Русский корабль - иди нахуй

[MagicSoccerSpray 1,732]

 

[956 Worldwide 34,755]

Apparently South Africa is trying to wave VVVP off of coming to a BRICS summit because it doesn’t want to be in the awkward position of enforcing or not enforcing the ICC warrant. 
 

Anytime someone goes on about the “BRICS” emerging as a bloc, it’s worth remembering that the concept was invented at GoldmanSachs as a way to encourage high-risk investment. 
 

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/05/01/south-africa-warns-putin-could-face-arrest-while-attending-brics-summit-a80994

[statsman 5,478]

Thoughts:

-Wow, Patriot really works. However, Ukraine doesn’t have enough batteries (it’s a big country) and I don’t know how they get more. They really are running out of Buks and need a replacement

-The hit on Pahvlorad (sp?) is no bueno. Again, more air defense needed. Like Zelensky was asking for six months before Patriot was approved. 
-It’s not all on the US. Europe needs to take a good look in the mirror and ask themselves what they’re willing to do to keep the bear farther east. Everybody wants Uncle Sam to step in and make things right, but counting on your big brother to show up for the fight is an imperfect strategy. 
-Still, the US very publicly announced an alliance with Ukraine. The way to lose this war is to parse out support, just enough to keep Ukraine from being overrun (it has to be repeated- Ukraine has no armament production, on its own, without western help). The way to win it is to give Ukraine an abundance of weapons. 
 
William F. Buckley famously said of defense spending, and the proper amount of defense spending - “enough to keep us out of a war, and not one dollar more”. Right now, with stores depleting, an ally in an active shooting war, and Taiwan threatened- that’s a really big number and any plan to spend less is based on hopes and chance. 

[KYHorn 17,154]

 

Edited May 1, 2023 by KYHorn

[956 Worldwide 34,755]

16 minutes ago, statsman said:

Thoughts:

-Wow, Patriot really works. However, Ukraine doesn’t have enough batteries (it’s a big country) and I don’t know how they get more. They really are running out of Buks and need a replacement

-The hit on Pahvlorad (sp?) is no bueno. Again, more air defense needed. Like Zelensky was asking for six months before Patriot was approved. 
-It’s not all on the US. Europe needs to take a good look in the mirror and ask themselves what they’re willing to do to keep the bear farther east. Everybody wants Uncle Sam to step in and make things right, but counting on your big brother to show up for the fight is an imperfect strategy. 
-Still, the US very publicly announced an alliance with Ukraine. The way to lose this war is to parse out support, just enough to keep Ukraine from being overrun (it has to be repeated- Ukraine has no armament production, on its own, without western help). The way to win it is to give Ukraine an abundance of weapons. 
 
William F. Buckley famously said of defense spending, and the proper amount of defense spending - “enough to keep us out of a war, and not one dollar more”. Right now, with stores depleting, an ally in an active shooting war, and Taiwan threatened- that’s a really big number and any plan to spend less is based on hopes and chance. 

Lots of European nations have dug really deep and have transferred entire capabilities to Ukraine. What we are seeing is the result of decades of defense and industrial policy decisions. It can’t be repeated enough that we’re trying to help Ukraine win a type of war we never envisioned fighting ourselves. 

[statsman 5,478]

4 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Lots of European nations have dug really deep and have transferred entire capabilities to Ukraine. What we are seeing is the result of decades of defense and industrial policy decisions. It can’t be repeated enough that we’re trying to help Ukraine win a type of war we never envisioned fighting ourselves. 

Fair. How about this? “A” is the amount of aid the west can supply to Ukraine. “B” is the aid they need to win. If A > B, we don’t have a problem. If B > A, we do have a problem. In that case, what’s the solution?

[JesusSweatDuck 17,809]

9 minutes ago, statsman said:

Fair. How about this? “A” is the amount of aid the west can supply to Ukraine. “B” is the aid they need to win. If A > B, we don’t have a problem. If B > A, we do have a problem. In that case, what’s the solution?

Give them more advanced missiles allowing them to strike deeper into Russia?

