Russia's War Against Ukraine

[GDS_Starfury]

well we aint giving them carriers, subs and nukes.
long range missiles and aircraft should have been provided sooner.
the UAF are already hitting moscow on their own and now routinely shutting down their airports.
the strike the other day taking out two Backfires could have happened a lot sooner and led to a
lot less Ukrainian civilian deaths from cruise missile attacks.
what equipment or type is specifically in your no go zone?

[Con]

well we aint giving them carriers, subs and nukes.
long range missiles and aircraft should have been provided sooner.
the UAF are already hitting moscow on their own and now routinely shutting down their airports.
the strike the other day taking out two Backfires could have happened a lot sooner and led to a
lot less Ukrainian civilian deaths from cruise missile attacks.
what equipment or type is specifically in your no go zone?

Sharks with Frikkin lasers beams attached to their heads

[Jarhead0331]

well we aint giving them carriers, subs and nukes.
long range missiles and aircraft should have been provided sooner.
the UAF are already hitting moscow on their own and now routinely shutting down their airports.
the strike the other day taking out two Backfires could have happened a lot sooner and led to a
lot less Ukrainian civilian deaths from cruise missile attacks.
what equipment or type is specifically in your no go zone?

I haven't made a list, but much like obscenity, or hard-core pornography, in the words of the great Justice Potter Stewart, "I know it, when I see it."

Broadly, I'd describe it as anything that could jeopardize US national security, American lives, both military and civilian, or the stability of the free world. A broad range of weaponry and platforms would fall into this categorization, and a broad range would not. I think it's largely, but not entirely, common sense.

[GDS_Starfury]

ATACMS?

[Jarhead0331]

ATACMS?

I think it could depend on the variant, the payload, the method of employment, targets, etc. It's not always going to be so simple as spinning a wheel and seeing on what system it lands.

[SirAndrewD]

The area around Robotyne is now significantly secured that the UAF devoted a significant amount of their transport and troops to finally evacuate the town of civilians. 

Most of the people left were elderly and women.  I saw a few interviews with them and they said that the men were largely "taken" quite a while ago.  Clearly not evacuated for humanitarian reasons as the Russians had no problem leaving the town occupied by meat shields.

To where?  They had no idea, but they were considered to be "unreliable" by the occupying authorities.

There were a lot of tear jerkers in the videos of the people finally getting out, a lot in Bradleys. 

[FarAway Sooner]

Andrew, I assume that this means that the Russians stole all their Skodas and school buses?

Levity aside, I agree with Jarhead that the loss of life in this conflict is appalling and tragic.  There are clearly some good guys and some bad guys in this conflict, but that doesn't absolve the good guys of all scrutiny nor should it mean that asking tough questions makes us sympathetic to the bad guys.

I still don't understand, as a country, how we haven't been able to just produce about 10,000,000 extra artillery rounds and get those to the Ukrainians.  I assume it's because we relying on the free market and profit motives to make it happen?

[Con]

Andrew, I assume that this means that the Russians stole all their Skodas and school buses?

Levity aside, I agree with Jarhead that the loss of life in this conflict is appalling and tragic.  There are clearly some good guys and some bad guys in this conflict, but that doesn't absolve the good guys of all scrutiny nor should it mean that asking tough questions makes us sympathetic to the bad guys.

I still don't understand, as a country, how we haven't been able to just produce about 10,000,000 extra artillery rounds and get those to the Ukrainians.  I assume it's because we relying on the free market and profit motives to make it happen?

As my job deals with scaling manufacturing in a highly demanding, exacting precision and very regulated (for good reasons) industry I can sympathies with the manufacturers here.  US has not invested in being able to scale up in manufacturing of critical defense consumable infrastructure for over 40 years and suddenly they are being asked to go to wartime footing in under 12 months.
Make no mistake one of the greatest benefits for the US defense industry and the Us economy from this conflict is that finally the non sexy shit like capital equipment, business continuity planning, Kaizens, lean six sigma and resources are finally being poured and applied to the US arms industry.  This will be a bigger benefit to the US for the next generations over any type of new tank/plane or ship platform.  That is why this war will eventually make the US a more formidable adversary to any potential conflict in the next 30 years.
Napoleons quote still rings true - "The amateurs discuss tactics: the professionals logistics"
PS what do you think won the war in WW2 - The troops or the material advantages that the US manufacturing base brought?



