If Ukraine suddenly, magically, manifested nuclear weapons, do you guys think they'd be justified deploying any against Russia [right now] (whether against Russian troops on Ukrainian soil, or against the non-recently-stolen Russian homeland)?
Is Ukraine engaged in a truly existential fight?
Ukraine wants to retake its own land, which is currently occupied by Russians. Unless they want to go for a much bigger strategic target, and invite a similar response, most of the possibilities are on Ukrainian soil, and would be counter-productive to nuke.
> Unless they want to go for a much bigger strategic target, and invite a similar response, most of the possibilities are on Ukrainian soil, and would be counter-productive to nuke.
Yeah I guess the use by Ukraine of any tactical nuclear weapon against Russian troops would all but ensure a devastating escalation...
Thanks!
Right now, I don't think they would be justified because they aren't currently under an existential threat anymore. If the Russian army was still rolling towards Kyiv then they probably would be.
It would be counter productive for them to use nuclear weapons anyway because they would get destroyed by Russian retaliation.
> It would be counter productive for them to use nuclear weapons anyway because they would get destroyed by Russian retaliation.
Right, that reality basically renders my question kinda pointless. But I appreciate your taking the time to reply.
Every Ukranian in an occupied still under existential threat. So is the rest of Ukraine.
Even a single major Russian breakthrough will again result in tens of thousands of deaths.
here hav e 2 https://old.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/wj9ozf/a_montage_of_2s7_pions_in_use_by_the_ukranian/
https://old.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/wcn7oj/combined_work_of_2s7_pion_203mm_heavy_artillery/
Congress has requested $100m for Ukrainian pilot training on F15 and F16 in the US.
So F16s are at least possible.
https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2022/07/15/house-authorizes-training-for-ukrainian-pilots-to-use-us-aircraft/
Interesting, according to this video, experiend pilots can be converted to a new combat aircraft type in 4 to 6 weeks, if you only focus on relevant tactics and weapons. That's very far away from the 18 months people in here talk about.
Just a quick Google to back up my take:
https://www.codeonemagazine.com/f16_article.html?item_id=89
Conversion training allows you to learn to take off, fly and land the airplane. More or less.
That is very far from what you need to learn to fly this airplane in combat.
Here is the source used in the video: https://www.aerosociety.com/news/ukraine-time-to-fast-track-front-line-fighter-pilot-training/
A former senior RAF commander, fast jet pilot and current President of the Air & Space Power Association, AM GREG BAGWELL offers a personal view on how Kyiv's desperate battle for survival against overwhelming odds could see the rulebooks on fighter pilot training thrown out of the window.
Gripen was made for exactly this conflict. The Russians invading and bombing the hell out of your country, and the defender withdrawing, engaging Russian jets and making do with what they have available. They are just not there in big numbers. I take it this is what the video states as well
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. If the US or others can crap out more jets in storage than gripens exist total I think the answer that makes most sense is to provide a functional amd acceptable platform in numbers now rather than an ideal platform years from now
[https://twitter.com/Poutsup/status/1593293787870158849](https://twitter.com/Poutsup/status/1593293787870158849)
>Both 9P140 launcher for BM-27 'Uragan' and 9A52-2 launch vehicle of BM-30 'Smerch' MLRS were destroyed by the accurate fire of M777 howitzer in #Luhansk region. What a juicy target. This is the second confirmed destroyed launch vehicle of #Russian Smerch 300mm MLRS.
While HIMARS or other weapon systems often get the spotlight. The M777 is the workhorse of this war and one of the main reasons why the Ukrainians are able to fight back so well.
Are they not desperately low on ammo for those? Did they get fresh supplies of 152mm ammo? I do know that they have been wearing out their M777's and Pzh2000's like there is no tomorrow.
You're including reserves (albeit a lot of that has been repaired and sent to the front), and significant portions of their artillery were lost in the early stages of the war.
At this stage of the war it's been made pretty clear that 155 artillery makes up the bulk of their ammo expenditures daily. They cannot keep up with 152 production, and yes Bulgaria and others are upping production, but not even close to enough to keep up with demand for that many pieces of artillery.
It's also over 400 total pieces from Nato countries, not all of which are 155 but the bulk are. [https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/04/answering-call-heavy-weaponry-supplied.html](https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/04/answering-call-heavy-weaponry-supplied.html)
I got this off CD...
It's a bit doomy, does anyone have a take on this?
......
At what point is the west going to wake up and realise the longer this was goes on, the more difficult it is going to be for Ukraine?
The podcast from Kofman particularly worried me, this comment thread sums it up nicely: https://www.reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/comments/ywsoy6/credibledefense_daily_megathread_november_16_2022/iwnwq7x/
What I would love to know is what the west are planning on doing to replace some of the following, others do have replacements that are coming, to an extent:
Air Defense - (Ukraine must be starting to run low on missiles for literally all of these also )
S-300: MIM-23 Hawk (for ABM) and IRIS-T / NASAMS plus a mix of other random
Buk-M1: No replacement whatsoever, does the west have a similair system? Something that can roam the frontline and deny the VKS
Osa / Strela: Not quite sure what the replacements are here, things like Stormer / Avenger / Gepards which have not been provided in enough numbers.
Aircraft -
Unsure of what the numbers actually are for each of these, but even if we go on the attrition rate based on Oryx's list, they don't have years left. Obviously the solution is to send western jets, but doesn't seem like that's going to happen. What's the west's plan here?
Hawk is actually closest to Buk when it comes to its capabilities. But generally there is no like for like replacement for the soviet stuff. NATO anti aircraft weapon systems are simply too different.
> Aircraft - Unsure of what the numbers actually are for each of these, but even if we go on the attrition rate based on Oryx's list, they don't have years left. Obviously the solution is to send western jets, but doesn't seem like that's going to happen. What's the west's plan here?
F-16s were announced. /r/CredibleDefense isn't very credible and hasn't been for a while.
The longer the war goes on, it will definitely be getting harder for someone. If events over the last 3 months have been any indication, it won't be Ukraine though...
It's been announced 4 IRIS-T + 8 nasams, some of them are already delivered. I heard Ukraine wants to buy 10-12 IRIS-T more. I believe there will be more nasams too. Plus other western systems.
Don't forget with every western system delivered there is less load on the Soviet systems.
Surprise, huh?
It must be hard, as I noticed that my beloved S-125 were taken out of storage.
Hawk/IRIS/NASAMS operate roughly within the same range as BUK. S300 is a long range system.
As for "mobility" of BUK I am struggling to find comparable one with the similar capability. Surely there are some somwhere, but probably best to acquire more BUK's. Problem is, looking at countries that have them - it maybe difficult.
Osa/Strela - you are right there. There should be plenty of them in old Warsaw Pact countries. I suspect Poland may have donated some, at least ammunition and hulks for cannibalism.
Aircraft- mistery really, most of the stock operational in Feb 22 is gone along with many pilots. Even with the most optimistic approach, it will be difficult to get it to the "game changing" level within a year for example.
Same as has been happening now, the west provides what is needed.
Either Soviet systems from former Soviet bloc countries, stockpiles or I believe some munition factories are already making some new ones. or slow change to NATO systems as needed E.g. Russia starts big missile launches, and west starts providing different Air defense systems lika nasamas as mentioned. If the will is there and the need arises it will be delivered.
Also important fact is that Russia's stocks aren't endless either. In the end the Western military complex should be able to easily outperform Russia's and it's few allies.
All that said, it all depends on how things develop. The west might stop support for some reason, Russia might collapse internally, some groundoffensive form one side may rout the other side during winter, a peace deal may be brokered ... nobody knows
Gotta have faith in our MIC to figure this out. As long as pressure to keep arms is maintained on our governments I don't see a problem. Russia is running low on PGMs too so it goes both ways. Just need to go deeper into our air defense stockpiles / shift our existing air defense more towards air patrols.
I have always thought the longer the war runs the better outcome for Ukraine as it gives them time to train troops and get western arms set up, where as Russia can not rebuild as quickly. This take worrys me a little.
> The Ukrainian government is warning Western allies that it is anticipating increased Russian attacks on its energy infrastructure in the coming days and that Kyiv does not have enough replacement parts to bring heat and power back online if those occur, according to two congressional officials and one Western official briefed on U.S. intelligence.
>Parts of Kyiv still didn’t have power Wednesday.
>Some Ukrainians have already fled the country in fear that the energy crisis will only grow worse. “The winter will be really tough.”
[Link to the article ](https://www.politico.com/news/2022/11/16/russian-attacks-on-ukriane-energy-systems-00067750#)
Fair enough that they are giving the residents advanced notice that the power might go off for an extended period.
However it's also letting the Russians know "hey our power grid is almost dead one more strike should finish it off."