[The Dog 44,138]

 

[Dahobbs 17,682]

1 hour ago, statsman said:

Thoughts:

-Wow, Patriot really works. However, Ukraine doesn’t have enough batteries (it’s a big country) and I don’t know how they get more. They really are running out of Buks and need a replacement

-The hit on Pahvlorad (sp?) is no bueno. Again, more air defense needed. Like Zelensky was asking for six months before Patriot was approved. 
-It’s not all on the US. Europe needs to take a good look in the mirror and ask themselves what they’re willing to do to keep the bear farther east. Everybody wants Uncle Sam to step in and make things right, but counting on your big brother to show up for the fight is an imperfect strategy. 
-Still, the US very publicly announced an alliance with Ukraine. The way to lose this war is to parse out support, just enough to keep Ukraine from being overrun (it has to be repeated- Ukraine has no armament production, on its own, without western help). The way to win it is to give Ukraine an abundance of weapons. 
 
William F. Buckley famously said of defense spending, and the proper amount of defense spending - “enough to keep us out of a war, and not one dollar more”. Right now, with stores depleting, an ally in an active shooting war, and Taiwan threatened- that’s a really big number and any plan to spend less is based on hopes and chance. 

What extra systems are you proposing to send? Patriot is a super expensive niche system for Ukraine. It counters a very specific threat effectively (Russia' ballistic missiles/ "hypersonic" weapons). Other threats are going to be handled more efficiently by much cheaper and more ubiquitous systems. Unfortunately, the West in general doesn't have a ton of spare air defense systems.  We've literally been shipping new NASAMS as they are built. Many European countries have been cannibalizing's systems from their own active forces. And, as nice as the idea of sending Ukraine F-16s is, it wouldn't dramatically change the situation in Ukraine, but rather keep the status quo. That is unless we're willing to provide the hundreds (thousands?)of jets and weapon systems needed to allow Ukraine to actually engage the world's second largest air power within range of its air defense systems.  

[atomheartbevo 89,788]

4 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

to actually engage the world's second largest air power

[SydneyCarton 48,167]

44 minutes ago, The Dog said:

 

Severe political defeat. Ok, and what does that mean practically? Because it feels like jack shit. 

[statsman 5,478]

7 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Severe political defeat. Ok, and what does that mean practically? Because it feels like jack shit. 

On the ground? Nothing. 

Going forward? I think it reinforces Russia’s new status as a rogue nation, with lots of economic implications. 

[bolverk 29,717]

4 hours ago, MagicSoccerSpray said:

 

I ran across this guy 3-4 years ago and have come to really appreciate his background analyses. Some of his predictions before the war ended up being off but his contextual assessments are really useful for understanding the situation and motivation of various players (not just in this conflict).

[The Dog 44,138]

11 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Severe political defeat. Ok, and what does that mean practically? Because it feels like jack shit. 

It's one of the rare times that China has voted for one of these rather than abstaining. In fact, it might be the first. That's no small thing.

[statsman 5,478]

20 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

What extra systems are you proposing to send? Patriot is a super expensive niche system for Ukraine. It counters a very specific threat effectively (Russia' ballistic missiles/ "hypersonic" weapons). Other threats are going to be handled more efficiently by much cheaper and more ubiquitous systems. Unfortunately, the West in general doesn't have a ton of spare air defense systems.  We've literally been shipping new NASAMS as they are built. Many European countries have been cannibalizing's systems from their own active forces. And, as nice as the idea of sending Ukraine F-16s is, it wouldn't dramatically change the situation in Ukraine, but rather keep the status quo. That is unless we're willing to provide the hundreds (thousands?)of jets and weapon systems needed to allow Ukraine to actually engage the world's second largest air power within range of its air defense systems.  

I’m beating the drum that we should have dramatically ramped up defense spending a year ago (as if we were on a war time footing) and that we should still ramp up defense spending- more munitions, more systems, etc. I’m talking about a severe spike in spending, for just a couple of years  

Disclaimer- I work for a defense contractor. That said, nothing would be better for my employer’s long term sales than for Ukraine to lose. The subsequent years of humanitarian disasters and atrocities, all in the west’s face, will be great for sales. I still prefer not to see that, and want Ukraine to win. 

[SydneyCarton 48,167]

1 minute ago, The Dog said:

It's one of the rare times that China has voted for one of these rather than abstaining. In fact, it might be the first. That's no small thing.

