveal that American intelligence services are not only spying on the Russians, but are also eavesdropping on important allies.

In the pages posted online, there are at least two discussions about South Korea’s debate about whether to give the U.S. artillery shells for use in Ukraine, violating Seoul’s policy on providing lethal aid. One section of the documents reports that South Korean officials were worried that President Biden would call South Korea’s president pressuring Seoul to deliver the goods.

Another section of the documents, from the C.I.A., is more explicit about how the United States has learned about the South Korean deliberations, noting the information was from “a signals intelligence report.”

Julian E. Barnes, Helene Cooper and Eric Schmitt reported from Washington, Thomas Gibbons-Neff from London and Michael Schwirtz from Lviv, Ukraine.

 

A correction was made on 

April 8, 2023

: 

An earlier version of this article misstated the name of a U.S. law on national security surveillance. It is the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, not the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act.

 

[The Dog 44071]

 

[Neonmoon 38129]

49 minutes ago, KYHorn said:

NYT report on the leaked documents and how they might impact intelligence sharing.

Leaked Documents Reveal Depth of U.S. Spy Efforts and Russia’s Military Struggles

The information, exposed on social media sites, also shows that U.S. intelligence services are eavesdropping on important allies.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/08/us/politics/leaked-documents-russia-ukraine-war.html?campaign_id=190&emc=edit_ufn_20230408&instance_id=89758&nl=from-the-times&regi_id=141347410&segment_id=129952&te=1&user_id=5edae170e2c7f9e85eb5207073ecafed

  Reveal hidden contents

WASHINGTON — A trove of leaked Pentagon documents reveals how deeply Russia’s security and intelligence services have been penetrated by the United States, demonstrating Washington’s ability to warn Ukraine about planned strikes and providing an assessment of the strength of Moscow’s war machine.

The documents paint a portrait of a depleted Russian military that is struggling in its war in Ukraine and of a military apparatus that is deeply compromised. They contain daily real-time warnings to American intelligence agencies on the timing of Moscow’s strikes and even its specific targets. Such intelligence has allowed the United States to pass on to Ukraine crucial information on how to defend itself.

The documents lay bare the American assessment of a Ukrainian military that is also in dire straits. The documents, from late February and early March but found on social media sites in recent days, outline critical shortages of air defense munitions and discuss the gains being made by Russian troops around the eastern city of Bakhmut. The intelligence reports show that the United States also appears to be spying on Ukraine’s top military and political leaders, a reflection of Washington’s struggle to get a clear view of Ukraine’s fighting strategies.

The material reinforces an idea that intelligence officials have long acknowledged: The United States has a clearer understanding of Russian military operations than it does of Ukrainian planning. Intelligence collection is often difficult and sometimes wrong, but the trove of documents offers perhaps the most complete picture yet of the inner workings of the largest land war in Europe in decades.

ADVERTISEMENT

Continue reading the main story

 

American officials said while the documents offer hints about U.S. methods to collect information on Russian plans, U.S. intelligence agencies do not yet know if any of their sources of information will be cut off as a result of the leak. American officials have conceded they have lost some sources of information since the war began, but the new documents appear to show that America’s understanding of Russian planning remains extensive.

The State of the War

• Leaked Documents: A trove of classified Pentagon documents reveals how deeply Russia’s security and intelligence services have been penetrated by the United States, demonstrating Washington’s ability to warn Ukraine about planned strikes.
• In the South: The Ukrainian military said that the Russian authorities were preparing to evacuate civilians from Moscow-controlled territories in southern Ukraine before a potential counteroffensive by Ukrainian forces.
• Macron in China: President Emmanuel Macron of France concluded a three-day visit to China, during which he had been expected to seek Beijing’s involvement in helping to end the war. But a joint statement with China’s leader, Xi Jinping, said little about the conflict.
• Finland’s Entry to NATO: The Nordic country officially became the military alliance’s 31st member, in what amounts to a strategic defeat for President Vladimir Putin of Russia.

