Русский корабль - иди нахуй

[956 Worldwide 34444]

1 hour ago, TKthunder2 said:

Everything you said is true, but he’s not a true dictator or else elections (even rigged ones) wouldn’t happen.

If he appears to bend to the West and the religious/conservatives will not be happy and the “election” would give them an opportunity do express that unhappiness. The liberal/progressives (if you can even call them that) could also join the protest (because why not take advantage) and that is often the prefect precursor for lightning the fuse on a regime change.

Fake dictators stay in power by giving the illusion of choice but that illusion can be dangerous…which is why these “elections” are still politically important in regards to the NATO elevations.

My brother in Christ, Turkmenistan holds elections. 
 

I would argue that manipulated elections are a necessary and central feature of modern dictatorships. Aside from oddballs like the Saudis, dictators’ source of legitimizing authority does not stem from hereditary claim or from God via the Pope like European monarchs or the Mandate of Heaven like Chinese emperors or being semi-divine like Rome’s caesar. They all claim to the the embodiment and defender of the nation/people’s will and manipulated elections serve as sort of a coronation and anointing that needs to be repeated every now and again. 
 

It’s extremely relevant to point out that Erdogan has never claimed to be a caliph or sultan who has religious authority over Muslims. His source of legitimacy lies in being a representative of his Muslim citizens and doing what they allegedly want him to do. 

[SL Xpress 7505]

19 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

It’s extremely relevant to point out that Erdogan has never claimed to be a caliph or sultan who has religious authority over Muslims. His source of legitimacy lies in being a representative of his Muslim citizens and doing what they allegedly want him to do. 

 

For sure. I do not agree with you regarding Erdogan's strategic thought process, however. I feel like you're underestimating him.

The main thing here is how does Erdogan and Turkiye respond to events in Ukraine? What is their motivation? What do they seek? And the answer is inevitably, "It's complicated," just as nearly any issue in the middle east is.

We all know about the Turkish drones that were used to such effectiveness by the Ukrainians in the early part of the war, and the unabashed support of the manufacturer for Ukraine's cause. We also know about Erdogan negotiating for the transfer of Ukrainian grain, and the subsequent enforcement of that agreement even when the Russians made noises they wouldn't honor it any more. 

But this idea that Turkiye would like to see the Russians knocked down a peg or two is not true. What they really need is for Iran to be knocked down a peg or two, more than Russia. Russia is not a realistic threat to Erdogan's ambitions for Turkiye to be the leading figure in the Islamic world. Iran is. Yes they're on opposite sides of the conflict in both Syria and Armenia/Azerbaijan (well, Russia is ostensibly neutral there, but Turkiye is Azerbaijan's number one supporter). But Iran's support for proxies in Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon is the real danger. Not to mention successes from the Houthis also increases Iran's prestige in the region. 

My guess is that Erdogan will try to remain as neutral as possible, while being a little equaler towards Ukraine. He'd like to be a central figure in whatever cessation of hostilities eventually occurs. He'd like for his country to be a significant source for legitimate Russian fossil fuel exports after the conflict is over. He'd also find it important that Turkiye have some say over any kind of naval negotiations in the Black Sea and Mediterranean, particularly if Ukraine somehow manages to take control of Sevastopol. 

As far as Sweden, we'll see what happens. But this idea that Erdogan is just going to roll over regarding letting Sweden into NATO because enough money is thrown at him is not really how he works. If he thinks there's enough mileage in terms of how he's perceived in the Muslim world, and especially among his base in Turkiye, he'll keep the wrench in the spokes. 

Look at how intransigent he's been on the Cypriot issue. That's not completely an apples to apples comparison - because Sweden to NATO is much much bigger - but the fact remains he's willing to sacrifice economic advantages to prove his points. He'll be seen as a central figure in the international news cycle for as long as this goes on, and that's definitely going to increase his standing among rank and file Muslims. That's important to him. 

