Outside Topic Way OT: Ukraine - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Outside Topic Way OT: Ukraine (/thread-23071.html)

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 04-30-2022

(04-30-2022, 04:46 PM)dabigv13 Wrote:  I think the quickest and easiest way to break the Black Sea blockade is getting Ukraine better long range antiship missiles. It's a threshold we've already crossed, though only with short range missiles so far, and a capability Ukraine already possess, although apparently with only limited ammo. 

Nope. None of that matters. The real blockade is already fundamentally the 4th Independent Submarine Brigade based in Novorossiysk. There are six relatively new (2014 or later) Kilo class submarines. The Black Sea is an ideal operating area for these submarines. You basically can't find them, and there is nobody in the Black Sea who has the wherewithal to look in any case. No cruise missile in the world is going to lock on to a snorkel mast, and probably not a Kilo class on the surface for that matter. Too small a radar cross section too close to the water. To even fire the missile requires knowing where the submarine will surface to charge batteries, and when. These are activities that no sane sub would do anywhere near the Ukraine. Ukraine has no shot against these units. None.

The best hope of breaking the blockade by these submarines, assuming NATO can get involved to make it possible at all, would be to attack Novorossiysk. This is a Russian city quite far from Ukraine, and you would need to blow up the support facilities. The other hope would be that the subs just wear out and need maintenance that can't be done locally. Pretty unlikely. The only thing that prevents this "fleet in being" from blockading Ukraine is a peace treaty/cease fire.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - dabigv13 - 04-30-2022

Yeah, I forgot about the subs. Though Block V Tomahawks could theoretically reach Novorossiysk and I wouldn't put it past Russia having maintenance issues precluding use of their whole fleet.

Still though, doing substantial damage to the Russian surface fleet would cripple their ability to resupply units in Crimea and Southern Ukraine, which significantly enables a successful Ukrainian counterattack in these areas, and that very well could settle into a long war of attrition.

Coastal missiles or Russian air force could always be a threat to Ukrainian sea traffic as well, regardless of Russian subs or surface ships, so I think it is correct that really only a treaty can open up Ukraine to substantial commercial sea traffic.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 04-30-2022

(04-30-2022, 07:31 PM)dabigv13 Wrote:  Yeah, I forgot about the subs. Though Block V Tomahawks could theoretically reach Novorossiysk and I wouldn't put it past Russia having maintenance issues precluding use of their whole fleet.

Still though, doing substantial damage to the Russian surface fleet would cripple their ability to resupply units in Crimea and Southern Ukraine, which significantly enables a successful Ukrainian counterattack in these areas, and that very well could settle into a long war of attrition.

Coastal missiles or Russian air force could always be a threat to Ukrainian sea traffic as well, regardless of Russian subs or surface ships, so I think it is correct that really only a treaty can open up Ukraine to substantial commercial sea traffic.

I totally agree with you that the air threat is also an issue. One big aspect of the problem is not how many ships Russia can sink, it is what the threat does to insurance rates. No grain ship is going to pay the exorbitant rates it would cost to export from Odesa.

Equally unfortunately for Ukraine, even if rail transport to Europe was greatly improved and the gauge throughout Ukraine converted to "standard" (something that I think will happen if Ukraine survives this war), rail transport is always going to be significantly more expensive than ship transport, unless the destination is in Europe anyway. Even then it still may be cheaper to go by ship. That is another reason Ukraine can't sit still for the loss of Mariupol. Transporting all the grain grown in eastern Ukraine by rail to Odesa adds significantly to the cost, even if Odesa and the rail system could handle the traffic, which ATM they can't. Loading in Mariupol obviates those issues.

Ukraine really needs a peace treaty/cease fire agreement. Endless war won't work for them at all. Equally, they need assurance that Russia isn't going to do anything like this again. No commercial venture is going to invest big bucks in Ukraine if it is 50-50 that it will get blown up in 10 years. The military situation in Ukraine is complicated and serious enough. The "How does this end?" question IMHO is even harder.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - BostonCard - 05-01-2022

Cracks in the façade?

