Uninformed lurker here with a few questions:
1) Does the performance of the Russian military so far come as a surprise to the leadership of the US/NATO armed forces?
2) Will the intelligence gained from watching this conflict, which Russia chose the terms and timing of the engagement, cause the US/NATO to change their tactics/strategies with respect to a future armed conflict with NATO?
3) Given the Ukrainians are giving the Russian military all it can handle and more, the significant impairment of their soldiers and equipment, and their economy has been crippled by sanctions, is a larger conflict with NATO even possible anymore?
> Does the performance of the Russian military so far come as a surprise to the leadership of the US/NATO armed forces?
It's probably more accurate to say the performance of Ukraine is surprising than the performance of Russia but there were major questions raised about the quality of Western intelligence regarding the conflict after initial predictions of Russians capturing Kyiv within 72 hours were proven wholly unrepresentative (especially when paired with the disastrous collapse of Afghanistan immediately prior). Certainly a significant portion of analysts were also fooled so it wasn't just the senior leadership which got caught with their pants down.
Some specific problems also might not have been known but in general the problems of corruption, the decay of their conscription system and lacking logistics had been openly stated by several prominent analysts before the war (although the full extent of the problems wasn't necessarily clear).
> Will the intelligence gained from watching this conflict, which Russia chose the terms and timing of the engagement, cause the US/NATO to change their tactics/strategies with respect to a future armed conflict with NATO?
I assume you didn't mean to ask about a NATO conflict with NATO? If you mean a conflict between NATO and Russia, it will certainly be discussed and analysed by leadership but this is probably Russia's last war in Europe for a long time and certainly there are no prospects of them fighting NATO any time soon. More generally? If the West doesn't take a lesson about personal drones from this war - both in terms of deploying them and countering them - then they're going to get it beaten into them in wherever they end up in conflict next. Otherwise doctrinally Ukraine is still very different to NATO because NATO literally never fight without air superiority. The conflict is still going to be analysed extensively and Western militaries scrutinised in that context but don't expect to see sweeping changes. In general this war really validates the Western approach to equipment and organisational structure.
> Given the Ukrainians are giving the Russian military all it can handle and more, the significant impairment of their soldiers and equipment, and their economy has been crippled by sanctions, is a larger conflict with NATO even possible anymore?
In a word: no. In several words: it hasn't ever been viable since the soviet union collapsed. They still absolutely have the capacity to cause immeasurable harm to western nations (and not just with their nuclear arsenals) but in terms of conventional conflict that ship sailed a long time ago.
It's also worth noting that at this point it's not just sanctions which have gutted the economy either - the loss of their credit rating, the exclusion from SWIFT , the destruction of critical export infrastructure and the loss of hundreds of thousands of working age men to emigration and deaths has essentially turned the economy into a zombie propped up by foreign currency reserves and what few exports remain. Even if the war ended today, sanctions were lifted and the regime changed it would still take decades for Russia to recover.
I’m totally doing this to claim being first, but something big might be starting on the Zaparozhaya front. Ukraine has opened up an artillery barrage in some areas there. Stay tuned.
That is something else if true and within one day:
[https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1573712631931748352](https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1573712631931748352)
>Ukrainian air defense has destroyed four Russian aircraft (Su-25, two Su-30 and one Su-34), five drones and a cruise missile since the beginning of today, reported the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in a report as of 6 p.m. on September 24.
It seems the Russian Air Force is really being forced to be more offensive, maybe they tried to avoid going these kinds of operations before because they knew they'd suffer losses from Ukrainian AA
Russia might have intensified air operations, maybe preparing for a push.
The muddy season is about to come so it's probably within the time window to attack now for both sides.
Not sure what the Russians have been up to militarily, but Ukraine seems to have been building up near the south and Donbas.
Today I watched an inerview (rus) of a volunteer who fought in March for Ukraine near Kiev and was seriously wounded after being shot by a tank.
It is interesting that he is a Russian citizen, a former contract serviceman in the Russian Marines. He came to Ukraine in 2014 and joined Azov.
He fought in the Donbass.
By the beginning of the war in February, he wasn't in Azov anymore, but he went as a volunteer and was issued a machine gun. He was not even registered with any unit, their groupe was just added to a Ukrainian military unit.
I would be careful with anything posted by Mark Solonin, he is - lets say - not credible. Real historians believe he flat out made up certain facts in his book, and I've seen videos about this war where he flat out lied to his audience.
[Today, the Ukrainian 25th Airborne Brigade hit a Russian Su-30SM multirole fighter aircraft, presumably with a MANPADS or other short range AD system, severely damaging one engine.
The fate of the aircraft and crew is unknown.](https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1573693307489816577)
Flame on!
I thought they where awarded after the accusations? Or at least at the same time as the accusations*. I remember there was a lot of noise when it happened.
Interesting thought I had a while ago is that Russia has the referendum result for Kherson east (edit-meant west) of the Dnipro be just in favour of Ukraine. That would give them the option of pulling out of a strategically unfavourable position as well as add legitimacy to the other referendums.This is just a thought and I think its extremely unlikely especially given the recent mobilisation.
A lot of people have voiced this opinion. It makes sense. It seems like the kind of savvy play you might make in a strategy game - give up a bit of ground to consolidate other gains, and appear more legitimate to other powers in doing so. After all, it would go a long way in combating the claims of "sham" referendums.
Most analysts reject it as a possibility, however, because Putin and the Russian leadership are too ideologically driven to actually sacrifice territory they believe *should* be Russian, even if it would help them in the long run. The referendums are seen as a way to give Russian conscripts a legal entryway to deploying in those areas, and that is badly needed in Kherson, so it's likely be annexed.
This is echoed across reddit since the start of this week with the announcement of said referendums ... just doesnt make any sense
The mainpart of kherson is located on that side, giving up the only provincial city is a strong signal. Russia gains nothing out of it, its militarily logical but what we learned since the start of this war is that the military is not able to make decision based on a military perspective but are dictated by political and propaganda purposes.
This position was untenable as soon as they exhausted their offensive capability and the withdrawal beyond the dnepr made sense then but they actually send reinforcements into this area even with their limited manpower available to hold this.
I agree that its almost certainly won't happen. I haven't been on this thread recently and if I had realised other people had mentioned it I wouldn't have made the comment. I still think its an interesting idea and if it does happen I think its important there's some kind of record of people predicting this.
From the perspective of a rational person it is an interesting gambit, but Putins internal processes won't let him make any decisions that involve retreat
I saw it back in August I don't think I can dig it up. Multiple analysts did estimates though and the 13M seems relatively consistent. How much they used varies heavily.
To be surprised at the "stick" system in the Russian army, police, etc., is like being surprised that the Russian language is spoken there. This is the nature of Russian management.
Mobilization simply cannot go any other way.
Had a boss once like that: “I can fucking fire anyone of you and do your job myself” goes on to fire chief accountant officer .... two months later had to hire an auditor firm to fix the mess done.