As far as your points regarding collaboration, I couldn't agree more. People get frustrated at the inefficiencies of building coalitions and coming to a common agreement. Rightly so. There's nothing efficient about it. And at a time when we're all watching the conflict in Ukraine with very set opinions about good and evil, it's beyond frustrating to see the delays because of only one or two countries putting the kibosh on things. Ukrainians are dying, the country is being devastated. It's already facing terrible demographic pressures that are going to be exacerbated to virtually unprecedented levels from the mass exodus. We all know the sooner Ukraine can expel the Russian forces, the better the outcome for everyone. Heck, I'd even argue that's the best outcome for Russia, for that matter. 

But Orban is bad news. That's for sure. I hate seeing him in power. 

 

Azerbaijan 

[Schulz2.0 28771]

 

[956 Worldwide 34444]

The thing about Erdogan is that even if he is thinking so strategically— Turkey is constrained by certain things and its ability to shape the strategic environment even in its immediate neighborhood is limited.  What Erdogan can do for the most part is make and hedge bets, but he’s not going to be the decider unless he is allowed to be.

Turkey will not determine the outcome of the Ukraine-Russia war; he can be an irritant and he can hedge his bets or maybe make marginal adjustments to timing. But the ultimate result will be determined by the actions or inactions of the United States and the rest of the Alliance and domestic developments in Russia.  He will be at the table in any Black Sea discussions because of geography and international law.  But he does want a hedged bet in case Putin is a continuing reality and victorious in this conflict. 
 

He has more freedom to shape the environment vis-a-vis Iran, Syria, Lebanon— but ultimately, his ability to do so is more or less determined by the forbearance of the United States, and to a lesser degree the extent Russia is able to continue its presence and activity.  
 

He enjoys being seen as an authority and hero in the Islamic world, but the restoration of the Ottoman Empire is not realistic and so that global image is distinctly secondary to domestic political concerns (first) and then to the degree other players (namely the United States) are willing to put the screws to him when it comes to real and pressing security concerns.

The Cyprus point is a good example— he can afford be intransigent there because it is first a question of fierce domestic pride and opinion in Turkey (the coin of the realm for a nationalist) while the United States and Europe have not cared enough to make a stink so long as no one is shooting.

Edited January 25, 2023 by 956 Worldwide

[SL Xpress 7505]

4 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

The thing about Erdogan is that even if he is thinking so strategically— Turkey is constrained by certain things and its ability to shape the strategic environment even in its immediate neighborhood is limited.  What Erdogan can do for the most part is make and hedge bets, but he’s not going to be the decider unless he is allowed to be.

Turkey will not determine the outcome of the Ukraine-Russia war; he can be an irritant and he can hedge his bets or maybe make marginal adjustments to timing. But the ultimate result will be determined by the actions or inactions of the United States and the rest of the Alliance and domestic developments in Russia.  He will be at the table in any Black Sea discussions because of geography and international law.  But he does want a hedged bet in case Putin is a continuing reality and victorious in this conflict. 
 

He has more freedom to shape the environment vis-a-vis Iran, Syria, Lebanon— but ultimately, now ability to do so is more or less determined by the forbearance of the United States, and to a lesser degree the extent Russia is able to continue its presence and activity.  
 

He enjoys being seen as an authority and hero in the Islamic world, but the restoration of the Ottoman Empire is not realistic and so that global image is distinctly secondary to domestic political concerns (first) and then to the degree other players (namely the United States) are willing to put the screws to him when it comes to real and pressing security concerns.

The Cyprus point is a good example— he can afford be intransigent there because it is first a question of fierce domestic pride and opinion in Turkey (the coin of the realm for a nationalist) while the United States and Europe have not cared enough to make a stink so long as no one is shooting.

 

Right. I don't think I've argued anything different. 

My point is that him acceding to allow Sweden into NATO is not fait accompli. I'm not saying he won't agree. I'm saying he's fully capable of being intransigent on the issue because it serves his purposes. And that's because he's way more aligned with the Muslim world, specifically in the Middle East (with all its complications and shifting "an enemy of my enemy is my friend" alliances), than he is with the Western world. 

