War Invasion of Ukraine News Megathread - Thread is only for articles and discussion of articles, general discussion thread is still in Happenings.

Status
Not open for further replies.
President Joe Biden on Tuesday said that the United States will impose sanctions “far beyond” the ones that the United States imposed in 2014 following the annexation of the Crimean peninsula.

“This is the beginning of a Russian invasion of Ukraine,” Biden said in a White House speech, signaling a shift in his administration’s position. “We will continue to escalate sanctions if Russia escalates,” he added.

Russian elites and their family members will also soon face sanctions, Biden said, adding that “Russia will pay an even steeper price” if Moscow decides to push forward into Ukraine. Two Russian banks and Russian sovereign debt will also be sanctioned, he said.

Also in his speech, Biden said he would send more U.S. troops to the Baltic states as a defensive measure to strengthen NATO’s position in the area.

Russia shares a border with Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.

A day earlier, Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered troops to go into the separatist Donetsk and Lugansk regions in eastern Ukraine after a lengthy speech in which he recognized the two regions’ independence.

Western powers decried the move and began to slap sanctions on certain Russian individuals, while Germany announced it would halt plans to go ahead with the Russia-to-Germany Nord Stream 2 pipeline.

At home, Biden is facing bipartisan pressure to take more extensive actions against Russia following Putin’s decision. However, a recent poll showed that a majority of Americans believe that sending troops to Ukraine is a “bad idea,” and a slim minority believes it’s a good one.

All 27 European Union countries unanimously agreed on an initial list of sanctions targeting Russian authorities, said French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian, and EU foreign affairs head Josep Borell claimed the package “will hurt Russia … a lot.”

Earlier Tuesday, Borell asserted that Russian troops have already entered the Donbas region, which comprises Donetsk and Lugansk, which are under the control of pro-Russia groups since 2014.

And on Tuesday, the Russian Parliament approved a Putin-back plan to use military force outside of Russia’s borders as Putin further said that Russia confirmed it would recognize the expanded borders of Lugansk and Donetsk.

“We recognized the states,” the Russian president said. “That means we recognized all of their fundamental documents, including the constitution, where it is written that their [borders] are the territories at the time the two regions were part of Ukraine.”

Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, Putin said that Ukraine is “not interested in peaceful solutions” and that “every day, they are amassing troops in the Donbas.”

Meanwhile, Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky on Tuesday morning again downplayed the prospect of a Russian invasion and proclaimed: “There will be no war.”

“There will not be an all-out war against Ukraine, and there will not be a broad escalation from Russia. If there is, then we will put Ukraine on a war footing,” he said in a televised address.

The White House began to signal that they would shift their own position on whether it’s the start of an invasion.

“We think this is, yes, the beginning of an invasion, Russia’s latest invasion into Ukraine,” said Jon Finer, the White House deputy national security adviser in public remarks. “An invasion is an invasion and that is what is underway.”

For weeks, Western governments have been claiming Moscow would invade its neighbor after Russia gathered some 150,000 troops along the countries’ borders. They alleged that the Kremlin would attempt to come up with a pretext to attack, while some officials on Monday said Putin’s speech recognizing the two regions was just that.

But Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin told reporters Tuesday that Russia’s “latest invasion” of Ukraine is threatening stability in the region, but he asserted that Putin can “still avoid a full blown, tragic war of choice.”

Article
 
Not only is the stinger not being produced anymore, the US Army wants nothing to do with it. Their Stryker-based air defense platform* had a design requirement that the turret system be capable of integrating a missile system that isn't stinger in the future. They want very badly to move all the Avengers back to NG units. They only remembered about the M6 Linebacker after a pants-shitting session watching the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict.

*It's taking real effort to not long post about how the LAV-AD existed 20 years ago. And the Army expecting headpats for developing and fielding their version in only four years. And the Marines only building 17 LAV-ADs. And not building a similar ACV variant.

That was actually news to me. I thought the stinger was still in production till I heard Perun say it isn't being produced anymore. It makes me wonder if they want to phase out the stinger then what will replace it?
 
That was actually news to me. I thought the stinger was still in production till I heard Perun say it isn't being produced anymore. It makes me wonder if they want to phase out the stinger then what will replace it?