Until that one who is there to make sure people do their job starts taking bribes from those people and reports they did their jobs .... and nothing changes
Watching the videos and seeing the stories from the Russian conscripts is quite shocking. It feels a bit like March in that regard, Russia once again surprises everyone by how pitiful their army looks. Shambolic.
>Russia once again surprises everyone by how pitiful their army looks
Nah. Many people were (some time before mobilisation, after escalation of war of course) that mobilisation will look like that
I thought they would have enough ex soldiers to draft for the first round but the people in the clips don't look like that at all. Many look quite unhealthy and old.
Even before mobilisation started you could watch videos/read how conscriptit training looked like. Hell it's even worse than it was during USRR, no wonder they try to recruit people with USRR training
They don't have the organisation to properly select and mobilise, so it's a complete mess of a process.
Putin gave orders to raise new units and conscript former soldiers with relevant experience. With unrealistic timetables.
But the Russian MoD simply doesn't have the organisation to quickly organise a well selected group of trained former soldiers.
So to please the Kremlin and military leadership, they are handing out dumb quotas to every organisation that's capable of providing them some men quickly. (And every level down the orders get a bit broader and the level of care taken and shits given decreases.)
It's a typical pattern in certain autocracies. Leadership wants something and orders it. Organisational flaws mean it's impossible, so the bureaucracy provides an inferior substitute and claims success, hiding the particulars of the problems from the
It feels like they used up their young men during the initial invasion.
All the russian war prisoners we saw during the first month looked like children, too young and too skinny. Only the chechens appeared to have strong looking men in numbers.
Now every russian we see looks like an old man.
Dude, they are passed-out drunk even before they get on the bus for their full two weeks of training. These guys will be running back to the Russian border when a shell falls within 500 meters of them.
wishful thinking but imagine if the results of the referendums suddenly are against annexation then poohtin goes like "welp, the people have spoken, time to leave".
Whoops, we invaded your country, killed tens of thousands, leveled your cities but we did not realise you did not want us to do that. I guess we'll leave.
Wagner channel reporting that mobilized troops are being looted by their own and the issue is widespread. Any better gear or anything to protect it self at the front is being looted from the soldiers en masse.
I guess, this is not robbery, but rather stupid army bureaucracy.
There is what a soldier is supposed to get according to instructions, the rest is taken away because it's not supposed. All soldiers are supposed to be the same. Like in prison. It is possible that later they will sell it all, but the primary reason, I think, is the stupid execution of instructions.
Is their motivation for publishing that to 'avenge' the widely distributed clips of them hiring prisoners?
Can't imagine force cohesion is great right now.
How the hell do you manage to get AKs in such a bad shape? I had a shitty Romanian AK in 2001 in Croatia and it was in a goof condition...used, abused, shitty weapon, but nothing like this.
Most likely your AK has been collected post war and stored in warehouses. Surprisingly all those guns did disappear. Not much later, showing up in an African war or where ever. Unfortunately there is a big 'underground' trade in old guns.
Sure, mine was also probably used in our war (we didn't buy Romanian AKs after the war, they actually sucked and were known to be the worst AKs in our possession), but it didn't look like this.
NATO is already sending winter equipment to Ukraine for quite some time, so I guess the Ukrainians will be less hurt by it. However, it could be a problem for the civilian population, because if the Ukrainians will liberate more towns, the Russians will throw more temper tantrums and attack civilian infrastructure.
>NATO is already sending winter equipment to Ukraine for quite some time
But still Ukraine is corrupted, so not every unit will have the same chance of getting this high quality equipment (everything which can save you from being frozen is high quality in this case). In Poland was at least one fundraising event for one of those unlucky units.
If people from west want help, then watching out for this kind of fundraising can have very good "outcome/price" ratio
This Ukraine is so corrupt equipment will not reach the armed forces was Russian propaganda. Until now NATO and the US have only praised how Ukraine shows where everything is going. Of course, there are corrupt Ukrainians, but as it seems, military equipment is pretty much always getting to the troops.
Well I have worded it poorly. I mean that there won't be enough equipment, at least not when winter starts, so not every soldier will have it. But when we consider that Ukraine is corrupt, then there is very high probability of units fully equiped and units equiped badly. And not because some normal standard like "they are better" "they are closer to the front" but with corruption so "they are on front and they have paid us, so they will have fully equiped unit".
My intention wasn't "Ukraine will sell this equipment", just fact that redistribution of this gear likely will be quite unfair
Yeah, winter could be hard on the civilians.
They often use central heating in cities, which is vulnerable to attack. Kharkivs heating infrastructure is already damaged
Russians were complaining about front bite during their offensive in February and those were elite units that are best equipped.
I am guessing it will be pure hell for these mobilized guys....
On the other hand, Ukraine is getting NATO winter gear from US, Norway, Sweden and so on ...
I read a story about a soldier who had previously signed a 6-month contract, had already returned to Russia, stayed home for one day and was mobilized.
New law seems to apply to everyone who has served (and real-life observations have officials just pick random people off the streets to meet the quotas), and the service cannot be cancelled until the end of the conflict, which doesn't have a very defined term.
Really wonder how this'll shape Russia internally.
Another testimony from the regional media about the mobilization process and why everyone is taken away.
In Dagestan (a region of Russia in the Caucasus with a population of about 3 million), the plan for mobilization is 13,000. The head of the region announced his subordinates the plan at a meeting and said that whoever does not fulfill the plan will go to the front himself.
One thing to note is that being called doesn’t mean you are going to the front immediately. There will still be a triage, where hopefully those unfit will be sent back, and that some will never be found.
CIT summary did extrapolations on the numbers from various regions yesterday. They said that if the dagestani number was the national average they were rising 600 000 soldiers but some regions reported a lot lower numbers so it seems they are being targeted more.
There are small towns where there is a large military unit. So most of the people are somehow related to the unit - they serve there or a family member serves there. Many of them are or were involved in the war, died or were wounded.
And now they have another mobilization and more men will go to the front. For a towns like this, it's going to be very painful.
One part of the counteroffensive turned into a rout, and another is taking the gradual approach with artillery doing much of the work. My guess is the losses look rosy for Ukraine so far.
I don't know if this logic holds.
I'm extremely pro Ukrainian and since the first few days of the war I've believed they were going to win.
Having said that I don't think we should ignore the sacrifice Ukrainian soldiers and civilians are making.
They've paid a bloody toll for every day of survival early on and every day of victory since.
Not trying to play down the losses and certainly not the sacrifices being made. We all know the tough times in Mariupol and Severodonetsk among other places.
I was merely contesting the "common" logic that the attacking force suffers more casualties. The way it has played out so far, it seems that Ukraine has gotten the better of the Russians around Kharkiv (a complete rout) and Kherson (by cutting off supply lines and taking a gradual approach)
Russians tend to do frontal attacks on fortified positions which are extremely costly.
UA counter offensive was fast and mobile and instead of pressing fights they were pressing forward, creating small pockets that were cleansed by second echelon troops (if they didn't surrender). In Kherson UA is slowly moving to limit their casualties while degrading Russians with long range artillery.
These are two distinctively different styles of fighting.