Another illustrative point is the S-400 purchase. It was a big middle finger to NATO and the US, and even after extensive sanctions and a dramatic pullout of the F-35 program that cost Turkiye industry billions, they went forward with it. Then once they get the two systems on their soil, they put them in storage, and have put on hold the delivery of the additional systems and missiles they purchased. He continues to try to play one side against the other in an effort to show his independence from the west, but he also backs down. He's not a reliable partner, but Turkiye is too important geographically not to cater to. I just wish they still had a government completely intent on being secular. But that's gone by the wayside.  

[KYHorn 16865]

 

[Gengs1 2583]

Thanks are coming 

 

[956 Worldwide 34444]

Leopard donation and export approval is official. The U.S. announcement and specific mechanism (drawdown vs commercial procurement) will be interesting. 
 

One thing to track and a potential minor fault line is that Germany had earlier vowed to use some Leopards as backfill for T-72s that some former Pact members donated. Some Czech press have expressed concern that instead of getting backfilled, those tanks will go to Ukraine. The Prime Minister even had to weigh in. I’ll be interested to see how that shakes out, I expect the Czechs to get their backfill. 
 

 

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

Would it not be a good idea at this point for Biden to do a prime time speech to the nation about the importance of this war?

I feel like this needs to be framed very clearly such that those opposing UKR are seen as enemies of all things supposedly held dear by western democracies.

[956 Worldwide 34444]

He has SOTU coming up and hopefully he’ll dedicate a big part of it to that. 

[YGIFS 19449]

Serious question---how many C-17 sorties does it take to fly 30 M1Abrams plus parts?  And where do they get delivered?  And then how do they get to the Eastern Front of Ukraine?  

Edited January 25, 2023 by YGIFS

[Captainant 27464]

7 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

Serious question---how many C-17 sorties does it take to fly 30 M1Abrams plus parts?  And where do they get delivered?  And then how do they get to the Eastern Front of Ukraine?  

A quick Google tells me a C17 carries around 85 tons, and an Abrams weighs about 72 tons. So probably 30 to 35 flights?

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11668]

8 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

Everything you said is true, but he’s not a true dictator or else elections (even rigged ones) wouldn’t happen.

damn near every dictatorship has elections.

[Chad Fuck 17566]

Leopard donation and export approval is official. The U.S. announcement and specific mechanism (drawdown vs commercial procurement) will be interesting. 
 
One thing to track and a potential minor fault line is that Germany had earlier vowed to use some Leopards as backfill for T-72s that some former Pact members donated. Some Czech press have expressed concern that instead of getting backfilled, those tanks will go to Ukraine. The Prime Minister even had to weigh in. I’ll be interested to see how that shakes out, I expect the Czechs to get their backfill. 
 
 

Rhinemettal gets to make more tanks? I don’t see a problem.

[956 Worldwide 34444]

12 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

Serious question---how many C-17 sorties does it take to fly 30 M1Abrams plus parts?  And where do they get delivered?  And then how do they get to the Eastern Front of Ukraine?  

Serious answer: 

A Globemaster can carry one Abrams. These tanks will almost certainly not be flown, they will be shipped. 
 

They will probably roll off in Gdańsk-Gdynia-Sopot and taken by rail from the tri-cities to points east.  When we fly stuff in, it usually lands at Rzeszow airport and rolls across by truck or rail at Przemysl. They have more options for stuff coming from from the ports. 
 

Ukraine, like Russia is heavily dependent on rail to move things to the front. 

Edited January 25, 2023 by 956 Worldwide

[Chad Fuck 17566]

A quick Google tells me a C17 carries around 85 tons, and an Abrams weighs about 72 tons. So probably 30 to 35 flights?

This. 1 M1 per C-17 sortie.

[Captainant 27464]

3 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Serious answer: 

A Globemaster can carry two Abrams. These tanks will almost certainly not be flown, they will be shipped. 
 