But the leak has the potential to do real damage to Ukraine’s war effort by exposing which Russian agencies the United States knows the most about, giving Moscow a potential opportunity to cut off the sources of information.

 

• Dig deeper into the moment.

Special offer: Subscribe for $1 a week for the first year.

 

The leak has already complicated relations with allied countries and raised doubts about America’s ability to keep its secrets. After reviewing the documents, a senior Western intelligence official said the release of the material was painful and suggested that it could curb intelligence sharing. For various agencies to provide material to each other, the official said, requires trust and assurances that certain sensitive information will be kept secret.

The documents could also hurt diplomatic ties in other ways. The newly revealed intelligence documents also make plain that the U.S. is not just spying on Russia, but also its allies. While that will hardly surprise officials, making such eavesdropping public always hampers relations with key partners, like South Korea, whose help is needed to supply Ukraine with weaponry.

Senior U.S. officials said an inquiry, launched Friday by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, would try to move swiftly to determine the source of the leak. The officials acknowledged that the documents appear to be legitimate intelligence and operational briefs compiled by the Pentagon’s Joint Staff, using reports from the government’s intelligence community, but that at least one had been modified from the original at some later point.

 

One senior U.S. official called the leak “a massive intelligence breach,” made worse because it lays out to Russia just how deep American intelligence operatives have managed to get into the Russian military apparatus. Officials within the U.S. government with security clearance often receive such documents through daily emails, one official said, and those emails might then be automatically forwarded to other people.

Another senior U.S. official said tracking down the original source of the leak could be difficult because hundreds, if not thousands, of military and other U.S. government officials have the security clearances needed to gain access to the documents. The official said that the Pentagon had instituted procedures in the past few days to “lock down” the distribution of highly sensitive briefing documents. The documents posted online were photographs of folded papers, some with images of a magazine behind them, information that may help investigators.

The documents show that nearly every Russian security service appears penetrated by the United States in some way. For example, one entry, marked top secret, discusses the Russian General Staff’s plans to counter the tanks NATO countries were providing to Ukraine, including creating different “fire zones” and beginning training of Russian soldiers on the vulnerabilities of different allied tanks.

Another entry talks about an information campaign being planned by the GRU, Russia’s military intelligence unit, in Africa trying to shape public opinion against the United States and “promote Russian foreign policy.”

While some of the intelligence briefs offer analysis and broad warnings of Russian plans, others are the kind of actionable information that Ukraine could use to defend itself. One entry talks about the Russian Defense Ministry formulating plans to conduct missile strikes on Ukraine’s forces at specific sites in Odesa and Mykolaiv on March 3, an attack that the U.S. intelligence agencies believed would be designed to destroy a drone storage area, an air defense gun and kill Ukrainian soldiers.

ADVERTISEMENT

Continue reading the main story

 

Still another entry discusses a report in February disseminated by Russia’s National Defense Command Center about the “decreased combat capability” of Russia’s forces in Eastern Ukraine.

While the documents were compiled by the Pentagon’s Joint Staff, they contain intelligence from many agencies, including the National Security Agency, the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research, and the Central Intelligence Agency. Some of the material is labeled as having been collected under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or F.I.S.A., noting that its further distribution is not allowed without the permission of the attorney general.

One section of the documents is labeled as being the C.I.A. Operations Center Intelligence Update from March 2. That section discusses intelligence on how the Russian ministry of defense had considered steps to counter accusations that it had not been supplying munitions to Wagner group troops in Ukraine “according to a signals intelligence report.”

The documents reveal that American intelligence services are not only spying on the Russians, but are also eavesdropping on important allies.

In the pages posted online, there are at least two discussions about South Korea’s debate about whether to give the U.S. artillery shells for use in Ukraine, violating Seoul’s policy on providing lethal aid. One section of the documents reports that South Korean officials were worried that President Biden would call South Korea’s president pressuring Seoul to deliver the goods.

Another section of the documents, from the C.I.A., is more explicit about how the United States has learned about the South Korean deliberations, noting the information was from “a signals intelligence report.”