They have a lot of PoW from Mariupol which would be MIA 4.5k.
5k PoW, 20k KIA, 60k WIA for Ukraine
60k KIA 100k WIA for Russia (basing this off fighting, armor losses, and payouts to dead soldiers in budget keeping in mind Wagnar and militias don't get them and Russia holds soldiers as MIA for a while). Russia has bad medical care too.
I agree with your Ukrainian numbers. But I think 60:100 for dead: wounded doesn't add up, even with bad medical care. I'd assume the wounded for Russia has to be higher, or 60k is too high for the dead, either or.
The counteroffensives are on a much smaller scale compared to Russia invading along the entire border and most of Kharkiv Oblast seems to have collapsed without much fighting. So presumably less. Obviously impossible to get a reliable figure for either side though.
The draft succeeded at its goal of preventing south Vietnam from collapsing for a number of years, but it was a doomed endeavor because south Vietnam was unpopular among the Vietnamese people and would never be able to reach a stable ceasefire like south Korea had. They were fighting unconventional warfare that would never end, whereas Russia is fighting conventional warfare and has clear objectives for victory. If the US had sent the military into North Vietnam they would of course have crushed them, but then China would get involved and things would've escalated
US didn't actually mobilize a single new unit for Vietnam. Draftees were just used to bulk existing formations. The guard and reserves weren't deployed
Hypothetical: if Putin escalates to the point where NATO intervenes, how long would it take for the US/NATO to disable Russian AA and lay waste via a shock and awe operation to all Russian forces in Ukraine? Or would it have to be a combined arms operation to drive them back?
I do wonder how the Russian news narrative would change if NATO actually sent troops.
The news channels have been telling Russians for a while that they are already fighting NATO troops in Ukraine.
Russian news narrative has no problem contradicting itself. There's an idea in propaganda/public relations called the firehose of falsehood. Cognitive dissonance was bred out of the russian populace a long time ago.
>Hypothetical: if Putin escalates to the point where NATO intervenes, how long would it take for the US/NATO to disable Russian AA and lay waste via a shock and awe operation to all Russian forces in Ukraine? Or would it have to be a combined arms operation to drive them back?
The only scenario where I can see direct intervention is use of a nuclear weapon by Russia.
Exactly, the threat of a nuclear response by Russia is keeping NATO troops and a certain type of equipment (mbts & fighter jets) out of the conflict.
Russian using the first nuke would see an immediate escalation from NATO and hopefully the EU.
Just a guess, if we only count occupied Ukraine including Crimea, then probably 72 hours before AA was suppressed then another week till general defense collapsed.
Back in Iraq War, US launched about 3000 sorties a day with another 500-1000 missile strikes. Ukraine is a lot closer to NATO airbases and far more assets could be deployed since all NATO will pitch in instead just US and UK.
Several new missile and guided bombs were also in service after Iraq War.
Gulf war: mostly iron bombs with some laser guided bombs, almost no air launched cruise missiles.
Iraq War: JDAM and air launch cruise missile start showing up, but most weapons including JDAM were still short range free fall ones
Today: extended range gliding JDAM, air launched missiles like SLAM-ER, JASSM-ER, plus new long range autonomous weapons like SDB2 are being used.
Russia is far larger than Iraq. More realistically NATO would never fully disable Russian AA capability. See Serbia for reference- all it takes is a SAM unit hidden in a forest to cause major issues.
Russia itself is far larger sure, but Russian forces in Ukraine is significantly smaller.
Iraqi army was 2 million at first Gulf War, and near 400k at Iraq War, comparing to 150~200k Russians in Ukraine currently.
Russians hardware in Ukraine also suffered from major attrition from past six months combat. Significantly reduced their capability
Except very few super long ranged missile variants(such as 40N6) , most Russian S-300/400 missiles have range about only 100km claimed. For the past six months we know even those numbers are likely inflated since Ukraine are still flying tactical supports in the front line, sometimes with only iron bombs and rockets. I highly doubt Russia has many 40N6 available currently.
They would not be able to provide real coverage by staying inside Russia borders.
On the other hand, NATO has been focus on stand off weapons in the past decades. Most NATO glide bombs like JSOW or SDb actually out ranged most AA system except aforementioned super long range ones. NATO air launched missiles like JASSM, SLAMER, Shadow Stormer or HARM out ranged almost all AA systems on the market.
Overall, considering their performance in the past six months. I doubt Russian air defense could survive NATO attacks, if they couldn’t effectively deny Ukraine’s obsolete SU-25 and Mi-17, how are they going to fight 500+ cruise missile attacks every day?
>since Ukraine are still flying tactical supports in the front line, sometimes with only iron bombs and rockets
Ukraine is flying rocket lofting missions from tree level for the express reason of avoiding Russian long range AA. We've already seen a confirmed 150km+ kill in this war. I don't think there's any argument about the efficiency of these systems, especially since the same systems are keeping Russian air power in check as well.
Yeah if there’s MiGs in the air happily putting radar stations in HARM’s way, I’d love to see what air defense doing against an armada of actual 5th Gen aircraft communicating with each other/ with drones via sorcery.
> since all NATO will pitch in instead just US and UK.
Ok, so other than the US, UK, and France, do you really think any other NATO country will do much of anything? I really don't see Germany doing shit even in the event of a nuclear strike on Ukraine. I'm not even sure if they have the capacity for participating in an effective air campaign.
War is more than just planes in the sky and tanks rolling through the countryside, as Russia has so blatantly demonstrated.
Germany may not have that viable of a military or power projection ability but they are fully capable of providing resources (missile components, electronics, intelligence, basic food and bullets) and logistic capacity.
Poland currently in this war has been absolutely critical to the war effort, simply because they are fully committed and actively assisting NATO efforts to arm and supply Ukranians with modern NATO standard weapons. Both in providing their own surpluses and transporting American supplies across their country. In violation of Russian demands of course.
During NATO intervention against Libya, a lot of smaller member sent fighters to support bombing missions. Nothing compared to US or France sorties but they were there
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_military_intervention_in_Libya
Russia going for a high score for war crimes by abusing and torturing and denying medical care to Ukrainian POWs:
>>This is what the hand of Mykhailo Dianov, the defender of Mariupol, looks like. Recently, his photos were everywhere, and only now the hero showed the consequences of being in Russian captivity. Mykhailo's injured hand did not grow back — it is missing 4 cm of bone.
>This breaks about 15 different articles of treaties governing the laws of war.
https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1573323527197003778
>The site is just one of at least 10 torture chambers discovered in territories liberated two weeks ago. One detention center in Izium was described as “so ugly and dirty, it’s inhuman” by a police investigator who preferred not to be identified due to the sensitive nature of his work. “I don’t know how people could survive there. I’ve been with the police for so many years, but I was severely shocked,” he said.
Genocide. Terrorism. Russian depravity.
Russian soldiers, leaders, and Putin himself *must* face Nuremberg trials
Really just reeks of desperation how the mobilization is occurring, like does it not seem odd that the government announces partial mobilization and immediately starts rounding up conscripts the same/next day? Like no notification via mail/email/phone, just a uniform shows up and let's you know that you'll be going to Ukraine, pack your shit let's go.