They will probably roll off in Gdańsk-Gdynia-Sopot and taken by rail from the tri-cities to points east.  When we fly stuff in, it usually lands at Rzeszow airport and rolls across by truck or rail at Przemysl. They have more options for stuff coming from from the ports. 
 

Ukraine, like Russia is heavily dependent on rail to move things to the front. 

A C17 Globemaster can't, but a C5 Galaxy can carry 2 Abrams 

Edited January 25, 2023 by Captainant

[YGIFS 19449]

So we're gonna fly a boat via C-17 to put them onto trains that we sent by truck?  Got it.   

Yeah, on the water makes more sense.  I just thought the satellite obfuscation of C-17 was more attractive since you can't see inside.  I mean, I know Russia knows what we're sending.  But not exactly when and where.  Plus, I am still surprised we didn't have more armor readily available at our myriad installations in Belgium, Germany, and Italy.  I was pleased to learn though that we have lots of spare parts, mechanics, trainers, and support staff who've already been accidentally leaving manuals and toolkits around Eastern Europe.  Looks like Winger and Ziskey's school of logistics finally paid off.  Alls I know is I finally get to shoot somebody........

[956 Worldwide 34444]

1 minute ago, Captainant said:

A C17 Globemaster can't, but a C5 Galaxy can carry 2 Abrams 

Yep, you’re right. Made the edit. In any event we won’t fly these there. 

[956 Worldwide 34444]

5 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

So we're gonna fly a boat via C-17 to put them onto trains that we sent by truck?  Got it.   

Yeah, on the water makes more sense.  I just thought the satellite obfuscation of C-17 was more attractive since you can't see inside.  I mean, I know Russia knows what we're sending.  But not exactly when and where.  Plus, I am still surprised we didn't have more armor readily available at our myriad installations in Belgium, Germany, and Italy.  I was pleased to learn though that we have lots of spare parts, mechanics, trainers, and support staff who've already been accidentally leaving manuals and toolkits around Eastern Europe.  Looks like Winger and Ziskey's school of logistics finally paid off.  Alls I know is I finally get to shoot somebody........

I would imagine that Russia has a satellite in geosynchronous orbit with Rzeszow airport. 
 

A photo of what was flying in and out of that facility during the opening weeks of the war:

 

[Bateshorn 9904]

15 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

damn near every dictatorship has elections.

This.  The Arabian Gulf states are unique in not at least wearing a fig leaf (Dynastic Kingdoms gonna Kingdom).  Although MBS is in the process of turning Saudi Arabia from a Dynastic Kingdom into just a straight strongman autocracy. 

Edited January 25, 2023 by Bateshorn

[The Dog 43806]

It's going to take a while but Ukraine is getting a lot of Leopards:

 

[NotActuallyALonghorn 4968]

Given that they said it will take half a year or more to get the Abrams, and we've already seen videos of train loads of them heading towards Poland, I wonder if they are going there to set up a training camp in Poland for easy access to Ukes and as a deterrent of sorts for Russia.

[KYHorn 16865]

Interesting thread on food issues linked to Prigozhin's companies.

Apparently they're so desperate that they have to resort to cutting off each others' penises to survive.

Edited January 25, 2023 by KYHorn

[Pescado_Rojo 19331]

2 minutes ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

Given that they said it will take half a year or more to get the Abrams, and we've already seen videos of train loads of them heading towards Poland, I wonder if they are going there to set up a training camp in Poland for easy access to Ukes and as a deterrent of sorts for Russia.

That's my guess. There are 90ish M1A2s in ready storage in Germany. I'm guessing the tanks we've seen heading east are coming from that stock. Seems like it would be easier to send them 50 Abrams out of that stock, then backfill that with shipments from the US but those are US Army M1A2s, so top of the line shit and we may not want to risk Russia getting ahold of one. 

[Chad Fuck 17566]

28 minutes ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

Given that they said it will take half a year or more to get the Abrams, and we've already seen videos of train loads of them heading towards Poland, I wonder if they are going there to set up a training camp in Poland for easy access to Ukes and as a deterrent of sorts for Russia.

I saw a trainload of Bradleys, not Abrams.  