I recognize the implications of China admitting this, sure. But I don't see this in any way changing China's policy on supporting Russia, sucking Russia dry of cheap resources, etc. So, practically, I don't see what this does, honestly. Sure, China admitted Russia was shitbags. But they'll still do business with the shitbags. And I don't see this somehow changing their stance on Taiwan, either, as I don't think China is all too concerned with being seen as a hypocrite. 

5 minutes ago, statsman said:

On the ground? Nothing. 

Going forward? I think it reinforces Russia’s new status as a rogue nation, with lots of economic implications. 

Yeah. Maybe some economic implications, but hell I imagine those economic implications were all going to happen regardless of this vote. Everyone can see they're an unreliable partner. 

[Bevo 13,600]

4 minutes ago, statsman said:

I’m beating the drum that we should have dramatically ramped up defense spending a year ago (as if we were on a war time footing) and that we should still ramp up defense spending- more munitions, more systems, etc. I’m talking about a severe spike in spending, for just a couple of years  

Disclaimer- I work for a defense contractor. That said, nothing would be better for my employer’s long term sales than for Ukraine to lose. The subsequent years of humanitarian disasters and atrocities, all in the west’s face, will be great for sales. I still prefer not to see that, and want Ukraine to win. 

Ehh, there will always be an enemy. The defense industry will be fine regardless of what happens in Ukraine.

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11,669]

3 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I recognize the implications of China admitting this, sure. But I don't see this in any way changing China's policy on supporting Russia, sucking Russia dry of cheap resources, etc. So, practically, I don't see what this does, honestly. Sure, China admitted Russia was shitbags. But they'll still do business with the shitbags. And I don't see this somehow changing their stance on Taiwan, either, as I don't think China is all too concerned with being seen as a hypocrite. 

Yeah. Maybe some economic implications, but hell I imagine those economic implications were all going to happen regardless of this vote. Everyone can see they're an unreliable partner. 

war is part of a political process.  it's not just pew pew.  you're organizing millions/billions of people toward a goal.  this weighs on that organizational ability.  analogous to our talk at the outset of 'good generals think tactics, great generals think logistics.'

[Dahobbs 17,682]

6 minutes ago, statsman said:

I’m beating the drum that we should have dramatically ramped up defense spending a year ago (as if we were on a war time footing) and that we should still ramp up defense spending- more munitions, more systems, etc. I’m talking about a severe spike in spending, for just a couple of years  

Disclaimer- I work for a defense contractor. That said, nothing would be better for my employer’s long term sales than for Ukraine to lose. The subsequent years of humanitarian disasters and atrocities, all in the west’s face, will be great for sales. I still prefer not to see that, and want Ukraine to win. 

Unfortunately, the House isn't going to authorize dramatic new spending. We are currently limited to amounts that were previously approved, so we have to operate within in that budget. It also isn't clear to me that dramatic new spending even last year would actually result in increased manufacturing for things like air defense systems this year. Allocating money doesn't necessarily get new production lines built. Production of certain kinds of ammunition are probably more susceptible to being increased. But air defense is what it is at this point. We'll continue to see new systems provided to Ukraine as they become available along with scrounging together replacement missiles for the S-300 and Buks. 

[The Dog 44,138]

 

[TKthunder2 4,997]

1 hour ago, The Dog said:

 

South Africa is a pussy.

[956 Worldwide 34,755]

A little on that UNGA resolution, I have to say I am more in @SydneyCarton’s camp. 
 

The resolution is a general one that calls for more cooperation between the UN and the Council of Europe.  The part about Russian aggression is one paragraph. During the drafting phase, China tried to have that paragraph removed. They didn’t succeed, so the whole resolution went for a vote with the aggression language in, and China held their nose and voted for it. 
 

Why? Because China has seen the potential to push on fractures between Europe and the United States by playing “good cop” to Europe and trying to paint the U.S. as a spoiler. China has astutely recognized that being too far, publicly, in Russia’s camp is going to push Europe away more. And a “no limits” partnership with Russia is a poor substitute for access to the massive EU market and for the potential to peel away U.S. Allies. 
 

In short, this is if anything a tactical gesture to Europe and is not to be seen as a shift in Chinese attitudes, especially not on big questions like Taiwan or the S. China sea. 

[The Dog 44,138]

 

[atomheartbevo 89,788]

1 hour ago, statsman said:

Disclaimer- I work for a defense contractor. That said, nothing would be better for my employer’s long term sales than for Ukraine to lose. The subsequent years of humanitarian disasters and atrocities, all in the west’s face, will be great for sales. I still prefer not to see that, and want Ukraine to win. 