 

[MengJiao]

PS what do you think won the war in WW2 - The troops or the material advantages that the US manufacturing base brought?

  A combination -- after all on Guadalcanal, for a while, it really was all on the US Marines.  On the other hand the Army proved to be pretty good at matching US material to what the troops could do and vis-versa.
And of course the Germans and Japan had pretty much shot themselves in the logistic feet a few dozen times before the
US really got rolling on them.
See for example Adam Tooze The Wages of Destruction on just how fast the German economy was falling apart even before the war.

[Sir Slash]

I think the reason so many here in the U.S. are beginning to question the cost of this war is that the U.S. has committed to north of $100 Billion to support Ukraine while no other European country has yet to commit to even $10 Billion. Is that just because we are so much more rich than everybody else, or is America going to get stuck with paying the bill for this European war? I think our President should tell everybody else, 'We'll match the largest figure of whoever antes-up the most' then wait to see how fast the Piggy Bank gets full.

[Con]

PS what do you think won the war in WW2 - The troops or the material advantages that the US manufacturing base brought?

  A combination -- after all on Guadalcanal, for a while, it really was all on the US Marines.  On the other hand the Army proved to be pretty good at matching US material to what the troops could do and vis-versa.
And of course the Germans and Japan had pretty much shot themselves in the logistic feet a few dozen times before the
US really got rolling on them.
See for example Adam Tooze The Wages of Destruction on just how fast the German economy was falling apart even before the war.

I just finished Phillip O'Briens book "How the War was won"  While it focused on the attrition caused by Allied Bombing and Naval power to corrode the Axis ability to supply material to the troops on the battlefield its chock full of data on US and Axis manufacturing.  If more than half of your war material is destroyed before it can even be deployed and your manufacturing base is significantly underperforming your opponent and in steep decline that's what will eventually ensure victory.  IMHO it was a very good read for those who like to look at the logistics of WW2 with some pertinent parallels to the Ukraine conflict (I was drawn to O'Briens book based on his articles and insights on Ukraine).

https://www.amazon.com/How-War-Was-Won-Cambridge/dp/110871689X

[Con]

I think the reason so many here in the U.S. are beginning to question the cost of this war is that the U.S. has committed to north of $100 Billion to support Ukraine while no other European country has yet to commit to even $10 Billion. Is that just because we are so much more rich than everybody else, or is America going to get stuck with paying the bill for this European war? I think our President should tell everybody else, 'We'll match the largest figure of whoever antes-up the most' then wait to see how fast the Piggy Bank gets full.

Here is a very good article breaking down the aid packages - Its missing the last two months but has a good analysis of the magnitude, the composition of military aid and the comparisons both by total dollars but also by % of GDP which is a measure of how much it hurts other countries to be sending aid.
I think it gives a much better insight rather than using a somewhat inaccurate 100B figure.
https://www.cfr.org/article/how-much-aid-has-us-sent-ukraine-here-are-six-charts

Updated one which is current to August -
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/08/04/ukraine-war-us-spending/

Tells similar outcome.  Interesting quote though
"We could do it forever," O'Hanlon said of this rate of funding and support for Ukraine. "It's not economically unsustainable. But it's probably politically unsustainable."

[SirAndrewD]

Andrew, I assume that this means that the Russians stole all their Skodas and school buses?

Levity aside, I agree with Jarhead that the loss of life in this conflict is appalling and tragic.  There are clearly some good guys and some bad guys in this conflict, but that doesn't absolve the good guys of all scrutiny nor should it mean that asking tough questions makes us sympathetic to the bad guys.