[NotActuallyALonghorn 4968]

From last week.

Also, according to this, we ppened the Abrams Tank Training Academy in Poznan, Poland back in August, so maybe that is their destination.

[CycleTex87 2954]

So is Ukraine in the desert?

[KYHorn 16865]

 

 

Edited January 25, 2023 by KYHorn

[KYHorn 16865]

Seems like Israel really risks losing American public support...

 

[WhatTheBuck 28712]

Biden announcing latest arms shipments right now.

[KYHorn 16865]

 

 

Edited January 25, 2023 by KYHorn

[InkaUtexas 25518]

3 hours ago, YGIFS said:

Serious question---how many C-17 sorties does it take to fly 30 M1Abrams plus parts?  And where do they get delivered?  And then how do they get to the Eastern Front of Ukraine?  

Doubt we fly them. RO/RO ships from Charleston is my guess. 

[InkaUtexas 25518]

Cool group to follow. It is one of the groups I like to support. We got any cash left in the wreath fund? 

 

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11668]

we need to have a west coast tank and an east coast tank, just for funsies.  every other tank we have should be in europe right now.  the fuck do we need tanks here for?  

[Orange&White 5516]

6 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

we need to have a west coast tank and an east coast tank, just for funsies.  every other tank we have should be in europe right now.  the fuck do we need tanks here for?  

I am not sure you are aware of this, but Russian paratroopers can show up in Colorado at ANY TIME.

[InkaUtexas 25518]

11 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

we need to have a west coast tank and an east coast tank, just for funsies.  every other tank we have should be in europe right now.  the fuck do we need tanks here for?  

maintenance. 

[Dahobbs 17447]

17 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

we need to have a west coast tank and an east coast tank, just for funsies.  every other tank we have should be in europe right now.  the fuck do we need tanks here for?  

storage, maintenance, and training. Also, generally a bad idea to keep all your equipment in areas you could lose access to. 

Edited January 25, 2023 by Dahobbs

[956 Worldwide 34444]

I would like Ukraine to win tomorrow and every Russian go home. But the idea of watching Abrams blow up actual Russian armor on Twitter gives me an erection. 

[InkaUtexas 25518]

Just now, 956 Worldwide said:

I would like Ukraine to win tomorrow and every Russian go home. But the idea of watching Abrams blow up actual Russian armor on Twitter gives me an erection. 

Well it why we built them! And let's not over look the Bradley. Spoke with a friend from 1 AD who was in Iraq the first time. Said those TOW's can eat up some Russian Armor. 

[SimonBolivar 10931]

31 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

we need to have a west coast tank and an east coast tank, just for funsies.  every other tank we have should be in europe right now.  the fuck do we need tanks here for?  

This is pure Mexican disinformation here as they plan their "training exercises" in Baja California before they roll on San Diego. 

[statsman 5425]

Curious, I was reading about the Syrian encounter between 45 US troops in Syria, five years ago, and 200 Syrian troops augmented by over a 100 Wagner mercs. To refresh your memory- the Syrian and Wagner troops attacked, and the regular US Army troops responded as they do- massive, accurate artillery, augmented by gunships (including AC-130’s). A couple hundred of the SYrians and Russkis were killed and no Americans died. 

The interesting thing is that, for the entire encounter, US army was In communications with Russian Army counterparts and were being assured there were no Russians involved. With new perspective, you have to wonder if the Russian regular army was hanging Wagner out to dry.

[Gatorubet 30112]

Well it why we built them! And let's not over look the Bradley. Spoke with a friend from 1 AD who was in Iraq the first time. Said those TOW's can eat up some Russian Armor. 