Julian E. Barnes, Helene Cooper and Eric Schmitt reported from Washington, Thomas Gibbons-Neff from London and Michael Schwirtz from Lviv, Ukraine.

A correction was made on 

April 8, 2023

: 

An earlier version of this article misstated the name of a U.S. law on national security surveillance. It is the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, not the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act.

 

 

Every country spies on every other country.

News at 11

 

[BamaATL 16593]

It's almost like these guys are full of shit

 

[MissingInAction 25126]

They are gloriously incompetent. 

[Schulz2.0 28991]

 

[KYHorn 17107]

 

Edited April 8, 2023 by KYHorn

[Schulz2.0 28991]

 

 

 

[NAVY 6747]

We’ve reached the flood the zone with shit part of spring offensive prep 

Edited April 9, 2023 by NAVY

[BamaATL 16593]

13 minutes ago, NAVY said:

We’ve reached the flood the zone with shit part spring offensive prep 

I believe you are correct, seeing it in a new way in this information age.  

[Foosters 17858]

7 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Dmitri Medvedev is having a normal one. 
 

 

[KYHorn 17107]

 

 

[Schulz2.0 28991]

 

[KYHorn 17107]

Interesting that they need more of APC-type vehicles. Other countries have been able to provide a large number of them

 

 

[KYHorn 17107]

Good sign

 

 

[KYHorn 17107]

 

 

 

[KYHorn 17107]

If you recall, I think the Russians took this advice too literally:

 

[MagicSoccerSpray 1732]

 

[MillerEP 30492]

 

[MillerEP 30492]

 

[MillerEP 30492]

 

[atomheartbevo 89757]

[atomheartbevo 89757]

 

 

[Schulz2.0 28991]

 

[Gatorubet 30271]

In my dreams, I hope that the constant narrative of shell shortages in Ukraine is a giant propaganda feint, so that when the spring offensive starts, the Russians will be shock and awed. 

[Chopper 17241]

I don't know why but earlier today I was thinking about that Tech grad who worked for Russia Today when it was shut down. It turned out she was easy to locate on the interwebz because Tx Monthly wrote an article about her last year.

She's still posting on twitter. She's still a verrrry open and fair-minded journalist, just as she insisted before the invasion. It's probably just a small coincidence that she now lives in Moscow, vacations only in Dubai, and blogs on Telegram. I don't know how she's doing on telegram but her twitter posts get almost no engagement.

https://twitter.com/RachBlevins

 

[Schulz2.0 28991]

 

[RDCanecutter 26458]

On 4/8/2023 at 11:41 AM, 956 Worldwide said:

Dmitri Medvedev is having a normal one. 
 

 

We need Medvedev on Surly.

[Chopper 17241]

nm

Edited April 9, 2023 by Chopper

[Pato del Muerto 52534]

Public server?  Pentagon panic?  I realize that Occam’s razor may well apply, but c’mon. Either it’s false info or the reaction is being overacted publicly to make them think it is false info. Its all too much. 

[atomheartbevo 89757]

21 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Public server?  Pentagon panic?  I realize that Occam’s razor may well apply, but c’mon. Either it’s false info or the reaction is being overacted publicly to make them think it is false info. Its all too much. 

Yeah, seems mighty convenient.

[BamaATL 16593]

In looking at the Russian defensive fortifications and upgrades, may be we all looking at the wrong area for the counter attack.  Many of us believe it will rally at either Mariupol or Melitopol, or perhaps both.  Given the fortifications, I started considering that perhaps the Ukrainians will look for other areas of opportunity.  We I compared this fortification map with deep state map of Russian troop locations I noticed something.  Just north of Vuhledar, there is a corridor with few Russian troops and if the fortification map is to be believe it looks to be lightly fortified.  I wonder if the first strike could be directly at this corridor, with the idea of splitting the fronts into North and South, vs East and West.  Given the geography of the area, with bridges and wetlands, it would be a short strike about 65 km to the Russian border and could serve split their army.  Additionally, it doesn't appear they would need lots of people to hold this area.  The real advantage would be that it could open a corridor to the south that evades the existing fortifications by going around them from the north and the east, which it doesn't appear the Russians are expecting.  The rally point for this might be Novotroitske.  