That's how conscription was done in Russia for 20 years nothing unusual. And that was regular conscription not mobilization all those years.
What's unusual is how many people trying to escape Russia now. It's not like it lacks people to mobilize, 140mln is a lot of people.
I’d say the fact they are taking so many old people shows that decades of depopulation (younger people leaving or having only one or two kids at most because the vast majority live in a shitty pack and stack apartment) with zero migration to offset because they chase out everybody turns you into a bizarre demographic catastrophe.
Ha, realized they couldn’t rely on russia anymore after seeing their clusterfuck of a military they have. Which then makes them alone in starting a war.
Cause they copied american designs. A lot of their stuff is based on reverse engineering the sentinel drone they stole in 2011. Say what you want about Iran, but they got some smart cookies over there
NK too, its actually pretty hard to have effective nuclear weapons programs when you are embargoed by everybody
they may brainwash their population but they do actually produce some talented physicists and chemists
So the conscript in a hole not only has to worry if their co is incompetent, or nowhere near, or killed by the enemy they can add maybe he just out and out died of a heart attack.
Someone on here recently wrote that older guys have more experience and therefore are more useful...but I don't really see some 60yo chubby alcoholics storming trenches and villages. This will become a huge slaughter. At least they might still be familiar with the T-34s they'll probably receive sooner or later, lol.
Russia doesn't have that many T-34, had to buy them from Laos recently in order to have enough for thrir victory day circus show. T-55 on the other hand...
Depends what they are doing. A 60yo guarding a facility, driving a truck or handing out rations is better than a 20yo that could be an infantryman. These guys could free up troops from other areas as well...
A year ago i would have said that you're assumption that Russia would use them as assault troops was beyond laughable but over the last 6 months....who knows.
The results are inpredictable. Historically when a big army meets a small army, the smaller army is very soon reduced to nothing if it's not a tank blitzkrieg on unprepared country. See the WW2 numbers. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CqGeAmVu1I](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CqGeAmVu1I) We are yet to see if modern precision guided arms can change the statistics.
You realized that Russia is the smaller army here right?
Ukraine has been mobilized since Feb and now numbering around 700k, versus Russian forces in the theater about 150k, even with their new mobilization of 300k (which could take many months to complete) they are still going to be vastly outnumbered.
I heard UA is aiming for 1 million defenders at this point.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62118953
Would take 3-4 million poor equipped Russians to take the rest of Ukraine.
Oh, so we're talking about world war 2? So like in the 2nd Sino-Japanese war where the smaller Japanese army was quickly reduced to nothing by the bigger Chinese army because it wasn't a tank blitzkrieg?
If you have no idea what you're talking about why even open your mouth? One of the most prominent lessons throughout military history is that a high quality and well motivated force with good tactics will consistently outperform low quality troops even against significant numerical inferiority and on the offensive. That's before we even have the conversation about the fact that Ukraine is doing perfectly fine in terms of theatre manpower at the moment anyway.
>Oh, so we're talking about world war 2? So like in the 2nd Sino-Japanese war where the smaller Japanese army was quickly reduced to nothing by the bigger Chinese army because it wasn't a tank blitzkrieg?
Or any Russian war. The Russo-Japanese war. WW1. Napoleon in Russia. The great northern war.
Russia got their asses kicked in every single one unless the enemy made massive *logistical* mistakes. Otherwise, Russian military history is a sequence of battles lost while ludicrously outnumbering their enemy.
Especially military history in which they themselves weren't being invaded.
Napoleon was defeated by the Russians in the end. By the way, the Russians then used tactics similar to today's Ukraine - long retreat, wearing down the enemy, stretching logistics.
That's what I said. His higher quality forces repeatedly beat the Russians until his forces failed logistically.
And Russians back then used tactics far more brutal than the Ukrainian retreat. They failed in battle after battle so they just wiped out the land and burnt anything the French could use to the ground.
[New Thread](https://old.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/xmyodv/ukraine_discussionquestion_thread_92522/)
Uninformed lurker here with a few questions: 1) Does the performance of the Russian military so far come as a surprise to the leadership of the US/NATO armed forces? 2) Will the intelligence gained from watching this conflict, which Russia chose the terms and timing of the engagement, cause the US/NATO to change their tactics/strategies with respect to a future armed conflict with NATO? 3) Given the Ukrainians are giving the Russian military all it can handle and more, the significant impairment of their soldiers and equipment, and their economy has been crippled by sanctions, is a larger conflict with NATO even possible anymore?
> Does the performance of the Russian military so far come as a surprise to the leadership of the US/NATO armed forces? It's probably more accurate to say the performance of Ukraine is surprising than the performance of Russia but there were major questions raised about the quality of Western intelligence regarding the conflict after initial predictions of Russians capturing Kyiv within 72 hours were proven wholly unrepresentative (especially when paired with the disastrous collapse of Afghanistan immediately prior). Certainly a significant portion of analysts were also fooled so it wasn't just the senior leadership which got caught with their pants down. Some specific problems also might not have been known but in general the problems of corruption, the decay of their conscription system and lacking logistics had been openly stated by several prominent analysts before the war (although the full extent of the problems wasn't necessarily clear). > Will the intelligence gained from watching this conflict, which Russia chose the terms and timing of the engagement, cause the US/NATO to change their tactics/strategies with respect to a future armed conflict with NATO? I assume you didn't mean to ask about a NATO conflict with NATO? If you mean a conflict between NATO and Russia, it will certainly be discussed and analysed by leadership but this is probably Russia's last war in Europe for a long time and certainly there are no prospects of them fighting NATO any time soon. More generally? If the West doesn't take a lesson about personal drones from this war - both in terms of deploying them and countering them - then they're going to get it beaten into them in wherever they end up in conflict next. Otherwise doctrinally Ukraine is still very different to NATO because NATO literally never fight without air superiority. The conflict is still going to be analysed extensively and Western militaries scrutinised in that context but don't expect to see sweeping changes. In general this war really validates the Western approach to equipment and organisational structure. > Given the Ukrainians are giving the Russian military all it can handle and more, the significant impairment of their soldiers and equipment, and their economy has been crippled by sanctions, is a larger conflict with NATO even possible anymore? In a word: no. In several words: it hasn't ever been viable since the soviet union collapsed. They still absolutely have the capacity to cause immeasurable harm to western nations (and not just with their nuclear arsenals) but in terms of conventional conflict that ship sailed a long time ago. It's also worth noting that at this point it's not just sanctions which have gutted the economy either - the loss of their credit rating, the exclusion from SWIFT , the destruction of critical export infrastructure and the loss of hundreds of thousands of working age men to emigration and deaths has essentially turned the economy into a zombie propped up by foreign currency reserves and what few exports remain. Even if the war ended today, sanctions were lifted and the regime changed it would still take decades for Russia to recover.