That was the original plan, a lot of 80's-90s tech is on the way out on the usual 30/40 year cycle of military tech with moving warfare requirements learned over the last 20 years. UK's phasing out Starstreak so has sent all that out. A whole heap of the electronic components for the Stinger simply aren't made any more (It being a design first drafted in 1967) so there's a bit of head scratching going on with how to replace those guts considering they probably stopped making replacements for them around 2003.
 
A yes the time honored means of secure victory of "just letting them leave so you can count it as a win already".
Russians managed to turn a modern Thermopylae into a modern Dunkirk while throwing wounded LPDR soldiers out of hospital beds to make room for Azov Batt members. Also Russia is winning.
 
Plus, Ukraine is forced to fight Russian ground forces head on - this is not how NATO would fight them except in the initial stage, slowing down the initial assault. The way that NATO, and most NATO partners, would seek to defeat the Russians is by first eliminating their Ground Based Air Defence capabilities - Desert Storm in 1991 shows the model for doing this - and then airpower would be used to prevent Russian forces from being able to move. It would interdict supplies, cut off logistical routes - destroying roads, railways, preventing air resupply - it would annihilate convoys whilst they were on the roads. Meanwhile cruise missiles would strike at logistical infrastructure deep behind enemy lines. The troops at the front would not be able to effectively manoeuvre due the threat from the air, and the lack of fuel.

I think that was generally the strategy, to avoid direct engagement and concentrate on supply columns, as evidenced by photos in the 2-3 weeks, when Russians were trying to mask their fuel trucks as troop and even lumber carriers, running out of fuel and food ahead.

Artillery was #1 killer for a long while, and you can also see how arrival of M777s coincided with Ukrainian major counter-offensive around Kharkiv. M777s are more precise, more maneuverable and out-range a lot of Soviet junk that Russians have.

I am also curious about the role of intel that Americans have been passing to Ukrainians. US has far better satellite recon and automated systems to ID and track material movement. How much of it was passed from the first days to current situation we'll never know, but I'd venture to guess a whole shitload. It may have been selective, but nevertheless, location of generals and high value targets is something that US intel could easily (and have plenty of experience) track across wast territory.

This is impromt interview from Ivan Otrakovsky. He is a RF bro, served til rank of captain and fought in different Russian conflicts. He blogs on militray and civic shit in Russia. He is well respected by Russian anti-corruption, military circles. He volunteered to serve in Ukraine, got fucked up and speaking from a hospital bed.

From his comments on current situation, Ukrainian artillery is #1 problem right now. Most troops are getting killed from a-far. He also notes that Uki artillery is working for A+ grade and extremely hard to hit back at, while them being very effective at hit and run strike game.

From other comments elsewhere, an average engagement distance in this conflict is 2-5 kilometers, i.e. most people are getting killed by various artillery strikes before firing a shot in anger.

 
Last edited:
From his comments on current situation, Ukrainian artillery is #1 problem right now. Most troops are getting killed from a-far.
That's always been the number one killer in industrial war. The US did a study into the causes of injury and fatality during WW2 and found the number one killer by far was shrapnel, specifically that from artillery. I believe 50% or so of all combat casualties were from shelling.
 
this is kind of interesting, not sure how common it is, but fucking cyber punk is here on the battle field. Ukrainian national guardmen, K9 units. Special doggo helmets come equipped with live feed cams (night/infra) and secure coms from operator to doggo. The system is more money than squad worth of RF dudes.

This is what happens when your people stop eating doggos and be friends with them.

1652877893523.png


1652877997403.png


1652878084785.png



During WWII Soviets training dogs to rest/sleep under a tank, then strapped a shitload of explosives and let them loose at the front lines. Fucking savages.
 
this is kind of interesting, not sure how common it is, but fucking cyber punk is here on the battle field. Ukrainian national guardmen, K9 units. Special doggo helmets come equipped with live feed cams (night/infra) and secure coms from operator to doggo. The system is more money than squad worth of RF dudes.

This is what happens when your people stop eating doggos and be friends with them.

View attachment 3295103

View attachment 3295106

View attachment 3295113


During WWII Soviets training dogs to rest/sleep under a tank, then strapped a shitload of explosives and let them loose at the front lines. Fucking savages.
China should take notes than
 
That's always been the number one killer in industrial war. The US did a study into the causes of injury and fatality during WW2 and found the number one killer by far was shrapnel, specifically that from artillery. I believe 50% or so of all combat casualties were from shelling.
Capture.GIF


One of the things WH40k gets right (this and the fact that we'll probably still be rocking Browning M2s 38,000 years in the future.
 