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/04/27/vicious-blame-game-erupts-among-putins-security-forces-a77508

And rumors swirling that the Russian military chief of staff was wounded and had to be evacuated.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10772727/amp/Putins-military-commander-Valery-Gerasimov-wounded-forced-evacuate-war-zone.html

BC

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - 82lsju - 05-01-2022

good read about current Stanford student Catarina Buchatskiy '23

https://stanforddaily.com/2022/04/29/the-shadow-war-the-stanford-student-on-the-front-line-of-ukrainians-battle-for-independence/

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - BostonCard - 05-01-2022

[tweet]https://twitter.com/markhertling/status/1520887048063930368?s=21&t=-PdxZ0KhN4S-6WV1aHse5A[/tweet]

Apparently, this happened during the attack that killed Simonov.  Reportedly a fair number of other high ranking officials were also there, and up to 200 soldiers.

BC

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - dabigv13 - 05-01-2022

Ukraine denies that Gerasimov was injured. He got out a couple hours before the attack. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/01/world/europe/russian-general-dead-valery-gerasimov.html

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - dabigv13 - 05-02-2022

[Tweet]https://twitter.com/JackDetsch/status/1521168317192486913?s=20&t=jKPRPZybyZC8GcgH8ltmTQ[/tweet]

Of course, anonymous US defense officials don't always tell the truth...the first shot of the arty barrage that killed that general was spot on. And the US has been sneaky about provision of PGMs in the past, such as in Colombia to target the FARC.

Quote:In a typical mission, several A-37 Dragonflys flying at 20,000 feet carried smart bombs. As soon as the planes came within a three-mile “basket” of the target, a bomb’s GPS software would automatically turn on.

The Dragonflys were followed by several A-29 Super Tucanos, flying at a much lower altitude. They would drop a series of dumb bombs in a pattern nearby. Their blast pressure would kill anyone close in and also flatten the dense jungle and obscure the use of the smart bombs.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2013/12/21/covert-action-in-colombia/

Also interesting to me-

[Tweet]https://twitter.com/JackDetsch/status/1521165270030635009?s=20&t=IOkiPl6qMNkCj5xSksi0bA[/tweet]

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 05-02-2022

(05-02-2022, 09:49 AM)dabigv13 Wrote:  [Tweet]https://twitter.com/JackDetsch/status/1521168317192486913?s=20&t=jKPRPZybyZC8GcgH8ltmTQ[/tweet]



Of course, anonymous US defense officials don't always tell the truth...the first shot of the arty barrage that killed that general was spot on. And the US has been sneaky about provision of PGMs in the past, such as in Colombia to target the FARC.

It is also true that the M142 HIMARS is a vehicle to launch rockets. The M270 is as well, but is not HIMARS. The one report we saw referenced the M270. The official may have been telling the literal truth but not actually answering the question "Did the US send MLRS to Ukraine?". Both vehicles can launch the entire family of Multiple Launch Rocket System Family of Munitions. Some of these rockets are precision guided, some are not. AFAIK neither vehicle nor any rockets, precision or otherwise, have been sent to Ukraine. I wish it were otherwise.

If we ever send such systems, Russia will undoubtedly know which rockets were used because they will find identifiable fragments in the target area. Whether they will be "honest" about what they found is another matter.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - BostonCard - 05-02-2022

Ukraine hit another two Russian boats (per the description, they were smaller). They were targeted by the Turkish drone, not the Neptune missile.

On another, more depressing note, more echos of WWII, and not in a good way…

You've been given free access to this article as a gift. You can open the link five times within seven days. After that it will expire.

Why is Russia setting up detention centres in Ukraine? from The Economist

https://econ.st/3LDzo3z

(That article should not be paywalled, as it counts as one of my five “gift” articles).