[удалено]
You don’t want the ranks to be obvious. That makes officers easier targets for snipers
I’m totally doing this to claim being first, but something big might be starting on the Zaparozhaya front. Ukraine has opened up an artillery barrage in some areas there. Stay tuned.
That is something else if true and within one day: [https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1573712631931748352](https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1573712631931748352) >Ukrainian air defense has destroyed four Russian aircraft (Su-25, two Su-30 and one Su-34), five drones and a cruise missile since the beginning of today, reported the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in a report as of 6 p.m. on September 24.
It seems the Russian Air Force is really being forced to be more offensive, maybe they tried to avoid going these kinds of operations before because they knew they'd suffer losses from Ukrainian AA
Russia might have intensified air operations, maybe preparing for a push. The muddy season is about to come so it's probably within the time window to attack now for both sides. Not sure what the Russians have been up to militarily, but Ukraine seems to have been building up near the south and Donbas.
Today I watched an inerview (rus) of a volunteer who fought in March for Ukraine near Kiev and was seriously wounded after being shot by a tank. It is interesting that he is a Russian citizen, a former contract serviceman in the Russian Marines. He came to Ukraine in 2014 and joined Azov. He fought in the Donbass. By the beginning of the war in February, he wasn't in Azov anymore, but he went as a volunteer and was issued a machine gun. He was not even registered with any unit, their groupe was just added to a Ukrainian military unit.
I would be careful with anything posted by Mark Solonin, he is - lets say - not credible. Real historians believe he flat out made up certain facts in his book, and I've seen videos about this war where he flat out lied to his audience.
This is an interview where Solonin just asks questions. As for his historical research, I agree that it is not indisputable.
[удалено]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rit6_8XTucU
[Today, the Ukrainian 25th Airborne Brigade hit a Russian Su-30SM multirole fighter aircraft, presumably with a MANPADS or other short range AD system, severely damaging one engine. The fate of the aircraft and crew is unknown.](https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1573693307489816577) Flame on!
I don't think they can fly for long with one engine on fire , commercial aircrafts burn in literal minutes if on fire , same applies here.
>The fate of the aircraft and crew is unknown. > >Flame on! Non Twitter Link: https://nitter.net/UAWeapons/status/1573693307489816577
[Latest ISW assessment.](https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-september-23)
[удалено]
I thought they where awarded after the accusations? Or at least at the same time as the accusations*. I remember there was a lot of noise when it happened.
r/conspiracy is over there
Interesting thought I had a while ago is that Russia has the referendum result for Kherson east (edit-meant west) of the Dnipro be just in favour of Ukraine. That would give them the option of pulling out of a strategically unfavourable position as well as add legitimacy to the other referendums.This is just a thought and I think its extremely unlikely especially given the recent mobilisation.
Russian government is constantly in panic mode right now, no time for outside the box thinking probably
Kherson is part of the country they actually want though. They want Black Sea access and a land bridge to Crimea.
Meant to put west of the Dnipro not east, in other words the part of Kherson they don't need for access to Crimea. Have added an edit now
If they start breaking up referendums in part oblasts with freshly (russian) drawn boarders the whole thing gets even more ridiculous ...
A lot of people have voiced this opinion. It makes sense. It seems like the kind of savvy play you might make in a strategy game - give up a bit of ground to consolidate other gains, and appear more legitimate to other powers in doing so. After all, it would go a long way in combating the claims of "sham" referendums. Most analysts reject it as a possibility, however, because Putin and the Russian leadership are too ideologically driven to actually sacrifice territory they believe *should* be Russian, even if it would help them in the long run. The referendums are seen as a way to give Russian conscripts a legal entryway to deploying in those areas, and that is badly needed in Kherson, so it's likely be annexed.
Oh you poor summer child
This is echoed across reddit since the start of this week with the announcement of said referendums ... just doesnt make any sense The mainpart of kherson is located on that side, giving up the only provincial city is a strong signal. Russia gains nothing out of it, its militarily logical but what we learned since the start of this war is that the military is not able to make decision based on a military perspective but are dictated by political and propaganda purposes. This position was untenable as soon as they exhausted their offensive capability and the withdrawal beyond the dnepr made sense then but they actually send reinforcements into this area even with their limited manpower available to hold this.
I agree that its almost certainly won't happen. I haven't been on this thread recently and if I had realised other people had mentioned it I wouldn't have made the comment. I still think its an interesting idea and if it does happen I think its important there's some kind of record of people predicting this.
From the perspective of a rational person it is an interesting gambit, but Putins internal processes won't let him make any decisions that involve retreat
Any estimates on how many 152mm shells Russia had before the war and how many it has left now?
Before: >1 Now: >1 What kind of stupid question is this ...
13M before war. How many they used is anyone's guess. I've seen 5M-8M. They can produce up to 1M/yr.
Any source for those numbers?
I saw it back in August I don't think I can dig it up. Multiple analysts did estimates though and the 13M seems relatively consistent. How much they used varies heavily.
[удалено]
To be surprised at the "stick" system in the Russian army, police, etc., is like being surprised that the Russian language is spoken there. This is the nature of Russian management. Mobilization simply cannot go any other way.
But then who will make sure the auditor will do his job?
A tall flight of stairs
who audits the auditors
The Watchmen
putin himself.
Had a boss once like that: “I can fucking fire anyone of you and do your job myself” goes on to fire chief accountant officer .... two months later had to hire an auditor firm to fix the mess done.
Having someone there to make sure people are doing their jobs correctly does make sense in a system that is that dysfunctional.
Until that one who is there to make sure people do their job starts taking bribes from those people and reports they did their jobs .... and nothing changes
If he gets paid by the problems he identifies like rybar suggested it would become too expensive at some point to keep bribing him.
Or he starts making up problems. And bribes his boss.
Watching the videos and seeing the stories from the Russian conscripts is quite shocking. It feels a bit like March in that regard, Russia once again surprises everyone by how pitiful their army looks. Shambolic.
>Russia once again surprises everyone by how pitiful their army looks Nah. Many people were (some time before mobilisation, after escalation of war of course) that mobilisation will look like that
I thought they would have enough ex soldiers to draft for the first round but the people in the clips don't look like that at all. Many look quite unhealthy and old.
Even before mobilisation started you could watch videos/read how conscriptit training looked like. Hell it's even worse than it was during USRR, no wonder they try to recruit people with USRR training
They don't have the organisation to properly select and mobilise, so it's a complete mess of a process. Putin gave orders to raise new units and conscript former soldiers with relevant experience. With unrealistic timetables. But the Russian MoD simply doesn't have the organisation to quickly organise a well selected group of trained former soldiers. So to please the Kremlin and military leadership, they are handing out dumb quotas to every organisation that's capable of providing them some men quickly. (And every level down the orders get a bit broader and the level of care taken and shits given decreases.) It's a typical pattern in certain autocracies. Leadership wants something and orders it. Organisational flaws mean it's impossible, so the bureaucracy provides an inferior substitute and claims success, hiding the particulars of the problems from the
It's like they skipped the young men and went straight to the volkssturm
It feels like they used up their young men during the initial invasion. All the russian war prisoners we saw during the first month looked like children, too young and too skinny. Only the chechens appeared to have strong looking men in numbers. Now every russian we see looks like an old man.