China should take notes than
The only notes china is interested in is the "field cooked dog recipe" as prepared by russian troops.

Ukrainians really became more European in their mentality in recent years while russians have been culturally lubing themselves up for Chinese overlordship it seems, this is just one example.
 
this is kind of interesting, not sure how common it is, but fucking cyber punk is here on the battle field. Ukrainian national guardmen, K9 units. Special doggo helmets come equipped with live feed cams (night/infra) and secure coms from operator to doggo. The system is more money than squad worth of RF dudes.

During WWII Soviets training dogs to rest/sleep under a tank, then strapped a shitload of explosives and let them loose at the front lines. Fucking savages.

These systems have been slowly appearing into more military roles and, iirc, originated in search and rescue operations to stop them getting debris in their eyes and to allow for a live feed to better get an idea where the dogs are when hunting for people.

The Minedog program was also a hilarious failure, as they'd trained the dogs under soviet tanks which the dogs thus associated with food.

So they promptly responded by running straight under a bunch of soviet vehicles instead of german ones.
 
That was the original plan, a lot of 80's-90s tech is on the way out on the usual 30/40 year cycle of military tech with moving warfare requirements learned over the last 20 years. UK's phasing out Starstreak so has sent all that out. A whole heap of the electronic components for the Stinger simply aren't made any more (It being a design first drafted in 1967) so there's a bit of head scratching going on with how to replace those guts considering they probably stopped making replacements for them around 2003.
From what I understand the electronics have have had several upgrades over the years with one more on the way. The issue is the missile itself getting old and suppliers of components of that moving on years ago.

The US Army has planned that one last refurbishment to keep them in service until 2030 when it finally hits it's expiration date. They are just getting together the draft of requirements for it's replacement so they can start the procurement process. One of them being use in existing launch platforms. I guess that makes sense considering how ubiquitous Stinger missiles are in existing SHORAD systems.

I really hope this doesn't cause congress or other meddlers to push to get the Stinger lines going again. It would be a huge waste of money.
 
Neolibs: "Ghoulishness in the defense of our pets is no vice, and consideration of human rights of our enemies is no virtue".

View attachment 3295202

Aren't we still picking landmines out of Croatia and Bosnia to this day despite fighting ending 30 years ago?

Fuck off Atlantic Council you bunch of fucking vultures.
 
Aren't we still picking landmines out of Croatia and Bosnia to this day despite fighting ending 30 years ago?

Fuck off Atlantic Council you bunch of fucking vultures.
I for one advocate placing land mines in Serbia and Russia using FASCAM as often as possible.
 
I think that was generally the strategy, to avoid direct engagement and concentrate on supply columns, as evidenced by photos in the 2-3 weeks, when Russians were trying to mask their fuel trucks as troop and even lumber carriers, running out of fuel and food ahead.

Artillery was #1 killer for a long while, and you can also see how arrival of M777s coincided with Ukrainian major counter-offensive around Kharkiv. M777s are more precise, more maneuverable and out-range a lot of Soviet junk that Russians have.

I am also curious about the role of intel that Americans have been passing to Ukrainians. US has far better satellite recon and automated systems to ID and track material movement. How much of it was passed from the first days to current situation we'll never know, but I'd venture to guess a whole shitload. It may have been selective, but nevertheless, location of generals and high value targets is something that US intel could easily (and have plenty of experience) track across wast territory.

This is impromt interview from Ivan Otrakovsky. He is a RF bro, served til rank of captain and fought in different Russian conflicts. He blogs on militray and civic shit in Russia. He is well respected by Russian anti-corruption, military circles. He volunteered to serve in Ukraine, got fucked up and speaking from a hospital bed.

From his comments on current situation, Ukrainian artillery is #1 problem right now. Most troops are getting killed from a-far. He also notes that Uki artillery is working for A+ grade and extremely hard to hit back at, while them being very effective at hit and run strike game.

From other comments elsewhere, an average engagement distance in this conflict is 2-5 kilometers, i.e. most people are getting killed by various artillery strikes before firing a shot in anger.

Certainly the evidence does seem to support the targeting of Russian logistics early on, however I think the difference in how the West would have operated is not the objective but the capacity to achieve it. Neither Ukraine, nor Russia, controls the skies and while drones, partisans and artillery are having some effect, the reality is that they can move relatively freely behind their own lines. If Russia was fighting NATO, once the initial SEAD mission was completed, then this would be impossible for the Russian forces who would be under constant attack from the air, and unlike in the past where you could use the cover of night to mask movements, that would be of no use on todays advanced battlefield.