Just a thought, I'm just looking for points of opportunity.  

[drt 640]

Airborne assault, brother. 
 

I know that’s not actually possible with the constraints and abilities of the Ukrainian military. But it sounds better than what actually is coming. 

[InkaUtexas 26017]

Impressive. I know they are not the only ones who do this, but nice to see. 

 

 

[Victor Lazlo 1777]

8 hours ago, BamaATL said:

In looking at the Russian defensive fortifications and upgrades, may be we all looking at the wrong area for the counter attack.  Many of us believe it will rally at either Mariupol or Melitopol, or perhaps both.  Given the fortifications, I started considering that perhaps the Ukrainians will look for other areas of opportunity.  We I compared this fortification map with deep state map of Russian troop locations I noticed something.  Just north of Vuhledar, there is a corridor with few Russian troops and if the fortification map is to be believe it looks to be lightly fortified.  I wonder if the first strike could be directly at this corridor, with the idea of splitting the fronts into North and South, vs East and West.  Given the geography of the area, with bridges and wetlands, it would be a short strike about 65 km to the Russian border and could serve split their army.  Additionally, it doesn't appear they would need lots of people to hold this area.  The real advantage would be that it could open a corridor to the south that evades the existing fortifications by going around them from the north and the east, which it doesn't appear the Russians are expecting.  The rally point for this might be Novotroitske.  

Just a thought, I'm just looking for points of opportunity.  

Yep, I’m sure you’ve got it all figured out.

Let’s just hope the Russkies don’t read Surly. Otherwise, the offensive is dead on arrival.

Edited to say, I was being a dick, you might be right. But I hope the people in charge use some imagination to create an offensive that can’t be stopped. Wherever that may take them.

Edited April 10, 2023 by Victor Lazlo

[SL Xpress 7517]

3 hours ago, InkaUtexas said:

Impressive. I know they are not the only ones who do this, but nice to see. 

 

 

One of the issues I was reading about regarding the F-16 is that it's one of the worst to do this with because of its sensitivity to debris on the runway. The airfields have to be maintained at a pretty high level to prevent debris from getting into the intake - more so than with some other fighters. 

In all honesty, I don't think that's the only reason, but it is a legitimate issue. 

The person I was watching was recommending the Swedish Gripen as a better fighter for what Ukraine is trying to do because it's specifically designed for mobile airfield deployment from the ground up, from takeoff, to maintenance and support. And then the Hornet was second best because it's designed for aircraft carrier deployment, which necessitates a more compact maintenance and support by definition. 

Of course, there are so MANY more F-16s, and so many roles it can be used for. I'm sure the reluctance to send them over has way more to do with politics - including funding - than it does the cleanliness of the runways required. I still found it interesting coming from an objective observer. 

[KYHorn 17107]

Nice. The vehicle seems vulnerable, but it's surely pretty effective otherwise.

 

[atomheartbevo 89757]

5 hours ago, Victor Lazlo said:

Yep, I’m sure you’ve got it all figured out.

Let’s just hope the Russkies don’t read Surly. Otherwise, the offensive is dead on arrival.

Edited to say, I was being a dick, you might be right. But I hope the people in charge use some imagination to create an offensive that can’t be stopped. Wherever that may take them.

Ukraine took back Kharkiv and Kherson when Russia had more effective (trained/competent) personnel than they do now, and had better equipment than they do now.

[RPM 26327]

2 hours ago, KYHorn said:

Nice. The vehicle seems vulnerable, but it's surely pretty effective otherwise.

 

[BamaATL 16593]

6 hours ago, Victor Lazlo said:

Yep, I’m sure you’ve got it all figured out.

Let’s just hope the Russkies don’t read Surly. Otherwise, the offensive is dead on arrival.

Edited to say, I was being a dick, you might be right. But I hope the people in charge use some imagination to create an offensive that can’t be stopped. Wherever that may take them.