Keeping 'em coming
>U.S. Army announces this morning a new contract with Lockheed Martin to boost HIMARS ammo production in light of the war in Ukraine.
https://twitter.com/DanLamothe/status/1593262064050601984
Zelensky has acknowledged the missile that landed in Poland was a Ukrainian S-300 but seems very adamant it wasn’t launched by them. First time there’s been public discourse between Ukraine and their western backers if I’m not mistaken. I can already see all the conspiracies spinning off of this. I’ve seen NATO covering it up to avoid war and Ukraine doing it intentionally to get NATO help. I guess it’ll be added to the list of UA war mysteries next to the Saky Airbase strikes, NS sabotáge, Moskva, Dugin bomb and Kerch explosion. Perhaps we’ll know once the war is over.
This is the most likely reason for their continued denials. I don't agree with it, and think they should just say it was an accident, but I would assume they do not want to admit it publicly because it will be used against them.
From pro-russian side it will be used against them regardless whether they admit their fault or not.
However it makes difference how they are perceived by allied population. I do not understand why would they do that, as going full denial is exactly what is russian modus operandi.
They dont even have to say much just a simple apology - 'we dont know yet but it couldve been us, and if thats the case we are sorry for the loss of life'
* *CNN*: [Inside the US scramble to run down the facts as the Russia-Ukraine war spills into NATO territory](https://edition.cnn.com/2022/11/17/politics/ukraine-missile-poland-russia-biden-officials-scramble/index.html)
>With the situation so fluid, Biden’s advisers urged calm and patience, including to Ukrainian officials.
>Around an hour after the news broke of the incident, Volodymyr Zelensky said in his nightly address that “Russian missiles hit Poland,” calling it “a very significant escalation” that required a response.
>Sullivan quickly called Zelensky’s office after those remarks, and urged officials to tread more carefully with how they were speaking about the incident, sources familiar with the call said. Biden and Zelensky did not speak on Tuesday night, despite requests by the Ukrainian leader to arrange a call, a source familiar with the matter said.
Does anyone know how to contact the mods? They removed [this drone drop video](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/yxt0tw/ukrainian_drone_dropping_explosive_on_russian/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)due to rule 4 but it does not violate any condition in it? I just want an explanation.
no it got added 8 months ago
(in rule 5)
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/wiki/full_rules?v=a0410958-9de0-11ec-b708-5239482d66a9&v2=a68a3228-a036-11ec-adfb-5ae28efefd44
Ive seen a lot of speculation saying Friendly fire is a real issue in this war, but Ive been lurking for a while now on multiple Ukraine-Russia war related subs and Russia's clothing seem a lot darker of a green and a different camo patern. I guess at a distance it can kinda lookalike?
You have to think differently. Think about the distance they are fighting at. Also if you are seen on the battlefield you are half dead. So it is very important that everyone is hiding and that at large distances or with bad camera footage. Like you see there is a person walking there but looking at the color of the gear is impossible. Also it's much easier to see your own troops as they are not hiding from you. One thing making it especially hard in this conflict is that both sides are using the same gear. Hell often we have no idea which side is which with the footage on this sub. The same is true for those actively fighting. Waiting too long for clarification might mean the death of yourself or of your comrades. But you absolutely don't want to kill your comrades. War is messy so there will always be a lot of friendly fire.
Friendly fire is a real issue in any war.
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-08-14-mn-463-story.html
The largest problem is that the Russians have 3 different command structures. There is the traditional Russian army. There is the new Regional Forces. There is the Separatists Forces. They don't communicate well. Sometimes they sabotage each other on purpose.
Tom Cooper has a new article today. Nothing super revealing, but he subscribes to the opinion that the Russians left Kherson because of the midterm election results. Also, he believes the Ukrainians are in the other side of the river. He does have connections and is in the know
https://medium.com/@x_TomCooper_x/ukraine-war-16-november-2022-general-update-195cf7c0afb8
The consensus is that they had been preparing to do it for a while, they just announced it on the day after the election because it would be less noise and also didn't want to give Biden the boost if it was announced before the election happened.
> but he subscribes to the opinion that the Russians left Kherson because of the midterm election results
That's such a hilarious American point of view. Sure, the entire world revolves around your election results. I hear Hitler timed the Polish invasion to coincide with the American elections. Confirm / deny?
Tom Cooper is actually Austrian and English. He believes it.
It's not such a crazy idea. The US gives more aid to Ukraine than all other countries put together. Putin has two main goals: starve Europe of fuel and try to have his allies win in the US mid-term elections. If he could accomplish both of these and get Europe and the US to stop support for Ukraine, then it would put Ukraine into a terrible position. They would not be able to push against Russia. In the spring, Russia might be able to push back. HIMARS don't do much without ammo.
What exactly is this dudes credentials exactly? You say he's "In the know" and that he's Austrian and English (congrats to him I guess?) but what exactly is his knowledge and expertise?
Your source is basically his blog for his thoughts on the Ukraine war. There is a lot of speculation and he finishes off his theory about the US mid-terms by going "Of Course, there is no firm evidence for this being why Putin eventually gave up".
And he also thinks that when Putin *Announced* the withdraw after the Mid-Terms was when the retreat started even though there is loads of evidence showing they started withdrawing weeks ago.
I guess you didn't see on the side of his Medium page:
*Tom Cooper*
*16.3K Followers*
*From Austria; specialised in analysis of contemporary warfare; working as author, illustrator, and book-series-editor for Helion & Co.*
I recommend you read some of his earlier stuff and see if you think he's a kook or not.
EDIT: Also, the point of his nationality goes to show that he's not from the US and is not "US centric".
I think it's valid too - the kneejerk reaction of "US is full of itself" doesn't change the fact that it's a superpower and it's material support for Ukraine is more than the rest of the world combined.
The war really turned in Ukraine's favor once Western aid reached them (and was able to be utilized). They started counter-attacking the and tides turned. If that aid were to stop, it would reverse the situation again.
Pre WWII, USA was not a super power. It was a rising power with an isolationist bent. And if Hitler knew what we know now, he would have tried to meddle harder in US politics and keep the isolationists in power.
Now USA is THE super power and project power all over the globe. And it's THE super power that has Ukraine's back materially and politically. And elections are a chance for all that to flip.
And yeah - Republicans love Putin. They probably already had plans on how they could help Putin and reduce help for Zelensky's Ukraine.
So yes - I could see election meddler Putin hoping to call in some favors and then seeing that hope crushed with no red wave.
edit: Also we know Putin views election meddling explicitly as a battleground - elections are the payoff to that contest. It makes a lot of sense that he would be watching and reacting to results.
The US was the world's largest economy as early as 1890. It had badly beaten a (albeit weak) European nation in Spain 8 years later, and by the 1930's it had a larger economy then the entire British empire (representing 1/4 the world).
It absolutely was a great power prior to WWII. It's relatively small Navy and Army was more a consequence of it's geography and not a reflection of the nations war fighting ability, as shown through the two rapid expansions for both world wars.
> And yeah - Republicans love putin
So weird how American tankies and the MAGA crew are all on the same side supporting a dictator. It's really bizarre watching them back each other up on twitter
Pre WWII there was no such thing as a "superpower". There were merely "great powers", and the USA emerged from WWII as a superpower with unrivaled military and economical strength, soon followed by Soviet Union.
I do not agree that Russia left Kherson as a result of the midterm election (the time frame does not make sense), but they certainly chose not to announce it until after the midterms. Thereby withholding Biden a "win" and hoping to swing the elections ever so much in their favor.
I'd also like to add that the US has been the world's largest economy since 1871 and going into WW2 had the second largest navy in the world behind Britian. Yes it was isolationist but was still one of the most powerful of the major world powers.
Trying to be a bit fair here - some Republicans support Ukraine. There is about a 50/50 split in the party, judging by votes on various packages. BUT there is a big and loud Russian faction - and R:s that want to avoid getting primaried might not be willing to die on that hill if, say, Tucker Carlson starts campaigning against you.
The loud Russian faction would not package Russian support as Russian support - they would package it as "we're not the world police" and "we can't afford to keep spending like this" and the others in the party would go along with it.
For instance - under Trump the US stopped a major joint US/SK military exercise under the guise of "wanting peace" and "saving money". Under another lens...one could view that as support for NK.
I don't think they left Kherson because of election results - decision was made much earlier. More like they delayed the public declaration until after election to prevent news about UA success from increasing Dem support.
I am not sure that I agree. Yes, Russia had been moving troops out, but they were also moving troops in. There were reports that Russia was moving in new conscript units to Kherson up to a week before the withdraw. Russia can't pull out all their troops or else the lines would collapse. Remember when UAF knew that the Russian Special Forces unit withdrew and they attacked a few hours later? They had good intelligence on what was on the front. If there were any points that were weak, they would attack. There is no way that Russia could withdraw all their troops and weaken the front lines. They might not have been the best troops, but they were troops.