Success in Ukraine is going to be good for a lot of defense contractors, depending on what they make - everybody and their brother has gotten a really good look at how things from tactical weapons like ATGMs (Javelins, etc.) and MANPADs at the small unit level up to strategic longer-range artillery (HIMARS), in the 2020s can be game changers when dealing with larger foes and are an easy sell to smaller nations who may have larger neighbors that make them nervous. We rarely get such a clear look at modern weapons being employed on a modern battlefield, and have never gotten a look at it on such a grand scale. And that's not even touching upon how the drone/UAV stuff has changed the equation.

[atomheartbevo 89,788]

@The Dog if the Brits get them those missiles, I wonder if it will take Belarus out of the equation for good. They've already been extremely hesitant to get involved and the last thing he wants is to do something that starts getting missiles hitting inside of Belarus proper - any of the Belarusian citizens that supported the war already had the chance to join up with Russian units or PMCs, so everybody else is going to be like "what the fuck, don't drag us into this".

[KYHorn 17,154]

 

 Can't hurt...

 

 

[SydneyCarton 48,167]

13 minutes ago, KYHorn said:

 

 Can't hurt...

 

 

Has the rocket #'s been confirmed. We heard reports of "lots" of explosions, and 18 doesn't seem like a lot. Additionally, they sent what, like 30 bombers into the air to launch 18 missiles? What, were they just looking to waste fuel to scare folks for a few hours? Is this a testament to just how little they have left on the missile front, whatever they can make?

[KYHorn 17,154]

2 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Has the rocket #'s been confirmed. We heard reports of "lots" of explosions, and 18 doesn't seem like a lot. Additionally, they sent what, like 30 bombers into the air to launch 18 missiles? What, were they just looking to waste fuel to scare folks for a few hours? Is this a testament to just how little they have left on the missile front, whatever they can make?

There's debate going on in the OSINT community about what actually happened. There were seemingly credible reports about the Russian planes, so it could be that they were trying out a new tactic to confuse intelligence and air defenses?

[956 Worldwide 34,755]

9 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Has the rocket #'s been confirmed. We heard reports of "lots" of explosions, and 18 doesn't seem like a lot. Additionally, they sent what, like 30 bombers into the air to launch 18 missiles? What, were they just looking to waste fuel to scare folks for a few hours? Is this a testament to just how little they have left on the missile front, whatever they can make?

There’s some chatter that perhaps the Russians did a dry run to suss out AFU air defense capabilities. Remember that Russia doesn’t have near the level of AWACS that we do, they have to get creative in other ways. 

[956 Worldwide 34,755]

 

[The Dog 44,138]

 

[Chad Fuck 17,756]

38 minutes ago, KYHorn said:

 

 Can't hurt...

 

 

Why is there a balkenkruez on this HIMARS?  That seems like bad messaging.  Really bad.  I know that Ukraine has been using white crosses as identifiers.  But this is something else.  

[Rimbo 26,070]

2 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

That is unless we're willing to provide the hundreds (thousands?)of jets and weapon systems needed to allow Ukraine to actually engage the world's second largest air power within range of its air defense systems.  

The world's second largest air power is the US Navy.

6 minutes ago, The Dog said:

 

goddamn it, you beat me to it

negged

[The Dog 44,138]

 

[The Dog 44,138]

 

[Gatorubet 30,303]

39 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

@The Dog if the Brits get them those missiles, I wonder if it will take Belarus out of the equation for good. They've already been extremely hesitant to get involved and the last thing he wants is to do something that starts getting missiles hitting inside of Belarus proper - any of the Belarusian citizens that supported the war already had the chance to join up with Russian units or PMCs, so everybody else is going to be like "what the fuck, don't drag us into this".

Belarus needs to recognize that unless they stay independent-ish, their eventual decision to be part of Russia as a N Korea pariah state will be met with future Chechnya like results if they later want to leave. Plus, Russian blathering about attacking and recovering Baltic and Polish/Finnish land should mean Russia will let Belarus take the hit for that.  The people of Belarus must know that.  

It needs to be drummed up more that a future with Russia means poverty and long term crippling sanctions as a pariah state.   Handsome Joe and Zelenskyy need to push that more.  