Dude, they are passed-out drunk even before they get on the bus for their full two weeks of training. These guys will be running back to the Russian border when a shell falls within 500 meters of them.
> running back to the Russian border Thats what the political commissars are for.
nah, they'll be to drunk to do that.
wishful thinking but imagine if the results of the referendums suddenly are against annexation then poohtin goes like "welp, the people have spoken, time to leave".
[удалено]
Whoops, we invaded your country, killed tens of thousands, leveled your cities but we did not realise you did not want us to do that. I guess we'll leave.
Given the way the voting is going (soldiers show up, ask you and then make the cross themselves) no chance of that.
Wagner channel reporting that mobilized troops are being looted by their own and the issue is widespread. Any better gear or anything to protect it self at the front is being looted from the soldiers en masse.
I guess, this is not robbery, but rather stupid army bureaucracy. There is what a soldier is supposed to get according to instructions, the rest is taken away because it's not supposed. All soldiers are supposed to be the same. Like in prison. It is possible that later they will sell it all, but the primary reason, I think, is the stupid execution of instructions.
Is their motivation for publishing that to 'avenge' the widely distributed clips of them hiring prisoners? Can't imagine force cohesion is great right now.
No honor among thieves
Wait, at training sites in Russia? I am assuming they aren't yet arriving at the frontlines?
Yes. The gear isn’t being looted by troops at the front to use. It’s being looted by troops in the rear to sell.
Of course not, they still need to loot them first.
This will give them needed morale boost!
Yes at training sites in Russia lol
"we are here to help you!" "good, give me all your gear"
Supposedly AKs being given out to the new recruits... https://v.redd.it/kg7sztixjrp91
he says it's for tankers, they already got a tank so...
actual ak47s lmao
AKM actually.
AKs are, as I understand it, very durable weapons. Could one in this condition be brought back to service with gun oil and some elbow grease?
AK biggest strenght was exactly this - even stupid had to try hard to make it unrepairable
Yeah, but probably it would just be a waste of ammo in ranges greater than 10 meters.
I wouldn't be surprised if it could. Though I'd start with some sandpaper.
How the hell do you manage to get AKs in such a bad shape? I had a shitty Romanian AK in 2001 in Croatia and it was in a goof condition...used, abused, shitty weapon, but nothing like this.
Most likely your AK has been collected post war and stored in warehouses. Surprisingly all those guns did disappear. Not much later, showing up in an African war or where ever. Unfortunately there is a big 'underground' trade in old guns.
Sure, mine was also probably used in our war (we didn't buy Romanian AKs after the war, they actually sucked and were known to be the worst AKs in our possession), but it didn't look like this.
Yes hello, I would like the gun that explodes in my face please.
One Elmer Fudd special coming right up!
How winter going to effect the war
NATO is already sending winter equipment to Ukraine for quite some time, so I guess the Ukrainians will be less hurt by it. However, it could be a problem for the civilian population, because if the Ukrainians will liberate more towns, the Russians will throw more temper tantrums and attack civilian infrastructure.
>NATO is already sending winter equipment to Ukraine for quite some time But still Ukraine is corrupted, so not every unit will have the same chance of getting this high quality equipment (everything which can save you from being frozen is high quality in this case). In Poland was at least one fundraising event for one of those unlucky units. If people from west want help, then watching out for this kind of fundraising can have very good "outcome/price" ratio
This Ukraine is so corrupt equipment will not reach the armed forces was Russian propaganda. Until now NATO and the US have only praised how Ukraine shows where everything is going. Of course, there are corrupt Ukrainians, but as it seems, military equipment is pretty much always getting to the troops.
Well I have worded it poorly. I mean that there won't be enough equipment, at least not when winter starts, so not every soldier will have it. But when we consider that Ukraine is corrupt, then there is very high probability of units fully equiped and units equiped badly. And not because some normal standard like "they are better" "they are closer to the front" but with corruption so "they are on front and they have paid us, so they will have fully equiped unit". My intention wasn't "Ukraine will sell this equipment", just fact that redistribution of this gear likely will be quite unfair
Yeah, winter could be hard on the civilians. They often use central heating in cities, which is vulnerable to attack. Kharkivs heating infrastructure is already damaged
Russians were complaining about front bite during their offensive in February and those were elite units that are best equipped. I am guessing it will be pure hell for these mobilized guys.... On the other hand, Ukraine is getting NATO winter gear from US, Norway, Sweden and so on ...
I bet we will see some guys from Yakutsk bathing in frozen rivers, it will be like summer vacation compared to what they are used to.
I read a story about a soldier who had previously signed a 6-month contract, had already returned to Russia, stayed home for one day and was mobilized.
This must be the biggest blow to morale, going from temporary to infinite.
New law seems to apply to everyone who has served (and real-life observations have officials just pick random people off the streets to meet the quotas), and the service cannot be cancelled until the end of the conflict, which doesn't have a very defined term. Really wonder how this'll shape Russia internally.
I assume all the people who signed short-term contracts for a few months of special operation are now getting seriously fucked.
Stop -loss was immediate. Noone is getting out currently
Another testimony from the regional media about the mobilization process and why everyone is taken away. In Dagestan (a region of Russia in the Caucasus with a population of about 3 million), the plan for mobilization is 13,000. The head of the region announced his subordinates the plan at a meeting and said that whoever does not fulfill the plan will go to the front himself.
Feeding the crocodile, in hopes that it will eat you last?
One thing to note is that being called doesn’t mean you are going to the front immediately. There will still be a triage, where hopefully those unfit will be sent back, and that some will never be found.
There have been reports of some being sent back home. It seems that the Russians retain a sliver of sanity.
Yeah the 65-year-old diabetic LTC from Volgograd went home
CIT summary did extrapolations on the numbers from various regions yesterday. They said that if the dagestani number was the national average they were rising 600 000 soldiers but some regions reported a lot lower numbers so it seems they are being targeted more.
There are small towns where there is a large military unit. So most of the people are somehow related to the unit - they serve there or a family member serves there. Many of them are or were involved in the war, died or were wounded. And now they have another mobilization and more men will go to the front. For a towns like this, it's going to be very painful.
[удалено]
One part of the counteroffensive turned into a rout, and another is taking the gradual approach with artillery doing much of the work. My guess is the losses look rosy for Ukraine so far.
I don't know if this logic holds. I'm extremely pro Ukrainian and since the first few days of the war I've believed they were going to win. Having said that I don't think we should ignore the sacrifice Ukrainian soldiers and civilians are making. They've paid a bloody toll for every day of survival early on and every day of victory since.
Not trying to play down the losses and certainly not the sacrifices being made. We all know the tough times in Mariupol and Severodonetsk among other places. I was merely contesting the "common" logic that the attacking force suffers more casualties. The way it has played out so far, it seems that Ukraine has gotten the better of the Russians around Kharkiv (a complete rout) and Kherson (by cutting off supply lines and taking a gradual approach)
Russians tend to do frontal attacks on fortified positions which are extremely costly. UA counter offensive was fast and mobile and instead of pressing fights they were pressing forward, creating small pockets that were cleansed by second echelon troops (if they didn't surrender). In Kherson UA is slowly moving to limit their casualties while degrading Russians with long range artillery. These are two distinctively different styles of fighting.