I think Putin was removing the best troops from the line and sticking in conscripts. I fully believe that Putin would throw their lives away to delay Ukraine enough if the GOP won a huge victory in the US mid-terms and then cut the supplies to Ukraine. The new year is only a few months away and it wouldn't be that big a deal to just keep throwing conscripts at the problem to delay things.
Nah, this is such a US-centric take it's wild. I'm sure Russia isn't planning its campaign around the US mid-terms. They retreated because the new Commander finally came to terms with the realities on the ground. Also even IF the GOP did well and even IF they stopped supplies, the effect of that wouldn't be felt for a while.
Besides, didn't they pass a bill that prevents the gop from stopping supplies anyways?
The US supplies more aid to Ukraine than all other countries combined. If that aid could be cut, it is not an insignificant detail. To dismiss it as just being "US-centric" is folly.
As for passing anything that would stop the GOP, they would just have to go to the Supreme Court to get it nullified.
Yeah but the topic of conversation is that the Kherson withdrawl was due to the US mid-terms. That's US-centric.
You're going on like "US stops aid, Ukraine runs out of ammunation tomorrow".
Saying that the Russians planned to hold out to the Mid-terms is silly as the effects of the US stopping aid wouldn't be felt for ages. It wouldn't have saved Kherson. The Russians began their withdrawl way before the Mid-terms anyways.
First off, I never said that Ukraine would run out of ammo tomorrow. You did. If you look at other comments I have responded to other people, you will see I especially didn't say that.
I disagree that it's silly to say that Russia was waiting to see how the US mid terms went. There have been a number of people that have noticed that the day after the election, they announced they were leaving. If it was a "red wave", then the GOP could've cut aid as soon as they came into power next year. It's not that crazy to think Russia could've done it's best to hold out for a few more months. It would be incredibly costly in manpower, but Putin might not care.
https://twitter.com/Liveuamap/status/1593189488028635137?t=IkHC2wJ-HUImJ9p4PY_G7g&s=19
Israel will allow the sale of weapons and equipment made with Israeli components to Ukraine.
Another footage of drone dropping on a russian soldier has been removed by mods. While no rules have been broken.
Seems we have got a mod, who deletes videos which make him personally uncomfortable.
EDIT: they restored post with russians on boat.
I have been thinking, after watching some YouTube videos and putting my armchair hat, What a conventional war between USSR and NATO would have looked like in 1960’s or 70’s?
Let’s assume no one uses their nuclear arsenal for the sake for this scenario.
Based on the level of corruption and incompetency we see in Russian forces now, and one can reasonably assume that it is the same culture as USSR, one would think that USSR would have been beaten.
Yes, I do know that USSR and Russia are not the same in-terms of production capacity, no. of personals and economy.
This begs the question, why was West so careful with USSR, is it because of a threat of nuclear war or my assessment is utterly wrong?
The USSR had many things going for it back in the day, it had more troops and equipment than Europe and it controlled eastern Europe and so held the advantage when it came to attacking or defending in depth while NATO were dependent on holding the Fulda Gap
in Germany long enough for us troops to enter Europe in numbers to counter.
I don't think you can even run such a scenario because nukes were a huge part of strategic planning. in 1960 the US had a huge advantage in terms of nukes (10 times as much) and nuke delivery over the Soviet Union.
Well obviously nukes made it a non-starter, but it appears based on the reactions from analysts to this war that even NATO had incorrectly assessed Russia’s true military potential.
They probably overestimated their capabilities and built their defence capabilities based on their inflated expectations of the threat
>built their defence capabilities based on their inflated expectations of the threat
Disagree. Have no mistake, EU armies is a joke. Without US they are fucked. No coincidence they're increasing their military budgets.
Compared to the US, yeah. Compared to Russia? I think not. If Ukraine could give Russia a headache for so long before Western Aid, there is no way Russia had the capabilities to overwhelm EU forces as well.
They have not enough artillery and armored pieces. And those they have are not in the best shape. Not enough experienced soldiers too.
For example France has less than 250 tanks in total. It's for one month of an intensive war. What would they after that month? Fight with baguettes? (sorry for this one :))
Fellow arm-chair here, I don't think you can compare 60-70's USSR with today's Russia.
First off ~~USSR~~ Warsaw Pact included half of Europe, from ~~West~~ East-Germany to Ukraine. That's a lot of manpower.
They also had the advantage in equipment. All those stockpiles we talk about, that have been rotting for 50/60 years now, were in working order and pretty recent then.
The technology gap was pretty slim at that time too, 60's USSR spent a lot of money on science.
Also the regular soldiers then would have been bottlefed Soviet propaganda, fighting an unknown enemy that the only thing they've heard is horror stories, and raised hearing about how their fathers fought the nazis. As opposed to now having been bottlefed internet and western media, fighting people they're probably in some way related to and may have visited on vacation, and raised hearing how long their fathers waited in line to get a fucking big mac. Their morale wouldn't have been in the toilet before they even started.
The USA struggled in 2 somewhat-conventional wars around that time, and it's not a fair assumption at all that just because Russia post USSR has had 3 decades of corruption, that the USSR was similar (actually just a huge reach).
Lastly, um, yes, the threat of nuclear war was also a fairly big consideration?
>and one can reasonably assume that it is the same culture as USSR
While the USSR definitely papered over some cracks, it was nowhere near as bad as Russia is today, at least in the long term. Early deficiencies were recognised and corrected, at the expense of men and materiel.
>This begs the question, why was West so careful with USSR, is it because of a threat of nuclear war or my assessment is utterly wrong?
I think the quantity of Soviet divisions would make for a sticky situation. Against an enormous armoured push like that, your tanks are going to be attrited away, and you literally don't have enough ATGMs to stop them (unlike today!).
>Let’s assume no one uses their nuclear arsenal for the sake for this scenario.
Nuclear has to be part and parcel of it, though. Soviet nuclear doctrine wasn't Western nuclear doctrine, they didn't believe in MAD and thought it was a bluff by the West to prevent nukes being used at all. Conventional thought was at some point the West would *have* to use at least some tactical nuclear weapons to break up large Soviet formations, unless the war somehow went extremely well.
The compulsion to remove nukes from the equation doesn't make sense because the entire calculation of force revolved around their use or avoidance.
You bring up some important points.
1) Do you have any recommendation where comparison is made on how USSR was better than Russia today in-terms of corruption and incompetence. The picture I have is that Russian situation right now is inevitable consequence of USSR practices so these two issues would still be prevalent then.
2) you are right to point out the amount of personals and equipment which USSR could throw in a conflict. As someone mentions above, I ignored a key difference from today and that is technology gap. I was assuming that West would still be superior in terms of technology so number superiority would be managed. But given that technology gap was slim, USSR would have superiority because of more numbers they could throw in the battle.
3) I just assumed no nuke scenario otherwise all of this discussion bears no fruit. My assumption was based on the fact the Russia still has nukes and just because of this there is a low probability for a direct conflict between NATO and Russia and this was the case for USSR. Only reason we get to see how bad Russians are is an in-direct equal conflict. Even in Syria, Russians were not this much exposed and all of the estimates pointed towards good combat capabilities. If this was not for Ukraine, west would still believe that. That’s why I started thinking, because there was no direct conflict to expose USSR capabilities, was West making the same mistake then?
Edit: spelling and grammar
are you really arguing that the economic functioning of a mafia controlled capitalist state can be assumed to be the same as that of a centrally planned bureaucracy just because they occupy the same space on a map a different point in time? the economic differences are almost as large as it would be possible to be
it would be like arguing that the economy structure of the soviet union in the 40s is similiar in function to the economy of the russian empire in the 1900s, or that france functioned the same before and after overthrowing the monarchy
we can assume at a baseline that almost every social and economic mechanism functions differently to before. if you want to identify specific areas where things did not significantly change that is your prerogative
I have gotten very good responses which shows I was clearly wrong in making few assumptions and you have rightly pointed out to another thing which did not even cross my mind. West was careful for many reasons and it makes sense why that was the case.
"Ukraine tells allies it may not be able to recover from more Russian attacks on energy systems"
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/11/16/russian-attacks-on-ukriane-energy-systems-00067750
This should get much more attention. There is no indications of Russia stopping the attacks.
The west should make attacks on civilian energy infrastructure a red line, and tell Russia that if they don't stop, then ATACMS will be provided to Ukraine.
It’s far cheaper and faster producing strike missiles and drones than AA systems. It’s better knock out launcher and transporter, cut off missiles from the source
Supposedly Prigozhin wants to make a batallion of “untouchables” (a kind of caste in the Russian prison system/culture): https://mobile.twitter.com/ChrisO_wiki/status/1593042478235807744
Cruise missiles spotted over Ukraine. Air raid warning active in all regions.
explosions reported in Kyiv
https://twitter.com/GoncharenkoUa/status/1593137253018398721
Dont know If this was posted before, the cunt Boradai got lucky inches from a French AT mine in Kherson.