BC

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Treefence - 05-02-2022

600 confirmed tank losses for the Russians according to Oryx, likely a lot more as it takes a while to catch up, and a lot of the Mariupol losses likely can't be documented by the Ukrainians.  Most estimates were that Russia had 1,200 tanks assigned for the invasion of Ukraine.  Another testament to the failures by Russia.  

https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - TrumpCard - 05-02-2022

(05-02-2022, 10:18 AM)BostonCard Wrote:  Why is Russia setting up detention centres in Ukraine? from The Economist

https://econ.st/3LDzo3z

(That article should not be paywalled, as it counts as one of my five “gift” articles).

BC

Thanks.  This is the most concerning facet of the war to me.  Ukraine is alleging that Russia forcibly deported hundreds of thousands of civilians.  I remain extremely concerned about their fate.  

Also, it's fair to say that we don't know how many of these people went "voluntarily," i.e. they would have rather stayed safe in their homes, but given the status of the war, they preferred to go to a refugee camp in Russia or Russia-occupied territory than a refugee camp in Western Ukraine or Poland.  I am hoping that the vast majority of people are ethnically and linguistically Russian and that Russia is treating them okay.  Even if that's true, however, it seems likely that there is a very substantial population of civilian prisoners being held against their will in bad conditions.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - fullmetal - 05-02-2022

(05-02-2022, 06:04 PM)TrumpCard Wrote:  Also, it's fair to say that we don't know how many of these people went "voluntarily," i.e. they would have rather stayed safe in their homes, but given the status of the war, they preferred to go to a refugee camp in Russia or Russia-occupied territory than a refugee camp in Western Ukraine or Poland.  I am hoping that the vast majority of people are ethnically and linguistically Russian and that Russia is treating them okay.  Even if that's true, however, it seems likely that there is a very substantial population of civilian prisoners being held against their will in bad conditions.

I bet the ethnic Russians were allowed to stay and control the area whereas the ethnic Ukrainians were deported to wrest control of the land away from Ukraine.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - TrumpCard - 05-02-2022

(05-02-2022, 11:14 AM)Treefence Wrote:  600 confirmed tank losses for the Russians according to Oryx, likely a lot more as it takes a while to catch up, and a lot of the Mariupol losses likely can't be documented by the Ukrainians.  Most estimates were that Russia had 1,200 tanks assigned for the invasion of Ukraine.  Another testament to the failures by Russia.  

https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html

I see a lot of reporting about Russia's failures.  Although Russia may well be inept, it's still doing a tremendous amount of damage.  Even seemingly pro-Ukrainian biased sources like Institute for the Study of War are noting the extent of damage that Russia is causing.  Here's today's report, for example:  https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-may-2.  No advances by Russia.  All they did today was conduct shelling of Ukrainian cities.  Sure, the Ukrainians conducted a counterattack that retook a small town north of Kharkiv, but ISW notes that the battle was very costly to the Ukrainians.  I continue to have the impression that neither side is going to have much success moving the current battle lines.  The problem is that Russia's apparently planning to permanently occupy the terriotry it grabbed.  I'm seeing reports that they're requiring use of the ruble, changing curriculum in schools, planning sham elections, etc.  I'm grateful that Ukraine has repelled the recent Russian attacks, but that doesn't change the fact that Russia currently controls a big slice of Ukraine.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 05-02-2022

(05-02-2022, 06:13 PM)TrumpCard Wrote:  I'm grateful that Ukraine has repelled the recent Russian attacks, but that doesn't change the fact that Russia currently controls a big slice of Ukraine.

It controlled a big slice of the Ukraine before this war started. Now it controls a bigger slice that contains the entire Kherson Oblast plus Mariupol and other newly added territory in the east and south. Ukraine can't tolerate that situation. It is an existential threat to the country. Let's hope that the additional weaponry that will be provided is at least sufficient to drive Russia back to the borders of Feb 24 before Ukraine collapses from the effort.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - BostonCard - 05-02-2022

Saw it flash on CNN that the US has “highly credible” intelligence reports that Russia will try to annex Luhansk and Donetsk some time
In mid-May.