Oh I don't know, freely admit that.  If the Ukrainians have shown us anything, they are full of surprises.  They have also shown that they can be strategically clever and feint well, a la the Kharkiv offensive.  What I was looking for is at least from a map standpoint anything that looks like opportunity that we haven't been considering.   If the Russian MOD or Wagner are reading this site for advice, I'd say they have much bigger problems to contend with.  The other thing that stood out is that fighting into Russian fortifications is sort of like determining that you have to fight on Russian dictated terms.  I would think it would make more sense to fight on your own terms and dictate to the enemy, if possible. 

[SquishMitten 10421]

On 4/8/2023 at 11:37 AM, cactusflinthead said:

Been thinking the same thing. Baffle them with bullshit and hit'em where they ain't.

Hope so. Mainly because the very low number of troops mentioned

[Bevo 13590]

14 hours ago, BamaATL said:

In looking at the Russian defensive fortifications and upgrades, may be we all looking at the wrong area for the counter attack.  Many of us believe it will rally at either Mariupol or Melitopol, or perhaps both.  Given the fortifications, I started considering that perhaps the Ukrainians will look for other areas of opportunity.  We I compared this fortification map with deep state map of Russian troop locations I noticed something.  Just north of Vuhledar, there is a corridor with few Russian troops and if the fortification map is to be believe it looks to be lightly fortified.  I wonder if the first strike could be directly at this corridor, with the idea of splitting the fronts into North and South, vs East and West.  Given the geography of the area, with bridges and wetlands, it would be a short strike about 65 km to the Russian border and could serve split their army.  Additionally, it doesn't appear they would need lots of people to hold this area.  The real advantage would be that it could open a corridor to the south that evades the existing fortifications by going around them from the north and the east, which it doesn't appear the Russians are expecting.  The rally point for this might be Novotroitske.  

Just a thought, I'm just looking for points of opportunity.  

Be careful on your prognostications. I thought today would be the start of the offensive. I was wrong.

[statsman 5473]

The document leak- is it a real leak or psyops? I think we’ll know by how well supplied Ukraine is with munitions. 
 
A common theme of the documents, echoed by Zelensky in his discussions with the west, is the Ukrainian need for more ammunition. If the offensive struggles for lack of munitions, is the Ukrainians have to ration air defense and artillery munitions, then we can probably figure the docs are legit. If (and I really hope this is the case) Ukraine busts loose on their offensive and have a full supply of munitions to fire, we can probably attribute the leaked docs as psyops. 

[SquishMitten 10421]

21 hours ago, MillerEP said:

 

I guess I don’t really understand all the fences being built. Are they also heavily patrolled? We know they don’t stop small groups of immigrants. They sure as shit aren’t going to slow down tanks. It’s not like mounds of razor wire that would really bog down infantry. Seems like that fence may add no more than a few minutes to breach all up and down the line. 

[Armybrat 40855]

17 hours ago, Chopper said:

I don't know why but earlier today I was thinking about that Tech grad who worked for Russia Today when it was shut down. It turned out she was easy to locate on the interwebz because Tx Monthly wrote an article about her last year.

She's still posting on twitter. She's still a verrrry open and fair-minded journalist, just as she insisted before the invasion. It's probably just a small coincidence that she now lives in Moscow, vacations only in Dubai, and blogs on Telegram. I don't know how she's doing on telegram but her twitter posts get almost no engagement.

https://twitter.com/RachBlevins

 

Moscow Miss.

[atomheartbevo 89757]

19 minutes ago, SquishMitten said:

Hope so. Mainly because the very low number of troops mentioned

15 minutes ago, statsman said:

The document leak- is it a real leak or psyops? I think we’ll know by how well supplied Ukraine is with munitions. 
 
A common theme of the documents, echoed by Zelensky in his discussions with the west, is the Ukrainian need for more ammunition. If the offensive struggles for lack of munitions, is the Ukrainians have to ration air defense and artillery munitions, then we can probably figure the docs are legit. If (and I really hope this is the case) Ukraine busts loose on their offensive and have a full supply of munitions to fire, we can probably attribute the leaked docs as psyops. 