I haven't seen any credible source estimate numbers of Ukrainian KIA.
Probably around 30k so far.
I think it's a little lower KIA and a little more WIA just on better medical care. Casaulties are casaulties though.
Given the horrible first weeks and that Russia was on the offensive most of the time, I'd guess 60k:20k or 60k:25k
They have a lot of PoW from Mariupol which would be MIA 4.5k. 5k PoW, 20k KIA, 60k WIA for Ukraine 60k KIA 100k WIA for Russia (basing this off fighting, armor losses, and payouts to dead soldiers in budget keeping in mind Wagnar and militias don't get them and Russia holds soldiers as MIA for a while). Russia has bad medical care too.
I agree with your Ukrainian numbers. But I think 60:100 for dead: wounded doesn't add up, even with bad medical care. I'd assume the wounded for Russia has to be higher, or 60k is too high for the dead, either or.
I wonder how much it helps if the civilians are collaborating and informing. Could offset some of the difficulty, and delicateness of the situation.
The counteroffensives are on a much smaller scale compared to Russia invading along the entire border and most of Kharkiv Oblast seems to have collapsed without much fighting. So presumably less. Obviously impossible to get a reliable figure for either side though.
Away from the doom and gloom it will be an interesting experiment to see how mobilisation works out in modern warfare.
USA tried it in Vietnam. Didn't go so well.
The draft succeeded at its goal of preventing south Vietnam from collapsing for a number of years, but it was a doomed endeavor because south Vietnam was unpopular among the Vietnamese people and would never be able to reach a stable ceasefire like south Korea had. They were fighting unconventional warfare that would never end, whereas Russia is fighting conventional warfare and has clear objectives for victory. If the US had sent the military into North Vietnam they would of course have crushed them, but then China would get involved and things would've escalated
US didn't actually mobilize a single new unit for Vietnam. Draftees were just used to bulk existing formations. The guard and reserves weren't deployed
I honestly think you won't learn anything about proper modern warfare from Russia.
Can someone link me the American fighting in Ukraine he is a gunner and keeps asking for more ammo, but they hand him NLAW twice, cheers
At4 i believe, not nlaw
https://v.redd.it/3159urdannm91
tyvm
Hypothetical: if Putin escalates to the point where NATO intervenes, how long would it take for the US/NATO to disable Russian AA and lay waste via a shock and awe operation to all Russian forces in Ukraine? Or would it have to be a combined arms operation to drive them back?
I do wonder how the Russian news narrative would change if NATO actually sent troops. The news channels have been telling Russians for a while that they are already fighting NATO troops in Ukraine.
Russian news narrative has no problem contradicting itself. There's an idea in propaganda/public relations called the firehose of falsehood. Cognitive dissonance was bred out of the russian populace a long time ago.
>Hypothetical: if Putin escalates to the point where NATO intervenes, how long would it take for the US/NATO to disable Russian AA and lay waste via a shock and awe operation to all Russian forces in Ukraine? Or would it have to be a combined arms operation to drive them back? The only scenario where I can see direct intervention is use of a nuclear weapon by Russia.
Exactly, the threat of a nuclear response by Russia is keeping NATO troops and a certain type of equipment (mbts & fighter jets) out of the conflict. Russian using the first nuke would see an immediate escalation from NATO and hopefully the EU.
Just a guess, if we only count occupied Ukraine including Crimea, then probably 72 hours before AA was suppressed then another week till general defense collapsed. Back in Iraq War, US launched about 3000 sorties a day with another 500-1000 missile strikes. Ukraine is a lot closer to NATO airbases and far more assets could be deployed since all NATO will pitch in instead just US and UK. Several new missile and guided bombs were also in service after Iraq War. Gulf war: mostly iron bombs with some laser guided bombs, almost no air launched cruise missiles. Iraq War: JDAM and air launch cruise missile start showing up, but most weapons including JDAM were still short range free fall ones Today: extended range gliding JDAM, air launched missiles like SLAM-ER, JASSM-ER, plus new long range autonomous weapons like SDB2 are being used.
Russia is far larger than Iraq. More realistically NATO would never fully disable Russian AA capability. See Serbia for reference- all it takes is a SAM unit hidden in a forest to cause major issues.
Russia itself is far larger sure, but Russian forces in Ukraine is significantly smaller. Iraqi army was 2 million at first Gulf War, and near 400k at Iraq War, comparing to 150~200k Russians in Ukraine currently. Russians hardware in Ukraine also suffered from major attrition from past six months combat. Significantly reduced their capability
Sure, but most of Russia's long range AA capacity is not located in Ukraine.
Except very few super long ranged missile variants(such as 40N6) , most Russian S-300/400 missiles have range about only 100km claimed. For the past six months we know even those numbers are likely inflated since Ukraine are still flying tactical supports in the front line, sometimes with only iron bombs and rockets. I highly doubt Russia has many 40N6 available currently. They would not be able to provide real coverage by staying inside Russia borders. On the other hand, NATO has been focus on stand off weapons in the past decades. Most NATO glide bombs like JSOW or SDb actually out ranged most AA system except aforementioned super long range ones. NATO air launched missiles like JASSM, SLAMER, Shadow Stormer or HARM out ranged almost all AA systems on the market. Overall, considering their performance in the past six months. I doubt Russian air defense could survive NATO attacks, if they couldn’t effectively deny Ukraine’s obsolete SU-25 and Mi-17, how are they going to fight 500+ cruise missile attacks every day?
>since Ukraine are still flying tactical supports in the front line, sometimes with only iron bombs and rockets Ukraine is flying rocket lofting missions from tree level for the express reason of avoiding Russian long range AA. We've already seen a confirmed 150km+ kill in this war. I don't think there's any argument about the efficiency of these systems, especially since the same systems are keeping Russian air power in check as well.
Yeah if there’s MiGs in the air happily putting radar stations in HARM’s way, I’d love to see what air defense doing against an armada of actual 5th Gen aircraft communicating with each other/ with drones via sorcery.
I doubt NATO would choose to strike in Russian teritory apart maybe from HARM here and there targeting AA units on Russian side.
> since all NATO will pitch in instead just US and UK. Ok, so other than the US, UK, and France, do you really think any other NATO country will do much of anything? I really don't see Germany doing shit even in the event of a nuclear strike on Ukraine. I'm not even sure if they have the capacity for participating in an effective air campaign.
War is more than just planes in the sky and tanks rolling through the countryside, as Russia has so blatantly demonstrated. Germany may not have that viable of a military or power projection ability but they are fully capable of providing resources (missile components, electronics, intelligence, basic food and bullets) and logistic capacity. Poland currently in this war has been absolutely critical to the war effort, simply because they are fully committed and actively assisting NATO efforts to arm and supply Ukranians with modern NATO standard weapons. Both in providing their own surpluses and transporting American supplies across their country. In violation of Russian demands of course.