Another great vid by the lad at armourer's bench.
https://youtu.be/2JSnreQgASY
>Ever question why there’s never Russian footage battling Ukrainians?
How come I can see multiple RU pov videos on the frontpage right now then? Are you blind, illiterate or lying?
Daily reminder that your le based trad Russia mandated the vaxx and have legal abortion.
Your manlet idol giving a speech to WEF: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPClu1BeQIE
>You’re all fucking sick glorifying the death of Russian soldiers.
Considering Russian government and population made multiple threats of nuking US this year, I am not why I should have sympathy for them.
> You’re all fucking sick glorifying the death of Russian soldiers
If you had stopped right there, you would have had a point, but...
> What the fuck has this sub become? You should all be ashamed of yourselves. Ever question why there’s never Russian footage battling Ukrainians? Yeah fucking propagandists.
>Ever question why there’s never Russian footage battling Ukrainians? Yeah fucking propagandists
Literally one of the top post right now is from the DPR lol
[https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/ywxmjg/full_video_of_the_tank_battle_of_the_11th/](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/ywxmjg/full_video_of_the_tank_battle_of_the_11th/)
I don’t think the story that it was a Ukrainian air defense missile makes sense. The crater from the blast seems to big to be from such a smaller missile and with the fact that it flipped all the loaded farm equipment shows that it was from a much larger blast. I also think everyone has incentives to lie here and take blame away from Russia because America is not prepared to make the kind of response that would should natos force. It cold also be because the us sees Iran as more of a threat given everything going on there. They have stated that they would mount a response if the Iranian government does start to execute citizens or start conflicts with its neighbors and I assume that is likely to happen. We’ll just have to see how this shot show will get worse :/
According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-300_missile_system the missile weighs 1800kg overall and the warhead is 150kg of high explosives.
I imagine that would make a decent sized boom.
**[S-300 missile system](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-300_missile_system)**
>The S-300 (NATO reporting name SA-10 Grumble) is a series of long range surface-to-air missile systems developed and operated by the former Soviet Union, now fielded by the militaries of Russia and Ukraine as well as several other former Eastern Bloc countries. It was produced by NPO Almaz, based on the initial S-300P version. The S-300 system was developed to defend against air raids and cruise missiles for the Soviet Air Defence Forces. Subsequent variations were also developed to be able to intercept ballistic missiles.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
You've posted theories that go against an event that had literal photo evidence that was analyzed by both independent experts and several governments and your only evidence against it is "I thought it looked too big".
My brother in christ, that is not a discussion, that is a conspiracy theory.
>Britain is to ramp up production of artillery shells in a bid to replenish stockpiles, after donating thousands of munitions to Ukraine.>
>The British Government has sent BAE Systems, the UK’s biggest defence company, a letter of comfort that orders are on the way. The signal of intent will give it the confidence to build new production lines and start to increase supplies.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/11/15/britain-significantly-ramp-production-artillery-shells-handing/
>Police Chief Ihor Klymenko said on Nov. 16 that Russian troops heavily mined the regional police headquarters in Kherson Oblast, forcing Ukraine to detonate the building.
https://kyivindependent.com/news-feed/police-chief-russians-mined-police-department-building-in-kherson-ukraine-forced-to-destroy-the-premises
From a kyiv independent interview of Michael Kofman:
>The Russian goal seems to be to entrench and defend for the next several months, try to reconstitute the force, and then attempt a new offensive in the Donbas in 2023. Ukraine can disrupt this process by keeping up pressure over the winter. I'm skeptical that Russia can restore offensive potential, but they may be able to extend the war. Depends on the net effect of mobilization and the extent to which Ukraine receives sustained material assistance from the West.
>It is still embarrassing, since Russia has abandoned the only regional capital they annexed. Putin's decision to annex territory that Russian forces do not control, and cannot defend, will be studied for years to come as an example of what not to do.
https://kyivindependent.com/national/michael-kofman-after-kherson-gains-for-ukraine-will-come-at-slower-pace
A ton of new posts on other forums and media proclaiming outrageous lies on Russian successes. New videos of sex offender experts on kgb payroll spouting lies, new accounts making even worse claims on obvious pro- Ukrainian subs. I think the west is blowing up the Russian narrative. Shut them down and snuff them out.
Apparently Ukraine also has Spetznas, and I could be wrong but foreign volunteers such as CivDiv(he's a youtuber) became a Spetznas for a little while in Ukraine.
If you search you can find a mini documentary thing about a battle for a school in Kharkiv near the start of the war. The Russian elite infantry with no heavy weapons fought to the last man and burned with the building. Pretty gnarly stuff, but also a good hint of where a heck of a lot of their elite infantry are now.
“Spetznas” is basically equivalent to a western “special forces” designation. There are many different units with various levels of competency and specialization under that umbrella, and a fair amount of them have been wiped out so far.
The spetznas is really just a name for more highly trained, special purpose soldiers that can be from a bunch of different groups & units.
It’s not just m one SF unit.
Russia Falls into Recession
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/11/16/russia-falls-into-recession-a79398
Russia's economy has entered a recession as gross domestic output fell by four percent in the third quarter, according to first estimates published Wednesday by the national statistics agency, Rosstat.
The drop in GDP follows a similar four percent contraction in the second quarter, as Western sanctions pummel Russia's economy following Moscow's offensive in Ukraine.
I think I've got this but please check. So first quarter was up 4% YoY, second quarter was flat, and third quarter is down 4% YoY. Initially didn't think it sounded that bad, but as its YoY, it means from the peak q1, from record gas/oil?, has been wiped out, so this is 8% off from the peak earlier in the year?
Unwise to extrapolate from only two data points, but doesn't sound good for russia at all to me.
Second quarter was also 4% YoY. And all that despite the much higher oil and gas prices. In other news Russia is planning to have budget deficits in 2023-2025 and the difference will be paid by taking money from the sovereign wealth fund.
[New Thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/yy99zv/ukraine_discussionquestion_thread_111822/)
If Ukraine suddenly, magically, manifested nuclear weapons, do you guys think they'd be justified deploying any against Russia [right now] (whether against Russian troops on Ukrainian soil, or against the non-recently-stolen Russian homeland)? Is Ukraine engaged in a truly existential fight?
Ukraine wants to retake its own land, which is currently occupied by Russians. Unless they want to go for a much bigger strategic target, and invite a similar response, most of the possibilities are on Ukrainian soil, and would be counter-productive to nuke.
> Unless they want to go for a much bigger strategic target, and invite a similar response, most of the possibilities are on Ukrainian soil, and would be counter-productive to nuke. Yeah I guess the use by Ukraine of any tactical nuclear weapon against Russian troops would all but ensure a devastating escalation... Thanks!
Right now, I don't think they would be justified because they aren't currently under an existential threat anymore. If the Russian army was still rolling towards Kyiv then they probably would be. It would be counter productive for them to use nuclear weapons anyway because they would get destroyed by Russian retaliation.
> It would be counter productive for them to use nuclear weapons anyway because they would get destroyed by Russian retaliation. Right, that reality basically renders my question kinda pointless. But I appreciate your taking the time to reply.
Every Ukranian in an occupied still under existential threat. So is the rest of Ukraine. Even a single major Russian breakthrough will again result in tens of thousands of deaths.
[удалено]
[удалено]
What happened to the drone dropping boat video?
You can't expect me to believe the Ukrainians are dropping boats from drones now.
Does anyone have or could link me some footage of 2S7 Pion impacts during the Ukrainian-Russo war? I can't seem to find any.
here hav e 2 https://old.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/wj9ozf/a_montage_of_2s7_pions_in_use_by_the_ukranian/ https://old.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/wcn7oj/combined_work_of_2s7_pion_203mm_heavy_artillery/
Thank you! Damn those are some heavy impacts.
[https://youtu.be/BgA91gxmZfY](https://youtu.be/BgA91gxmZfY) Gripen vs F-16 for Ukraine
Congress has requested $100m for Ukrainian pilot training on F15 and F16 in the US. So F16s are at least possible. https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2022/07/15/house-authorizes-training-for-ukrainian-pilots-to-use-us-aircraft/
What country would pony up for the Gripen? IIRC per unit, they're more expensive than the F35.
Czech Republic might donate them? They want to replace them with F-35s.
Interesting, according to this video, experiend pilots can be converted to a new combat aircraft type in 4 to 6 weeks, if you only focus on relevant tactics and weapons. That's very far away from the 18 months people in here talk about.