I still don't understand, as a country, how we haven't been able to just produce about 10,000,000 extra artillery rounds and get those to the Ukrainians.  I assume it's because we relying on the free market and profit motives to make it happen?

I generally try to stay largely objective and while I personally have a very strong and not hidden bias for Ukraine I am not one that will ever let my bias get involved with my analysis of this as a person who is a historian.

So I agree, I am strongly questioning Ukrainian strategy, and what kinds and types of support given to them and when.

I also accept the macro level issues that caused the Russians to start this war and don't absolve the west from them entirely. 

I still hold that this conflict could have been avoided as far back as 2017 or so if we had sufficient leadership that recognized the issues and actually engaged both sides and worked to come up with tangible solutions.

Still, all said the Ukrainians are not losing the war.  They haven't lost a major battlefield engagement since Bakhmut and Bakhmut was a disaster for the Russians.  They however aren't winning it the NATO way despite the gear given to them.  They're doing it as most of their high command was trained and learned, the Soviet way.

It's working, just not the way we in the west would like.

And yes, I despise the loss of life.  I've said it before, I keep saying it.  The sane, human, logical thing to do is for everyone to sit down and just stop this insanity.  I don't want to see Russia collapse as much as I hate Putin's tyranny because I don't want a nuclear power to fall into the hands of many even more mad men.

But I also fear more than anything a complete Russian victory.  I studied Russia.  I did a talk circuit on the Holodomor.  I know what Russia will do to the Ukrainians in victory and it will be a new Holocaust because they did it before.

I also see future wars in this.  This is a madness beyond the capability to deal with with platitudes. 

I constantly wish for sanity to prevail somehow but it won't. 

[Crossroads]

^Another well put summary, thanks Sir Andrew. I came to post something, but once again you put into writing better than I am able to.

Meanwhile, there's been two new additions by Lawrence Freedman to his sub stack. Out of all individuals, if I'd have to name one who's able to write holistic, objective summaries, it is him.

First, there's his view on how the "Global South" is viewing to war. In parenthesis, as it is not a single entity with a united view, but several important nations, also participating in G20 as he points out. It would seem Ukraine's diplomatic efforts are carrying some results as well, especially as so far Putin has been not able to offer any diplomatic solution to end the war apart that Ukraine would need to agree to all his demands, while Ukraine's 10-point plan often referring to UN Charter can be seen as more of a base for future negotiations.

https://samf.substack.com/p/the-global-south-brics-and-the-g20?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2


As for whether there's going to be a definitive battlefield event ending the war, if there ever was hope for one, it is not likely to happen in the near future. Here, Freedman discusses the current status quo in the battlefield, also rebutts the imho quite silly WaPo articles, or the unnamed military sources behind them.

https://samf.substack.com/p/ukraines-offensive-is-it-failing


Putin seems to be counting on the resolve of the Western nations to wither, but so far it does not seem to be happening. There's a large coalition of willing arming and supporting Ukraine, and said support is in no way stretching them (too) thin, outside 155mm shells perhaps. At the same time, production is ramping up, and there seems to be a long(er) term plan coming into play. For instance the F-16s, on one hand they could have been delivered earlier, but they are being delivered now, as a sign western support will carry well into 2024.

The view that Putin will not stop here if an armistice is negotiated seems to gain understanding outside Eastern European nations as well. If you checked the previous article on nations giving highest support per their GDP, it is the neighbouring countries. For a reason, I might add.

   

[Jarhead0331]

I don't think it is debatable that this conflict has turned into a war of attrition. It is not about whether the West continues to "arm" Ukraine, I think it is more about whether Ukraine will have soldiers to field those Western arms. A war of attrition favors Moscow. This is not the kind of war that Ukraine can possibly win on its own. So, there better be a decisive or, as you put it, "definitive" battlefield event that ends the war, otherwise, I believe the consequences will be extremely dire.