When Russia retreated from Kyiv, whilst it would be a push to call this an ordered withdrawal, they did get the majority of the men and equipment back to Belarus and then were able to send this east towards the Donbas meatgrinder. If they were fighting NATO, who would have gained local air supremacy, then this would have been impossible. They would at most have been able to walk back, but would have had to have left all of that kit and equipment, as it would of been totally cut off from fuel and munitions. It would effectively force them to fight in a static defensive manner akin to WWI.

Which is unfortunate for Ukraine, because it looks like they will have to defeat Russia on the battlefield.

In terms of intel, my guess is that the UK, US, Canada etc, have passed on highly encrypted means of communication to Ukraine years ago. This should allow the passage of information fairly easily. That is just speculation though.

As for satellites, lots of nations including Russian, have their own military satellite constellations, and in terms of capability lots of open source platforms like MAXAR show the kind of capabilities for imaging that the US and allies has at a minimum. I have no clue what special, secret satalites exist out there that are higher fidelity... but actually, it's not hugely important. You would not use satellites like this to target moving targets but instead those which are either static, or to pick out areas to recce for more immediate information. I do know for a fact that lots of civilian satellites are also used by the military out of convivence.

I am sure it is a lot more complicated, with a lot more hoops to jump through, but let me try and explain how it would work.
Surveillance satellites tend to be in a variable orbits, as opposed to geostationary ones, which means that depending on he time and date what they can see will change. However, because their orbits are predictable you will know when a given satellite will pass over a specific area at a given time. Now, a satellite will not be able to see the entire range of things within it's view so there is a limited amount it can focus on. Whoever is coordinating it will get a request through, perhaps from their own Int or perhaps passed on from the Ukrainians, they would then task the next satellite that is set to go over that area to take a picture of it. That will then be analysed - perhaps by a person, by my bet is that they will utilise machine learning that can identify differences between pictures and then highlight the differences to people for higher accuracy and reduced time cost. This information will then be passed onto the Ukrainians, who would either use that information as is, or use it as a prompt to carry out their own recce - maybe via drone.

In simple terms, they take a picture, give Zelensky a call and let him know the what3words for the location of the Ruskis.
That said, I would imagine there is plenty of undirected satellite surveillance, whereby NATO & partner militaries are just scanning busy areas and using AI to look for any significant movements that might be of interest. That's just photography too, there are lots of other satellites that are of use, that one that detects fires has been very used for identifying where fighting is generally fiercest.

Plus, that's just satellites, these Rivet Joints flying round the Black Sea will be able to identify SAM batteries by type, and the range they are able to detect things at. You wonder perhaps that's helped keep the Ukrainians flying...
 
Neolibs: "Ghoulishness in the defense of our pets is no vice, and consideration of human rights of our enemies is no virtue".

View attachment 3295202

Excellent, lets lay them along the US/Mexico border from the Gulf to the Pacific coast.

Aren't we still picking landmines out of Croatia and Bosnia to this day despite fighting ending 30 years ago?

Fuck off Atlantic Council you bunch of fucking vultures.

We're still picking landmines out of Central Europe, Vietnam, Cambodia (etc. etc.). The only safe landmines are the time-expired types the US lays now, and I wouldn't bet the farm on tapdancing on one of those.
 
Excellent, lets lay them along the US/Mexico border from the Gulf to the Pacific coast.
Too expensive, there are mobile or fixed systems that can detect the movement of people and systems that can alert people to react to what is happening. If anything a properly integrated system (and there is no reason that this would not be able to include ground penetrating radar) would be cheaper, more effective and less disastrous for wildlife than a large wall. These can alert semi-autonomous drones, and can alert border patrol instead of them just driving through the desert.

Dogs, if kept and looked after properly, are expensive and take a lot of working hours to keep fed, watered, healthy and happy. Better to just use machines.
 
Aren't we still picking landmines out of Croatia and Bosnia to this day despite fighting ending 30 years ago?

Fuck off Atlantic Council you bunch of fucking vultures.
There are still mines from the early 80s and before fucking up Cambodia.

Also, little kids, doggos, wildlife, and livestock can't read.

Mines are awful.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back