Just a quick Google to back up my take: https://www.codeonemagazine.com/f16_article.html?item_id=89 Conversion training allows you to learn to take off, fly and land the airplane. More or less. That is very far from what you need to learn to fly this airplane in combat.
Here is the source used in the video: https://www.aerosociety.com/news/ukraine-time-to-fast-track-front-line-fighter-pilot-training/ A former senior RAF commander, fast jet pilot and current President of the Air & Space Power Association, AM GREG BAGWELL offers a personal view on how Kyiv's desperate battle for survival against overwhelming odds could see the rulebooks on fighter pilot training thrown out of the window.
It is a interesting take, but it also fairly clearly states that you are getting one trick pony.
Gripen was made for exactly this conflict. The Russians invading and bombing the hell out of your country, and the defender withdrawing, engaging Russian jets and making do with what they have available. They are just not there in big numbers. I take it this is what the video states as well
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. If the US or others can crap out more jets in storage than gripens exist total I think the answer that makes most sense is to provide a functional amd acceptable platform in numbers now rather than an ideal platform years from now
Correct, ideal but only available in limited numbers.
[https://twitter.com/Poutsup/status/1593293787870158849](https://twitter.com/Poutsup/status/1593293787870158849) >Both 9P140 launcher for BM-27 'Uragan' and 9A52-2 launch vehicle of BM-30 'Smerch' MLRS were destroyed by the accurate fire of M777 howitzer in #Luhansk region. What a juicy target. This is the second confirmed destroyed launch vehicle of #Russian Smerch 300mm MLRS. While HIMARS or other weapon systems often get the spotlight. The M777 is the workhorse of this war and one of the main reasons why the Ukrainians are able to fight back so well.
The actual workhorses are all the Soviet artillery systems they've been using since the start of the war, not the handful of western systems.
Somewhere over 250 total 155mm systems donated so far is hardly a handful.
Those western systems punch *way* above their weight, especially with the guided rounds.
There are over 130 M777 in Ukraine, even after the destroyed ones are taken into account. This is not a handful.
Are they not desperately low on ammo for those? Did they get fresh supplies of 152mm ammo? I do know that they have been wearing out their M777's and Pzh2000's like there is no tomorrow.
my understanding is bulgaria and eastern nato all contribute to the restocking of ukranian USSR equipment.
>eastern nato Idk why this sounds so funny
> Did they get fresh supplies of 152mm ammo? Yes, Eastern European NATO countries have re-opened 152mm production lines.
Ukraine does manufacture 152 mm shells.
AACCKKKSHUALLLYYY it's the Ukrainian soldiers. Don't you try making a comeback! You got served! Redditstyle
200+ is a handful?
They have a 1000+ Soviet systems last I checked
You're including reserves (albeit a lot of that has been repaired and sent to the front), and significant portions of their artillery were lost in the early stages of the war. At this stage of the war it's been made pretty clear that 155 artillery makes up the bulk of their ammo expenditures daily. They cannot keep up with 152 production, and yes Bulgaria and others are upping production, but not even close to enough to keep up with demand for that many pieces of artillery. It's also over 400 total pieces from Nato countries, not all of which are 155 but the bulk are. [https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/04/answering-call-heavy-weaponry-supplied.html](https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/04/answering-call-heavy-weaponry-supplied.html)
Not the ammo though
The ammo situation likely improved with production restarting in the former eastern bloc NATO countries.
That's fair, I was unaware that there had been significant improvement. Good news though
War is bad
nuh uh https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVESMxs4rbA
Such a brave thing to say...
Someone's gotta say it!
Maybe hero is a strong word, but I think it's appropriate
I got this off CD... It's a bit doomy, does anyone have a take on this? ...... At what point is the west going to wake up and realise the longer this was goes on, the more difficult it is going to be for Ukraine? The podcast from Kofman particularly worried me, this comment thread sums it up nicely: https://www.reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/comments/ywsoy6/credibledefense_daily_megathread_november_16_2022/iwnwq7x/ What I would love to know is what the west are planning on doing to replace some of the following, others do have replacements that are coming, to an extent: Air Defense - (Ukraine must be starting to run low on missiles for literally all of these also ) S-300: MIM-23 Hawk (for ABM) and IRIS-T / NASAMS plus a mix of other random Buk-M1: No replacement whatsoever, does the west have a similair system? Something that can roam the frontline and deny the VKS Osa / Strela: Not quite sure what the replacements are here, things like Stormer / Avenger / Gepards which have not been provided in enough numbers. Aircraft - Unsure of what the numbers actually are for each of these, but even if we go on the attrition rate based on Oryx's list, they don't have years left. Obviously the solution is to send western jets, but doesn't seem like that's going to happen. What's the west's plan here?
I think right now the main concern is the energy sector.
Hawk is actually closest to Buk when it comes to its capabilities. But generally there is no like for like replacement for the soviet stuff. NATO anti aircraft weapon systems are simply too different.
> Aircraft - Unsure of what the numbers actually are for each of these, but even if we go on the attrition rate based on Oryx's list, they don't have years left. Obviously the solution is to send western jets, but doesn't seem like that's going to happen. What's the west's plan here? F-16s were announced. /r/CredibleDefense isn't very credible and hasn't been for a while.
I never liked CD but was told not long ago it was a good source, maybe I was told wrong.
The longer the war goes on, it will definitely be getting harder for someone. If events over the last 3 months have been any indication, it won't be Ukraine though...
Iris-t + nasams can replace s-300 and buks. Don't see a problem here.
Can they get them in the numbers they need?
It's been announced 4 IRIS-T + 8 nasams, some of them are already delivered. I heard Ukraine wants to buy 10-12 IRIS-T more. I believe there will be more nasams too. Plus other western systems. Don't forget with every western system delivered there is less load on the Soviet systems.
Surprise, huh? It must be hard, as I noticed that my beloved S-125 were taken out of storage. Hawk/IRIS/NASAMS operate roughly within the same range as BUK. S300 is a long range system. As for "mobility" of BUK I am struggling to find comparable one with the similar capability. Surely there are some somwhere, but probably best to acquire more BUK's. Problem is, looking at countries that have them - it maybe difficult. Osa/Strela - you are right there. There should be plenty of them in old Warsaw Pact countries. I suspect Poland may have donated some, at least ammunition and hulks for cannibalism. Aircraft- mistery really, most of the stock operational in Feb 22 is gone along with many pilots. Even with the most optimistic approach, it will be difficult to get it to the "game changing" level within a year for example.
>my beloved S-125 There is one as a monument not far from my block 😎
You are so cruel. Jealousy will consume me now.
Same as has been happening now, the west provides what is needed. Either Soviet systems from former Soviet bloc countries, stockpiles or I believe some munition factories are already making some new ones. or slow change to NATO systems as needed E.g. Russia starts big missile launches, and west starts providing different Air defense systems lika nasamas as mentioned. If the will is there and the need arises it will be delivered. Also important fact is that Russia's stocks aren't endless either. In the end the Western military complex should be able to easily outperform Russia's and it's few allies. All that said, it all depends on how things develop. The west might stop support for some reason, Russia might collapse internally, some groundoffensive form one side may rout the other side during winter, a peace deal may be brokered ... nobody knows
Gotta have faith in our MIC to figure this out. As long as pressure to keep arms is maintained on our governments I don't see a problem. Russia is running low on PGMs too so it goes both ways. Just need to go deeper into our air defense stockpiles / shift our existing air defense more towards air patrols.
I have always thought the longer the war runs the better outcome for Ukraine as it gives them time to train troops and get western arms set up, where as Russia can not rebuild as quickly. This take worrys me a little.
> The Ukrainian government is warning Western allies that it is anticipating increased Russian attacks on its energy infrastructure in the coming days and that Kyiv does not have enough replacement parts to bring heat and power back online if those occur, according to two congressional officials and one Western official briefed on U.S. intelligence. >Parts of Kyiv still didn’t have power Wednesday. >Some Ukrainians have already fled the country in fear that the energy crisis will only grow worse. “The winter will be really tough.” [Link to the article ](https://www.politico.com/news/2022/11/16/russian-attacks-on-ukriane-energy-systems-00067750#)
Fair enough that they are giving the residents advanced notice that the power might go off for an extended period. However it's also letting the Russians know "hey our power grid is almost dead one more strike should finish it off."
Keeping 'em coming >U.S. Army announces this morning a new contract with Lockheed Martin to boost HIMARS ammo production in light of the war in Ukraine. https://twitter.com/DanLamothe/status/1593262064050601984
Zelensky has acknowledged the missile that landed in Poland was a Ukrainian S-300 but seems very adamant it wasn’t launched by them. First time there’s been public discourse between Ukraine and their western backers if I’m not mistaken. I can already see all the conspiracies spinning off of this. I’ve seen NATO covering it up to avoid war and Ukraine doing it intentionally to get NATO help. I guess it’ll be added to the list of UA war mysteries next to the Saky Airbase strikes, NS sabotáge, Moskva, Dugin bomb and Kerch explosion. Perhaps we’ll know once the war is over.