This is my wild take, but I wonder if some of our less aggressive stances have to do with our concern of the upcoming Russian Federation’s breakup and how we approach the same nuclear issues as the last time the Soviets broke up.   The US may not want to harm Russia as much as we think for reasons having nothing to do with Ukraine’s success.  

The dying animal with nothing to lose is more dangerous than a humiliated and caged one. 

[KYHorn 17,154]

19 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

Why is there a balkenkruez on this HIMARS?  That seems like bad messaging.  Really bad.  I know that Ukraine has been using white crosses as identifiers.  But this is something else.  

Twitter comments seem to offer a few explanations:

1. It's a bad choice.

2. It's a fake Russian video using another vehicle they've captured (not HIMARS)

3. The Germans use a similar version of the cross on their current tanks.

 

4. :

The Iron Cross is a symbol of the 28th separate motorized brigade named after the Knights of the Winter Campaign .

[Dahobbs 17,682]

22 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

The world's second largest air power is the US Navy.

I was including all US armed forces branches as a single entity. Regardless, the US Navy does not maintain more aircraft than Russia. But, if you wanted to divide it by branches, the Army technically maintains more aircraft than the Navy (but not fixed wing fighters/attack aircraft). 

[The Dog 44,138]

Why Pavlograd was bad news even if it's of no military value. Potential ecological disaster:

 

[Deej 76,903]

Fuck it. Hand over cruise missiles to Ukraine. 

[Rimbo 26,070]

1 hour ago, KYHorn said:

There's debate going on in the OSINT community about what actually happened. There were seemingly credible reports about the Russian planes, so it could be that they were trying out a new tactic to confuse intelligence and air defenses?

 

For some reason, a certain dictator for nice having a fit seems reasonable. "LAUNCH EVERY BOMBER NOW AND FIRE EVERY MISSILE!"

"But, my Lord --"

"DO AS I SAY OR YOU'LL FIND YOURSELF FALLING OUT A WINDOW!"

"Yessir!"

Modern-day Russia, or a Silver Age comic villain? Who can tell the difference any more?

 

1 hour ago, Rimbo said:

The world's second largest air power is the US Navy.

goddamn it, you beat me to it

negged

 

32 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I was including all US armed forces branches as a single entity. Regardless, the US Navy does not maintain more aircraft than Russia. But, if you wanted to divide it by branches, the Army technically maintains more aircraft than the Navy (but not fixed wing fighters/attack aircraft). 

 

It turns out the US Navy is actually the fourth largest air force. US Army Aviation is the second-largest. USAF the first. Russia is third.

But yes, it depends on how you count it. And if we're talking about force effectiveness... whole 'nother story entirely.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/largest-air-forces-in-the-world

[Sbbruin 21,867]

1 hour ago, KYHorn said:

 

 

 

[The Dog 44,138]

 

[Chad Fuck 17,756]

1 hour ago, KYHorn said:

Twitter comments seem to offer a few explanations:

1. It's a bad choice.

2. It's a fake Russian video using another vehicle they've captured (not HIMARS)

3. The Germans use a similar version of the cross on their current tanks.

 

4. :

The Iron Cross is a symbol of the 28th separate motorized brigade named after the Knights of the Winter Campaign .

The balkenkreuze and Iron Cross are different things, the balkenkreuze being much more closely associated with the Wehrmacht during the Third Reich period than the Iron Cross.  Anyhow, weird choice, but I won't pursue this digression any longer.  

[MissingInAction 25,178]

2 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

 

As I get closer to 50 I'm learning the only thing that defeats pussy is a "daddy".

[JesusSweatDuck 17,809]

3 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

Has the rocket #'s been confirmed. We heard reports of "lots" of explosions, and 18 doesn't seem like a lot. Additionally, they sent what, like 30 bombers into the air to launch 18 missiles? What, were they just looking to waste fuel to scare folks for a few hours? Is this a testament to just how little they have left on the missile front, whatever they can make?

Honestly, I don't think they have many more missiles.  An earlier attack showed that the missiles used were built in Feb 2023.  It seems like they're shooting as soon as they're built?

[The Dog 44,138]

 

[Rimbo 26,070]

:gritty:

[The Dog 44,138]

HIMARS time!

[The Dog 44,138]

12 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

:gritty:

Edited May 1, 2023 by The Dog