We (in the West) are focused on numbers tossed around in the "leaked" documents, but a bunch of the Russian milbloggers/sympathizers were freaking out more over the idea that the US had seemed to have penetrated Russian comms pretty thoroughly up to high levels (general staff).  Now, most of us assume this is probably the case and that we've always had a way (multiple ways actually) of looking at what the Russians do since we have entire 3-letter agencies who do this stuff (and our allies are doing the same), but if you look at some of what was mentioned, the OSINT nerds could probably come up with info that could resemble what was in the "leak" based on ground and satellite information (and in terms of ammo, etc., a lot of that is public knowledge).  The Russian milbloggers seemed to fixate more on the "confirmation" that their comms were penetrated.

If this was deliberate misinformation (which the US has done before), the people doing it know what the Russians would fixate on, and by throwing a bunch of shit into the mix (ammo numbers, casualties, comments on non-Ukrainian stuff, etc. - the stuff I mentioned that the OSINT nerds could come up with and so is not much of a secret), they make it look like some senior staffer just got sloppy with some briefings/intel.  The Russians however would fixate on the idea that their comms were thoroughly penetrated.

For reference, the intercepted cell phone calls that get published every so often are not "Russian comms", although I'm sure the Russians are using them for military communications (when they shouldn't be) - those cell phone calls are picked up with off-the-shelf devices.  I'm talking the military-grade communications systems the Russians are using to talk to Moscow and each other.

Anyways, if this "leak" gets the idea out there that Russian comms are thoroughly penetrated (we assume they are, but they may not be), it's going to cause the Russians a lot of problems, because A) they have to work out how to secure their existing comms systems (which would be hard with untrained personnel) or deploy new systems (which they probably don't have or would be tough with untrained personnel) and B) they have to assume that the West knows all of their defensive plans/numbers/shortcomings/etc.

If it's misinformation on the eve of a counter-offensive, it's brilliant, because Russian officers would have to assume their comms are all compromised, all of their plans are known, and their paranoia/confusion would ramp up like crazy, and they might be afraid to use their comms which would lead to a further breakdown in a cohesive defense against Ukraine.  Russia would probably resort to Ye Olde Runners manually carrying messages between units, which is not very good these days. 

Oh, and Ukrainian drones might be able to pick up the high level of runner foot traffic of say higher-level headquarters.  That would be hilarious if they identified some headquarters here and there because runners are being  used.

If it's an actual leak from a sloppy staffer/official, the Russians have to assume their comms are penetrated and it's going to fuck up their plans/defense.  If it's misinformation, the Russians would think some legitimate things would be in the docs in order to make them look more authentic, and so they can't rule anything out.

 

[SL Xpress 7517]

13 minutes ago, statsman said:

The document leak- is it a real leak or psyops? I think we’ll know by how well supplied Ukraine is with munitions. 
 
A common theme of the documents, echoed by Zelensky in his discussions with the west, is the Ukrainian need for more ammunition. If the offensive struggles for lack of munitions, is the Ukrainians have to ration air defense and artillery munitions, then we can probably figure the docs are legit. If (and I really hope this is the case) Ukraine busts loose on their offensive and have a full supply of munitions to fire, we can probably attribute the leaked docs as psyops. 

There is virtually no chance Ukraine has as much munitions as it wants or needs. It's a systemic issue. I've posted about it before.

First, let's take a look at the US economy. It's no longer a manufacturing powerhouse, and hasn't been really since the 70s and 80s, when it systematically began offshoring its most important supply chains for cost savings. That's important because it limits how much of the peacetime economy can be moved into military production. Namely, zero.

A significant part of the biggest manufacturing capability the US retains is subsidized one way or another through the defense industry. Not all of it, but a significant part. Those manufacturers depend on the US budget and how the Department of Defense allocates its funding for market indicators on what it should invest in. By far the biggest expenditures go towards research and development for big ticket items, and the support and maintenance for those items. 