The single most important factor in winning an armor engagement is whether you are the attacking force or the defending force.   If you are the defending force, you can pick your location. If you are a tank you find a hull down position in some depression where you can fire and be relatively protected. Same goes for the Bradleys, except they are so much smaller they can hide in the forest or a stand of trees so long as there is a clear path for the tow missile to reach its target. 
Going back to World War II tank battles in Europe, when German panzers we’re on the attack in unknown territory in France and later in the Ardennes, many of them got brewed up by Sherman and 76 mm tank destroyers. Sure their cannons were less effective than the Germans. But the Germans didn’t know where we were and got the shit beat out of them by Sherman‘s hitting them from a very close distance in the front, or hitting them in the side and rear, where they were more vulnerable.
Similarly, when the allies were advancing the entrenched Germans blew up lots of Shermans from really good, well distance sighted positions. 
It has been a while (if ever with leopards) since we had leopard or Abrams vs. T 72, 80 90, etc. Russian tanks, and certainly the armor characteristics are really important too.  Can a tank survive a first or second hit?    Despite the Shermans doing a yeoman like effort versus better armored and cannoned German tanks, a first hit from a German 88 would destroy a Sherman - and from a rather distant location as well.    
Far better to let the Russians advance and attack and Ukraine defend than the other way around.   Ukraine needs to wreck a shit ton of Russian stuff defending the invasion, and then immediately go into a counter attack while the other side is disorganized and dispirited and lacking supplies. 
A well trained crew is just as important as a good Cannon and good armor. I doubt the new Russian tankers will even be allowed to fire that much practice ammo.  If we train them right, advantage Ukraine.
I wish I was rich enough to find an old Sherman tank like the one my father used to blow up German tanks in the Bulge and the Rhineland. If we had some of those in a shed we could put some TOWs on it and go hunting for T 72s and BMP-3s.

 

[Gravy Train 974]

54 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

Well it why we built them! And let's not over look the Bradley. Spoke with a friend from 1 AD who was in Iraq the first time. Said those TOW's can eat up some Russian Armor. 

The hull base of the M2 Bradley is made of aluminum, not exactly the sort of death-wish I'd like to engage counterfire strapped inside of.  But yes, let their autocannons rain fire down on those dipshits.

[The Dog 43806]

[Pescado_Rojo 19331]

15 minutes ago, statsman said:

Curious, I was reading about the Syrian encounter between 45 US troops in Syria, five years ago, and 200 Syrian troops augmented by over a 100 Wagner mercs. To refresh your memory- the Syrian and Wagner troops attacked, and the regular US Army troops responded as they do- massive, accurate artillery, augmented by gunships (including AC-130’s). A couple hundred of the SYrians and Russkis were killed and no Americans died. 

The interesting thing is that, for the entire encounter, US army was In communications with Russian Army counterparts and were being assured there were no Russians involved. With new perspective, you have to wonder if the Russian regular army was hanging Wagner out to dry.

I also remember everyone thinking how crazy it was the Russians could make such a mistake, and surely there would be serious repercussions within their leadership. Now with the benefit of hindsight, it turns out they are a lot worse at this than we thought. 

[Biff Tannen 45496]

My co-worker is flipping out that WW3 has started with the tanks rolling in and saying he's hearing reports of unusual military planes flying all over Austin.  I haven't heard shit.  Is just tin-foil hatting?

Edited January 25, 2023 by Biff Tannen

[InkaUtexas 25518]

2 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

My co-worker is flipping out that WW3 has started with the tanks rolling in and saying he's hearing reports of unusual military planes flying all over Austin.  I haven't heard shit.  Is just tin-foil hatting?

There were some AF jets over San Marcos earlier. It happens sometimes. 

 

[Biff Tannen 45496]

2 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

There were some AF jets over San Marcos earlier. It happens sometimes. 

 

Yeah, I mean, I saw two fighter jets over the Domain last week.  We have a big ass military base here.  Not unusual. But just making sure I wasn't missing something.

[Ghost of LL 15492]

17 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

My co-worker is flipping out that WW3 has started with the tanks rolling in and saying he's hearing reports of unusual military planes flying all over Austin.  I haven't heard shit.  Is just tin-foil hatting?

 A flight of F-18s went over the Capitol about a half-hour ago.  Standard finger-four with #3 missing, which implies to me that it was probably doing a missing-man formation over the Texas State Cemetery.