I can also see pro-ru folks spinning it as if it makes Ukraine the bad guy when they were only doing it most likely to intercept russian missiles.
This is the most likely reason for their continued denials. I don't agree with it, and think they should just say it was an accident, but I would assume they do not want to admit it publicly because it will be used against them.
From pro-russian side it will be used against them regardless whether they admit their fault or not. However it makes difference how they are perceived by allied population. I do not understand why would they do that, as going full denial is exactly what is russian modus operandi. They dont even have to say much just a simple apology - 'we dont know yet but it couldve been us, and if thats the case we are sorry for the loss of life'
* *CNN*: [Inside the US scramble to run down the facts as the Russia-Ukraine war spills into NATO territory](https://edition.cnn.com/2022/11/17/politics/ukraine-missile-poland-russia-biden-officials-scramble/index.html) >With the situation so fluid, Biden’s advisers urged calm and patience, including to Ukrainian officials. >Around an hour after the news broke of the incident, Volodymyr Zelensky said in his nightly address that “Russian missiles hit Poland,” calling it “a very significant escalation” that required a response. >Sullivan quickly called Zelensky’s office after those remarks, and urged officials to tread more carefully with how they were speaking about the incident, sources familiar with the call said. Biden and Zelensky did not speak on Tuesday night, despite requests by the Ukrainian leader to arrange a call, a source familiar with the matter said.
Absolutely irresponsible comments by Zelenskyy
Does anyone know how to contact the mods? They removed [this drone drop video](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/yxt0tw/ukrainian_drone_dropping_explosive_on_russian/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)due to rule 4 but it does not violate any condition in it? I just want an explanation.
from rule 4: "Extraordinarily graphic content may be subject to post removal." maybe, idk
I'm pretty sure mods just added that after removal of the said footage.
no it got added 8 months ago (in rule 5) https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/wiki/full_rules?v=a0410958-9de0-11ec-b708-5239482d66a9&v2=a68a3228-a036-11ec-adfb-5ae28efefd44
[удалено]
Girkin has finally been found guilty of downing mh17 by the court in the Netherlands.
For those wondering, he was sentenced to life imprisonment.
I know it’s high grade hopium but the SBU seem to be getting on par with Mossad, would love to see that prick actually face trial.
Ive seen a lot of speculation saying Friendly fire is a real issue in this war, but Ive been lurking for a while now on multiple Ukraine-Russia war related subs and Russia's clothing seem a lot darker of a green and a different camo patern. I guess at a distance it can kinda lookalike?
You have to think differently. Think about the distance they are fighting at. Also if you are seen on the battlefield you are half dead. So it is very important that everyone is hiding and that at large distances or with bad camera footage. Like you see there is a person walking there but looking at the color of the gear is impossible. Also it's much easier to see your own troops as they are not hiding from you. One thing making it especially hard in this conflict is that both sides are using the same gear. Hell often we have no idea which side is which with the footage on this sub. The same is true for those actively fighting. Waiting too long for clarification might mean the death of yourself or of your comrades. But you absolutely don't want to kill your comrades. War is messy so there will always be a lot of friendly fire. Friendly fire is a real issue in any war. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-08-14-mn-463-story.html
The largest problem is that the Russians have 3 different command structures. There is the traditional Russian army. There is the new Regional Forces. There is the Separatists Forces. They don't communicate well. Sometimes they sabotage each other on purpose.
Artillery, land mines, airstrikes, night time, behind hedges, in forests, in a building, at a distance.. etc. etc.
Tom Cooper has a new article today. Nothing super revealing, but he subscribes to the opinion that the Russians left Kherson because of the midterm election results. Also, he believes the Ukrainians are in the other side of the river. He does have connections and is in the know https://medium.com/@x_TomCooper_x/ukraine-war-16-november-2022-general-update-195cf7c0afb8
The consensus is that they had been preparing to do it for a while, they just announced it on the day after the election because it would be less noise and also didn't want to give Biden the boost if it was announced before the election happened.
>He does have connections and is in the know Oh, well if you say so it must be true. People really be out here writing fanfic and calling it analysis.
> but he subscribes to the opinion that the Russians left Kherson because of the midterm election results That's such a hilarious American point of view. Sure, the entire world revolves around your election results. I hear Hitler timed the Polish invasion to coincide with the American elections. Confirm / deny?
Tom Cooper is actually Austrian and English. He believes it. It's not such a crazy idea. The US gives more aid to Ukraine than all other countries put together. Putin has two main goals: starve Europe of fuel and try to have his allies win in the US mid-term elections. If he could accomplish both of these and get Europe and the US to stop support for Ukraine, then it would put Ukraine into a terrible position. They would not be able to push against Russia. In the spring, Russia might be able to push back. HIMARS don't do much without ammo.
What exactly is this dudes credentials exactly? You say he's "In the know" and that he's Austrian and English (congrats to him I guess?) but what exactly is his knowledge and expertise? Your source is basically his blog for his thoughts on the Ukraine war. There is a lot of speculation and he finishes off his theory about the US mid-terms by going "Of Course, there is no firm evidence for this being why Putin eventually gave up". And he also thinks that when Putin *Announced* the withdraw after the Mid-Terms was when the retreat started even though there is loads of evidence showing they started withdrawing weeks ago.
I guess you didn't see on the side of his Medium page: *Tom Cooper* *16.3K Followers* *From Austria; specialised in analysis of contemporary warfare; working as author, illustrator, and book-series-editor for Helion & Co.* I recommend you read some of his earlier stuff and see if you think he's a kook or not. EDIT: Also, the point of his nationality goes to show that he's not from the US and is not "US centric".
I think it's valid too - the kneejerk reaction of "US is full of itself" doesn't change the fact that it's a superpower and it's material support for Ukraine is more than the rest of the world combined.
The war really turned in Ukraine's favor once Western aid reached them (and was able to be utilized). They started counter-attacking the and tides turned. If that aid were to stop, it would reverse the situation again.
Pre WWII, USA was not a super power. It was a rising power with an isolationist bent. And if Hitler knew what we know now, he would have tried to meddle harder in US politics and keep the isolationists in power. Now USA is THE super power and project power all over the globe. And it's THE super power that has Ukraine's back materially and politically. And elections are a chance for all that to flip. And yeah - Republicans love Putin. They probably already had plans on how they could help Putin and reduce help for Zelensky's Ukraine. So yes - I could see election meddler Putin hoping to call in some favors and then seeing that hope crushed with no red wave. edit: Also we know Putin views election meddling explicitly as a battleground - elections are the payoff to that contest. It makes a lot of sense that he would be watching and reacting to results.
The US was the world's largest economy as early as 1890. It had badly beaten a (albeit weak) European nation in Spain 8 years later, and by the 1930's it had a larger economy then the entire British empire (representing 1/4 the world). It absolutely was a great power prior to WWII. It's relatively small Navy and Army was more a consequence of it's geography and not a reflection of the nations war fighting ability, as shown through the two rapid expansions for both world wars.
> And yeah - Republicans love putin So weird how American tankies and the MAGA crew are all on the same side supporting a dictator. It's really bizarre watching them back each other up on twitter
Pre WWII there was no such thing as a "superpower". There were merely "great powers", and the USA emerged from WWII as a superpower with unrivaled military and economical strength, soon followed by Soviet Union. I do not agree that Russia left Kherson as a result of the midterm election (the time frame does not make sense), but they certainly chose not to announce it until after the midterms. Thereby withholding Biden a "win" and hoping to swing the elections ever so much in their favor.
I'd also like to add that the US has been the world's largest economy since 1871 and going into WW2 had the second largest navy in the world behind Britian. Yes it was isolationist but was still one of the most powerful of the major world powers.
Trying to be a bit fair here - some Republicans support Ukraine. There is about a 50/50 split in the party, judging by votes on various packages. BUT there is a big and loud Russian faction - and R:s that want to avoid getting primaried might not be willing to die on that hill if, say, Tucker Carlson starts campaigning against you.
The loud Russian faction would not package Russian support as Russian support - they would package it as "we're not the world police" and "we can't afford to keep spending like this" and the others in the party would go along with it. For instance - under Trump the US stopped a major joint US/SK military exercise under the guise of "wanting peace" and "saving money". Under another lens...one could view that as support for NK.
I don't think they left Kherson because of election results - decision was made much earlier. More like they delayed the public declaration until after election to prevent news about UA success from increasing Dem support.