When it comes to artillery, the US has deemphasized it as a centerpiece for their military doctrine really since the Korean War. Either conflicts are asynchronous, such as Vietnam or Afghanistan, or the US uses complete air superiority and then munitions delivered through the air to fulfill the same kind of function artillery used to provide. Basically US and western based tactics emphasize air superiority and ground based mobility, more so than artillery. 

The market indicators for manufacturers for 60 years, then, has been to produce a minimum of artillery shells simply to keep stocks up and to make sure there's plenty for troops to train with. Which they've done. That's around 14,000 shells per month maxed out. 

It's not enough to simply tell defense contractors we want more shells. That's not how it works. There's no excess capacity out there waiting to be utilized. For companies to invest in new production facilities, they're going to want assurances the DoD isn't going to just pull the rug out from under them with a different administration, or a shift in doctrine. That's not easy to do. They have been doing a lot of work on that front, so that this summer they're expecting to raise production to 40,000 shells per month. Next year they think they can get it up to 90,000 shells per month.

That's not disinformation. That's straight up logistics and how the industry works. 

If you go to Europe, the situation is both better and worse. There's at least more options for artillery shell production, but because of the political realities of EU and NATO, production has to be split between different countries for virtually any system produced. That's not a big deal for peace time, because the collaborative process which is far from efficient can still produce the result needed given enough time. Just need to make enough people happy.

But in wartime, the collaborative process makes everything bog down. France wants to keep all the business and purchases in the EU. Countries like Hungary and Austria don't want to subsidize with a single penny munitions going to Ukraine. Hungary because it views Russia favorably. Austria because it values its neutrality, even though it's a part of EU. Then there's Switzerland, which produces a decent amount of 155mm shells, but doesn't want them going to Ukraine for the same reason. 

There are 155mm shells being produced elsewhere around the world, but those have their own complications.

Then you have the atrophy of EU military spending. Recently it was discovered there simply aren't enough explosives being produced in the EU to make the artillery shells they have the capacity for, and again, buying outside of the EU is fraught with political tension of one kind or another.

With all that, then you take a look at the sheer number of shells Ukraine needs every month. Ideally they'd love to have somewhere around 400,000 shells per month. 400,000! Per month! Combined the US and the EU can't come anywhere close to that. They can't even hit the 100,000 mark together. Ukraine rations to fire off about 120,000 shells per month, but even that is only sustainable because the US and EU draw down on their reserves, which has its own issues both in terms of military readiness for the countries drawing down, and politically with politicians who want to curb the amount of support being given Ukraine. 

I'm not competent enough to talk about the documents and how real they are. I tend to believe they're real enough. The funny thing to me is many of the leaks seem to have occurred on Discord where gamers got into heated arguments over Ukraine, and so someone spilled the documents as a way to win an argument. Which sounds completely farcical unless you've ever been on Discord. I can believe it. And then they've been altered to fit agendas as they got passed around. 

Regardless, the lack of shells is a real issue that isn't going away. My biggest hope is that they've been able to ration their use enough in their defense of places like Bakhmut so that they have enough to mount an effective offensive, but I sure am glad I'm not the one having to make the decisions as to how much rationing is enough, and how much is too much. 

[Orange&White 5528]

23 minutes ago, SquishMitten said:

I guess I don’t really understand all the fences being built. Are they also heavily patrolled? We know they don’t stop small groups of immigrants. They sure as shit aren’t going to slow down tanks. It’s not like mounds of razor wire that would really bog down infantry. Seems like that fence may add no more than a few minutes to breach all up and down the line. 

I believe they are primarily meant to stop Russian citizens trying to flee in order to avoid conscription and destruction of their economy/country.

[SL Xpress 7517]

2 minutes ago, Orange&White said:

I believe they are primarily meant to stop Russian citizens trying to flee in order to avoid conscription and destruction of their economy/country.

At the very least it's a political statement. Nothing says we hate you a lot more than we used to like putting a fence across your border with razor wire on top. It won't stop an invasion, but it's a lot more inconvenient than simply strolling across like they used to be able to do.