BC

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 05-02-2022

(05-02-2022, 08:05 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  Saw it flash on CNN that the US has “highly credible” intelligence reports that Russia will try to annex Luhansk and Donetsk some time
In mid-May.

BC

Seems plausible. Have a "referendum" while it is still a war zone. Everybody who would vote no has fled to the west or "died". I wouldn't be surprised if this was attempted even if Russia didn't actually control the entire Oblast at the time of the vote. Naturally, that will mean nothing to Ukraine.

Maybe they can rename them Alsace and Lorraine? The Treaty of Frankfurt was after all signed on 10 May 1871.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - TrumpCard - 05-03-2022

The Ukrainians are defending skillfully and admirably, but I don’t see how they will push Russia all the way back to 2/24 borders. If the heuristic is that an attacker wants to outnumber the defender 3:1, Ukraine is not close to those numbers. My understanding is that they are more like 2:3. Maybe they can get local advantages and push Russia back here and there, but I don’t see 2/24 borders happening. The Ukrainian economy will be hurting, but the people will adjust to a lower standard of living. Israel has survived in the desert with a heck of a lot fewer natural resources and plenty of regional foes for 74 years. The Ukrainians are capable of doing it too.  I just hope the humanitarian toll between now and the end of the conflict is not too immense.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Treefence - 05-03-2022

I don't think the goal for Ukraine is the pre Feb 24th borders, I think it's the pre 2014 borders. Yes, Russia has taken a significant chunk of Ukraines land for now, maybe 15 to 20% or so, but keep in mind, taking ground is one thing, keeping it is another. With the sanctions, and potentially more homeland sabotage attacks, Russia has a very limited ability to replenish it's losses, and will resort to bring out old stocks of outdated equipment, all while the west continues to replenish Ukraines losses, and in some cases add to the previous levels. The damage Russia has been causing to Ukraine is sadly mostly civilian infrastructure and their economy, while Ukraine has been hitting Russias military power almost completely.  

Russia found out in the first phase of the war that holding occupied territory was not only challenging, but deadly. They simply didn't have the manpower anymore to keep up their held territories in Kyiv, Chernihiv, and Sumy Oblasts.  While they've concentrated their forces on Kherson, Luhansk, Donetsk, and southern Zaporzhia oblasts, they are beginning to get routed in Kharkiv.  \The success of Ukrainians in that area will severely threaten the supply lines to the vanguard of Russian forces based in Izium. If that area is threatened that everything in the northeast starts crumbling for Russia.  

I think the biggest point I'll make is that Ukraine's main strategy in this war has been giving up land for time, so they are always in an advantageous position against Russians, causing as much harm as possible, in as efficient manner as possible. They have been mostly successful at this.  While for the next couple weeks we might see minor advances by the Russians, I think after that time the tide will turn, and Ukraine will be advancing on most fronts.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - dabigv13 - 05-03-2022

It will be tough for Ukraine to gain everything back in a few months. Give it a year or two though, and Russia will probably be hard pressed to continue resupplying their troops. 

Russia basically mortgaged the future of their military for the next few years with an assault that used over 75% of their available forces, and is killing all of their best troops. All of the NCOs that would ostensibly be used to train new conscripts have been sent to the front. Even if Russia declares war and institutes widespread conscription they will really only be sending cannon fodder. And of course Russia is very strapped for PGMs and will have great difficulty resupplying this. They are using expensive antiship missiles in a secondary land attack role, probably because they are starting to run low on their typical guided cruise and ballistic missiles.

Look to Afghanistan or Vietnam for guides of how it goes for an occupying imperial power. And Ukraine is a lot bigger and getting better more and better gear than either of those.

---