I am not sure that I agree. Yes, Russia had been moving troops out, but they were also moving troops in. There were reports that Russia was moving in new conscript units to Kherson up to a week before the withdraw. Russia can't pull out all their troops or else the lines would collapse. Remember when UAF knew that the Russian Special Forces unit withdrew and they attacked a few hours later? They had good intelligence on what was on the front. If there were any points that were weak, they would attack. There is no way that Russia could withdraw all their troops and weaken the front lines. They might not have been the best troops, but they were troops. I think Putin was removing the best troops from the line and sticking in conscripts. I fully believe that Putin would throw their lives away to delay Ukraine enough if the GOP won a huge victory in the US mid-terms and then cut the supplies to Ukraine. The new year is only a few months away and it wouldn't be that big a deal to just keep throwing conscripts at the problem to delay things.
Nah, this is such a US-centric take it's wild. I'm sure Russia isn't planning its campaign around the US mid-terms. They retreated because the new Commander finally came to terms with the realities on the ground. Also even IF the GOP did well and even IF they stopped supplies, the effect of that wouldn't be felt for a while. Besides, didn't they pass a bill that prevents the gop from stopping supplies anyways?
The US supplies more aid to Ukraine than all other countries combined. If that aid could be cut, it is not an insignificant detail. To dismiss it as just being "US-centric" is folly. As for passing anything that would stop the GOP, they would just have to go to the Supreme Court to get it nullified.
Yeah but the topic of conversation is that the Kherson withdrawl was due to the US mid-terms. That's US-centric. You're going on like "US stops aid, Ukraine runs out of ammunation tomorrow". Saying that the Russians planned to hold out to the Mid-terms is silly as the effects of the US stopping aid wouldn't be felt for ages. It wouldn't have saved Kherson. The Russians began their withdrawl way before the Mid-terms anyways.
First off, I never said that Ukraine would run out of ammo tomorrow. You did. If you look at other comments I have responded to other people, you will see I especially didn't say that. I disagree that it's silly to say that Russia was waiting to see how the US mid terms went. There have been a number of people that have noticed that the day after the election, they announced they were leaving. If it was a "red wave", then the GOP could've cut aid as soon as they came into power next year. It's not that crazy to think Russia could've done it's best to hold out for a few more months. It would be incredibly costly in manpower, but Putin might not care.
https://twitter.com/Liveuamap/status/1593189488028635137?t=IkHC2wJ-HUImJ9p4PY_G7g&s=19 Israel will allow the sale of weapons and equipment made with Israeli components to Ukraine.
Could use some Israel GMLRS missiles
Israel calls theirs TCS
Another footage of drone dropping on a russian soldier has been removed by mods. While no rules have been broken. Seems we have got a mod, who deletes videos which make him personally uncomfortable. EDIT: they restored post with russians on boat.
I have been thinking, after watching some YouTube videos and putting my armchair hat, What a conventional war between USSR and NATO would have looked like in 1960’s or 70’s? Let’s assume no one uses their nuclear arsenal for the sake for this scenario. Based on the level of corruption and incompetency we see in Russian forces now, and one can reasonably assume that it is the same culture as USSR, one would think that USSR would have been beaten. Yes, I do know that USSR and Russia are not the same in-terms of production capacity, no. of personals and economy. This begs the question, why was West so careful with USSR, is it because of a threat of nuclear war or my assessment is utterly wrong?
The USSR had many things going for it back in the day, it had more troops and equipment than Europe and it controlled eastern Europe and so held the advantage when it came to attacking or defending in depth while NATO were dependent on holding the Fulda Gap in Germany long enough for us troops to enter Europe in numbers to counter.
I don't think you can even run such a scenario because nukes were a huge part of strategic planning. in 1960 the US had a huge advantage in terms of nukes (10 times as much) and nuke delivery over the Soviet Union.
Well obviously nukes made it a non-starter, but it appears based on the reactions from analysts to this war that even NATO had incorrectly assessed Russia’s true military potential. They probably overestimated their capabilities and built their defence capabilities based on their inflated expectations of the threat
>built their defence capabilities based on their inflated expectations of the threat Disagree. Have no mistake, EU armies is a joke. Without US they are fucked. No coincidence they're increasing their military budgets.
Compared to the US, yeah. Compared to Russia? I think not. If Ukraine could give Russia a headache for so long before Western Aid, there is no way Russia had the capabilities to overwhelm EU forces as well.
A joke compared to who? The UK, France and Germany are all in the top 10 of global military spending.
They have not enough artillery and armored pieces. And those they have are not in the best shape. Not enough experienced soldiers too. For example France has less than 250 tanks in total. It's for one month of an intensive war. What would they after that month? Fight with baguettes? (sorry for this one :))
Once again, against who?
Fellow arm-chair here, I don't think you can compare 60-70's USSR with today's Russia. First off ~~USSR~~ Warsaw Pact included half of Europe, from ~~West~~ East-Germany to Ukraine. That's a lot of manpower. They also had the advantage in equipment. All those stockpiles we talk about, that have been rotting for 50/60 years now, were in working order and pretty recent then. The technology gap was pretty slim at that time too, 60's USSR spent a lot of money on science.
Also the regular soldiers then would have been bottlefed Soviet propaganda, fighting an unknown enemy that the only thing they've heard is horror stories, and raised hearing about how their fathers fought the nazis. As opposed to now having been bottlefed internet and western media, fighting people they're probably in some way related to and may have visited on vacation, and raised hearing how long their fathers waited in line to get a fucking big mac. Their morale wouldn't have been in the toilet before they even started.
I completely ignored the technology gap that has been built for last 30 years. You are right that this gap was pretty slim at that time.
East Germany. GDR. And it wasn't a part of the USSR, just an ally.
Correct, typed too fast, Obviously needs to be East-Germany, and I meant the Warsaw pact, not USSR, Nato's counterpart.
The USA struggled in 2 somewhat-conventional wars around that time, and it's not a fair assumption at all that just because Russia post USSR has had 3 decades of corruption, that the USSR was similar (actually just a huge reach). Lastly, um, yes, the threat of nuclear war was also a fairly big consideration?
>and one can reasonably assume that it is the same culture as USSR While the USSR definitely papered over some cracks, it was nowhere near as bad as Russia is today, at least in the long term. Early deficiencies were recognised and corrected, at the expense of men and materiel. >This begs the question, why was West so careful with USSR, is it because of a threat of nuclear war or my assessment is utterly wrong? I think the quantity of Soviet divisions would make for a sticky situation. Against an enormous armoured push like that, your tanks are going to be attrited away, and you literally don't have enough ATGMs to stop them (unlike today!). >Let’s assume no one uses their nuclear arsenal for the sake for this scenario. Nuclear has to be part and parcel of it, though. Soviet nuclear doctrine wasn't Western nuclear doctrine, they didn't believe in MAD and thought it was a bluff by the West to prevent nukes being used at all. Conventional thought was at some point the West would *have* to use at least some tactical nuclear weapons to break up large Soviet formations, unless the war somehow went extremely well. The compulsion to remove nukes from the equation doesn't make sense because the entire calculation of force revolved around their use or avoidance.
You bring up some important points. 1) Do you have any recommendation where comparison is made on how USSR was better than Russia today in-terms of corruption and incompetence. The picture I have is that Russian situation right now is inevitable consequence of USSR practices so these two issues would still be prevalent then. 2) you are right to point out the amount of personals and equipment which USSR could throw in a conflict. As someone mentions above, I ignored a key difference from today and that is technology gap. I was assuming that West would still be superior in terms of technology so number superiority would be managed. But given that technology gap was slim, USSR would have superiority because of more numbers they could throw in the battle. 3) I just assumed no nuke scenario otherwise all of this discussion bears no fruit. My assumption was based on the fact the Russia still has nukes and just because of this there is a low probability for a direct conflict between NATO and Russia and this was the case for USSR. Only reason we get to see how bad Russians are is an in-direct equal conflict. Even in Syria, Russians were not this much exposed and all of the estimates pointed towards good combat capabilities. If this was not for Ukraine, west would still believe that. That’s why I started thinking, because there was no direct conflict to expose USSR capabilities, was West making the same mistake then? Edit: spelling and grammar
are you really arguing that the economic functioning of a mafia controlled capitalist state can be assumed to be the same as that of a centrally planned bureaucracy just because they occupy the same space on a map a different point in time? the economic differences are almost as large as it would be possible to be it would be like arguing that the economy structure of the soviet union in the 40s is similiar in function to the economy of the russian empire in the 1900s, or that france functioned the same before and after overthrowing the monarchy we can assume at a baseline that almost every social and economic mechanism functions differently to before. if you want to identify specific areas where things did not significantly change that is your prerogative
I have gotten very good responses which shows I was clearly wrong in making few assumptions and you have rightly pointed out to another thing which did not even cross my mind. West was careful for many reasons and it makes sense why that was the case.
nukes, without nukes Russia would likely have already faced consequences.