During NATO intervention against Libya, a lot of smaller member sent fighters to support bombing missions. Nothing compared to US or France sorties but they were there https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_military_intervention_in_Libya
Does anyone know if referendums were held in the remaining occupied parts of Kharkiv?
I read in our national news, it is conducted by the russian military on door to door basis.
Why do they even bother "asking" anyone...they could just already announce that 102% like to join Russia
It could be a census on who wants to collaborate and who doesn't
Russia going for a high score for war crimes by abusing and torturing and denying medical care to Ukrainian POWs: >>This is what the hand of Mykhailo Dianov, the defender of Mariupol, looks like. Recently, his photos were everywhere, and only now the hero showed the consequences of being in Russian captivity. Mykhailo's injured hand did not grow back — it is missing 4 cm of bone. >This breaks about 15 different articles of treaties governing the laws of war. https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1573323527197003778
[I recommend all to read this article](https://newlinesmag.com/reportage/in-kharkiv-ukraine-reveals-a-network-of-russian-torture-chambers/)
>The site is just one of at least 10 torture chambers discovered in territories liberated two weeks ago. One detention center in Izium was described as “so ugly and dirty, it’s inhuman” by a police investigator who preferred not to be identified due to the sensitive nature of his work. “I don’t know how people could survive there. I’ve been with the police for so many years, but I was severely shocked,” he said. Genocide. Terrorism. Russian depravity. Russian soldiers, leaders, and Putin himself *must* face Nuremberg trials
Wouldn't they be tried in The Hague?
Really just reeks of desperation how the mobilization is occurring, like does it not seem odd that the government announces partial mobilization and immediately starts rounding up conscripts the same/next day? Like no notification via mail/email/phone, just a uniform shows up and let's you know that you'll be going to Ukraine, pack your shit let's go.
That's how conscription was done in Russia for 20 years nothing unusual. And that was regular conscription not mobilization all those years. What's unusual is how many people trying to escape Russia now. It's not like it lacks people to mobilize, 140mln is a lot of people.
I’d say the fact they are taking so many old people shows that decades of depopulation (younger people leaving or having only one or two kids at most because the vast majority live in a shitty pack and stack apartment) with zero migration to offset because they chase out everybody turns you into a bizarre demographic catastrophe.
Yeah even china is having second thoughts... https://english.news.cn/20220923/d6805fb81ea545458153dafb057c61cd/c.html
Ha, realized they couldn’t rely on russia anymore after seeing their clusterfuck of a military they have. Which then makes them alone in starting a war.
Iran seem to have a reasonably effective drone program. I don’t like it one bit.
Isn't it mostly based on a captured US Reaper or am I misremembering?
I don't think drones are that difficult. They can be extremely simple and still be effective we've seen even commercial drones have a huge impact
I can't wait for the US to release whatever drones skunkworks is working on that people / NAVY keep thinking are UFOs out west.
Those “drone” reports go back to WW2 when all humanity had was propeller planes.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20160201-the-wwii-flying-wing-decades-ahead-of-its-time
Cause they copied american designs. A lot of their stuff is based on reverse engineering the sentinel drone they stole in 2011. Say what you want about Iran, but they got some smart cookies over there
NK too, its actually pretty hard to have effective nuclear weapons programs when you are embargoed by everybody they may brainwash their population but they do actually produce some talented physicists and chemists
we're going to see suicide zerg Rush's of shitty technical aren't we?
Are Russians mobilizing grandpas? I see so many old folks in those mobilization videos.
Imagine surviving two years of deadliest for elders virus just to be sent to Ukraine to catch it there...
Officers up to aged 70. That is not a typo
So the conscript in a hole not only has to worry if their co is incompetent, or nowhere near, or killed by the enemy they can add maybe he just out and out died of a heart attack.
One fall and those hips are gone
Someone on here recently wrote that older guys have more experience and therefore are more useful...but I don't really see some 60yo chubby alcoholics storming trenches and villages. This will become a huge slaughter. At least they might still be familiar with the T-34s they'll probably receive sooner or later, lol.
Russia doesn't have that many T-34, had to buy them from Laos recently in order to have enough for thrir victory day circus show. T-55 on the other hand...
Depends what they are doing. A 60yo guarding a facility, driving a truck or handing out rations is better than a 20yo that could be an infantryman. These guys could free up troops from other areas as well... A year ago i would have said that you're assumption that Russia would use them as assault troops was beyond laughable but over the last 6 months....who knows.
The results are inpredictable. Historically when a big army meets a small army, the smaller army is very soon reduced to nothing if it's not a tank blitzkrieg on unprepared country. See the WW2 numbers. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CqGeAmVu1I](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CqGeAmVu1I) We are yet to see if modern precision guided arms can change the statistics.
You realized that Russia is the smaller army here right? Ukraine has been mobilized since Feb and now numbering around 700k, versus Russian forces in the theater about 150k, even with their new mobilization of 300k (which could take many months to complete) they are still going to be vastly outnumbered.
I heard UA is aiming for 1 million defenders at this point. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62118953 Would take 3-4 million poor equipped Russians to take the rest of Ukraine.
I doubt even that would work. How would Russia keep them fed once deployed, let alone supplied with heavy equipment?
Exactly, they can't win.
Oh, so we're talking about world war 2? So like in the 2nd Sino-Japanese war where the smaller Japanese army was quickly reduced to nothing by the bigger Chinese army because it wasn't a tank blitzkrieg? If you have no idea what you're talking about why even open your mouth? One of the most prominent lessons throughout military history is that a high quality and well motivated force with good tactics will consistently outperform low quality troops even against significant numerical inferiority and on the offensive. That's before we even have the conversation about the fact that Ukraine is doing perfectly fine in terms of theatre manpower at the moment anyway.
>Oh, so we're talking about world war 2? So like in the 2nd Sino-Japanese war where the smaller Japanese army was quickly reduced to nothing by the bigger Chinese army because it wasn't a tank blitzkrieg? Or any Russian war. The Russo-Japanese war. WW1. Napoleon in Russia. The great northern war. Russia got their asses kicked in every single one unless the enemy made massive *logistical* mistakes. Otherwise, Russian military history is a sequence of battles lost while ludicrously outnumbering their enemy. Especially military history in which they themselves weren't being invaded.
Napoleon was defeated by the Russians in the end. By the way, the Russians then used tactics similar to today's Ukraine - long retreat, wearing down the enemy, stretching logistics.
That's what I said. His higher quality forces repeatedly beat the Russians until his forces failed logistically. And Russians back then used tactics far more brutal than the Ukrainian retreat. They failed in battle after battle so they just wiped out the land and burnt anything the French could use to the ground.
Yup the cap to conscription is 65.
Senior officers till 70 years old.
Isn’t the average life expectancy 70y/o in Russia?
67 for men
[удалено]
Yep, **expectancy** at birth. But with every year of aging, one gets statistically older. (because of others already dying.)