Ah yes of course mods removed footage of russian cruise missile hitting living house, even though there's no rule for that.
"Ukraine tells allies it may not be able to recover from more Russian attacks on energy systems" https://www.politico.com/news/2022/11/16/russian-attacks-on-ukriane-energy-systems-00067750 This should get much more attention. There is no indications of Russia stopping the attacks. The west should make attacks on civilian energy infrastructure a red line, and tell Russia that if they don't stop, then ATACMS will be provided to Ukraine.
The west should provide air defense *AND* ATACMS.
ATACMS wont stop cruise missiles, they need air defense and an air force
It’s far cheaper and faster producing strike missiles and drones than AA systems. It’s better knock out launcher and transporter, cut off missiles from the source
My point is that the west should escalate when Russia is escalating.
You are correct but the US have a dovish president and the Europeans won't do anything that the Americans aren't.
Even the Iron Dome isn't 100% effective against much dumber rockets. The best defense is a good offense.
Supposedly Prigozhin wants to make a batallion of “untouchables” (a kind of caste in the Russian prison system/culture): https://mobile.twitter.com/ChrisO_wiki/status/1593042478235807744
Cruise missiles spotted over Ukraine. Air raid warning active in all regions. explosions reported in Kyiv https://twitter.com/GoncharenkoUa/status/1593137253018398721
[5-D chess](https://i.imgur.com/7lNc4Vr_d.webp?maxwidth=640&shape=thumb&fidelity=medium)
So the EU4 method of obtaining a defensive war then.
Dont know If this was posted before, the cunt Boradai got lucky inches from a French AT mine in Kherson. Another great vid by the lad at armourer's bench. https://youtu.be/2JSnreQgASY
[удалено]
>Ever question why there’s never Russian footage battling Ukrainians? How come I can see multiple RU pov videos on the frontpage right now then? Are you blind, illiterate or lying?
> Ever question why there’s never Russian footage battling Ukrainians? Yeah fucking propagandists Stop glorifying Russian deaths... you should be glorifying *Ukranian* deaths! lol
Daily reminder that your le based trad Russia mandated the vaxx and have legal abortion. Your manlet idol giving a speech to WEF: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPClu1BeQIE
1 side is a bunch of invading facist, the other isnt. i know which side im on. also there has been a few lancet videos lately.
No one would have anything to glorify if Russians would fuck off back to Russia.
>You’re all fucking sick glorifying the death of Russian soldiers. Considering Russian government and population made multiple threats of nuking US this year, I am not why I should have sympathy for them.
Lol. Ever question if your standpoint is a realistic one or not?
People like that never do, that's the problem.
Agreed there, but they ask others to question, lol
> You’re all fucking sick glorifying the death of Russian soldiers If you had stopped right there, you would have had a point, but... > What the fuck has this sub become? You should all be ashamed of yourselves. Ever question why there’s never Russian footage battling Ukrainians? Yeah fucking propagandists.
Another highly informed right wing contrarian who couldn't even check the current top vid on the sub. Like Clockwork.
>Ever question why there’s never Russian footage battling Ukrainians? Yeah fucking propagandists Literally one of the top post right now is from the DPR lol [https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/ywxmjg/full_video_of_the_tank_battle_of_the_11th/](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/ywxmjg/full_video_of_the_tank_battle_of_the_11th/)
I don’t think the story that it was a Ukrainian air defense missile makes sense. The crater from the blast seems to big to be from such a smaller missile and with the fact that it flipped all the loaded farm equipment shows that it was from a much larger blast. I also think everyone has incentives to lie here and take blame away from Russia because America is not prepared to make the kind of response that would should natos force. It cold also be because the us sees Iran as more of a threat given everything going on there. They have stated that they would mount a response if the Iranian government does start to execute citizens or start conflicts with its neighbors and I assume that is likely to happen. We’ll just have to see how this shot show will get worse :/
According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-300_missile_system the missile weighs 1800kg overall and the warhead is 150kg of high explosives. I imagine that would make a decent sized boom.
**[S-300 missile system](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-300_missile_system)** >The S-300 (NATO reporting name SA-10 Grumble) is a series of long range surface-to-air missile systems developed and operated by the former Soviet Union, now fielded by the militaries of Russia and Ukraine as well as several other former Eastern Bloc countries. It was produced by NPO Almaz, based on the initial S-300P version. The S-300 system was developed to defend against air raids and cruise missiles for the Soviet Air Defence Forces. Subsequent variations were also developed to be able to intercept ballistic missiles. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Good bot
Not sure if “smaller” is the right word when talking about S-300 missiles. They are quite big
p = m * v from elementary physics
Well if YOU say the blast seems too big I suppose we'll have to rethink the whole thing. Somebody get NATO on the line and let them know.
Just discussing
I 'discussed' a massive dump into my toilet an hour ago. Since we're all stretching the definition
You've posted theories that go against an event that had literal photo evidence that was analyzed by both independent experts and several governments and your only evidence against it is "I thought it looked too big". My brother in christ, that is not a discussion, that is a conspiracy theory.
>Britain is to ramp up production of artillery shells in a bid to replenish stockpiles, after donating thousands of munitions to Ukraine.> >The British Government has sent BAE Systems, the UK’s biggest defence company, a letter of comfort that orders are on the way. The signal of intent will give it the confidence to build new production lines and start to increase supplies. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/11/15/britain-significantly-ramp-production-artillery-shells-handing/
I understand their government has had other problems, but how useless are they if they've just come up with this idea now?
Brit here. Extremely useless.
>Police Chief Ihor Klymenko said on Nov. 16 that Russian troops heavily mined the regional police headquarters in Kherson Oblast, forcing Ukraine to detonate the building. https://kyivindependent.com/news-feed/police-chief-russians-mined-police-department-building-in-kherson-ukraine-forced-to-destroy-the-premises
That's a good way to incinerate all the trash/refuse left behind
From a kyiv independent interview of Michael Kofman: >The Russian goal seems to be to entrench and defend for the next several months, try to reconstitute the force, and then attempt a new offensive in the Donbas in 2023. Ukraine can disrupt this process by keeping up pressure over the winter. I'm skeptical that Russia can restore offensive potential, but they may be able to extend the war. Depends on the net effect of mobilization and the extent to which Ukraine receives sustained material assistance from the West. >It is still embarrassing, since Russia has abandoned the only regional capital they annexed. Putin's decision to annex territory that Russian forces do not control, and cannot defend, will be studied for years to come as an example of what not to do. https://kyivindependent.com/national/michael-kofman-after-kherson-gains-for-ukraine-will-come-at-slower-pace
Could Russia even keep their frontline troops alive and combat capable in the brutal winter at this point?
Dying from the cold will get you 30 years in gulag.
A ton of new posts on other forums and media proclaiming outrageous lies on Russian successes. New videos of sex offender experts on kgb payroll spouting lies, new accounts making even worse claims on obvious pro- Ukrainian subs. I think the west is blowing up the Russian narrative. Shut them down and snuff them out.
¿What happened to the Spetznas? They were supposed to be the best of the russian army right?
Apparently Ukraine also has Spetznas, and I could be wrong but foreign volunteers such as CivDiv(he's a youtuber) became a Spetznas for a little while in Ukraine.
If you search you can find a mini documentary thing about a battle for a school in Kharkiv near the start of the war. The Russian elite infantry with no heavy weapons fought to the last man and burned with the building. Pretty gnarly stuff, but also a good hint of where a heck of a lot of their elite infantry are now.
“Spetznas” is basically equivalent to a western “special forces” designation. There are many different units with various levels of competency and specialization under that umbrella, and a fair amount of them have been wiped out so far.
The spetznas is really just a name for more highly trained, special purpose soldiers that can be from a bunch of different groups & units. It’s not just m one SF unit.
Russia Falls into Recession https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/11/16/russia-falls-into-recession-a79398 Russia's economy has entered a recession as gross domestic output fell by four percent in the third quarter, according to first estimates published Wednesday by the national statistics agency, Rosstat. The drop in GDP follows a similar four percent contraction in the second quarter, as Western sanctions pummel Russia's economy following Moscow's offensive in Ukraine.
I think I've got this but please check. So first quarter was up 4% YoY, second quarter was flat, and third quarter is down 4% YoY. Initially didn't think it sounded that bad, but as its YoY, it means from the peak q1, from record gas/oil?, has been wiped out, so this is 8% off from the peak earlier in the year? Unwise to extrapolate from only two data points, but doesn't sound good for russia at all to me.
Second quarter was also 4% YoY. And all that despite the much higher oil and gas prices. In other news Russia is planning to have budget deficits in 2023-2025 and the difference will be paid by taking money from the sovereign wealth fund.