Russian Special Military Operation in the Ukraine - Mark IV: The Partitioning of Discussion

[Jump]

Don't forget to pay your taxes!

 

[make_it_so]

Don't forget to pay your taxes!

I can't wait to see them drive unsupported straight into minefields and artillery sights all over again.

 

[Matt Damon]

I dunno, them coming here actually sounds like a great way to get some fresh entertainment.

I imagine most of them would be unwilling to use Tor. Why would anyone want to avoid the wonderful surveillance state that only exists to keep us safe?

 

[Romeo]

A whole platoon of the Armed Forces of Ukraine surrendered in the Avdiivka direction. The commander of platoon 110 ombre contacted one of our units. He wanted to save the personnel, since he has a lot of 300s, and his command refused to evacuate.
After negotiations, the AFU unit came out in full force on the BMP in our direction. The wounded were treated. Specialists work with the rest
tg

The whole environment in that video has a lot of tension going on. The Russian forces are anticipating under the twilight sky that the Ukrainian BMP convoy could be a trap, and are waiting patiently to move in when the convoy shows up. The Ukrainians on the other hand have decided to surrender to the enemy, knowing that they will be considered traitors to their government and that they do not know how the Russians will treat them. I could not imagine how frightening it is for both the Russians and Ukrainians in that situation. I just hope that the Ukrainian soldiers and commander come out fine in the end.

I've often thought that NAFO would be a worthy candidate for a community watch thread, but I don't know if you could have one without inevitably violating the containment rules regarding the Russia-Ukraine war discussions.

There is always the r/VolunteersForUkraine Community Watch thread which does include discussion on the NAFO community and survived not being put in Mass Debates. You can ask the OP of the thread to include NAFO in the title and the original post.

 

[Fatniggo1488]

The Stryker vehicle family is a 8x8 platform that can do a lot while having the same engine, transmission, and drivetrain as the other variants. It's also a decent enough APC in it's base configuration.

It's alright if you ignore the fact that it's basically all around inferior to the BTRs in almost every conceivable way outside of it being very slightly faster on road which has very limited relevance for an APC. It doesn't even have much going for it that the BTR 60 has which was designed in the 1950s. I get that an APC is not an IFV but from everything I've seen of the Stryker, it's really stretching the "armored" in APC. It's only rated to 14.5×114mm which is basically the Russian 50 bmg and from everything I've found, that's only assuming they're not using anything even remotely similar to SLAP rounds. That's also only with the addition of bolt on ceramic armor which one, doesn't really protect a large surface area of the vehicle, and two, it's highly unlikely to offer good multi hit protection, which is a massive problem since an APC is mainly protecting against heavy machine guns in conventional warfare.

I'm also extremely critical of the lack of firepower in the actual APC configuration, but that's more back to comparison with the BTRs and less on just how it is as an APC. Technically an APC needs minimal fire power since it's not an IFV, but to me it makes sense to have something able to actually provide real suppression since it doesn't do you a lot of good to have an APC if all the dismounts get absolutely waxed as soon as the ramp drops.

 

[Jump]

Cellphone video around the blown up leopard and bradleys

Spoiler: trigger warning: dead bodies and lots of Punisher patches)

archive

 

[The Ugly One]

It's alright if you ignore the fact that it's basically all around inferior to the BTRs in almost every conceivable way outside of it being very slightly faster on road which has very limited relevance for an APC. It doesn't even have much going for it that the BTR 60 has which was designed in the 1950s. I get that an APC is not an IFV but from everything I've seen of the Stryker, it's really stretching the "armored" in APC. It's only rated to 14.5×114mm which is basically the Russian 50 bmg and from everything I've found, that's only assuming they're not using anything even remotely similar to SLAP rounds. That's also only with the addition of bolt on ceramic armor which one, doesn't really protect a large surface area of the vehicle, and two, it's highly unlikely to offer good multi hit protection, which is a massive problem since an APC is mainly protecting against heavy machine guns in conventional warfare.

I'm also extremely critical of the lack of firepower in the actual APC configuration, but that's more back to comparison with the BTRs and less on just how it is as an APC. Technically an APC needs minimal fire power since it's not an IFV, but to me it makes sense to have something able to actually provide real suppression since it doesn't do you a lot of good to have an APC if all the dismounts get absolutely waxed as soon as the ramp drops.

There are a lot of BTR variants, and not all of them have armor on par with a Stryker. The Stryker's armor, which is tough enough to withstand heat from just about any crew-served weapon that isn't an outright ATGM, is fine for its role within a NATO combined arms strategy. Sure, it'll get ripped apart by something like the Soviet 30mm autocannon, but under US military doctrine, you don't roll up your armor while anybody's still got anything big enough to mount an autocannon on to point at it. By the time Strykers with troops roll up, you're supposed to have air supremacy and have salted the earth with anything resembling armor.

The Ukies are unable to even obtain air parity, so really, nobody in NATO knows what to do.

 

[make_it_so]

There is always the r/VolunteersForUkraine Community Watch thread which does include discussion on the NAFO community and survived not being put in Mass Debates. You can ask the OP of the thread to include NAFO in the title and the original post.

The question is would it really fit, though? NAFO themselves aren't volunteers that actually go over to see combat in Ukraine (or pretend to do so), they're just a bunch of keyboard warriors that cheerlead from behind the safety of their monitors and watch as other people go off and get killed.

There are a lot of BTR variants, and not all of them have armor on par with a Stryker. The Stryker's armor, which is tough enough to withstand heat from just about any crew-served weapon that isn't an outright ATGM, is fine for its role within a NATO combined arms strategy. Sure, it'll get ripped apart by something like the Soviet 30mm autocannon, but under US military doctrine, you don't roll up your armor while anybody's still got anything big enough to mount an autocannon on to point at it. By the time Strykers with troops roll up, you're supposed to have air supremacy and have salted the earth with anything resembling armor.

The Ukies are unable to even obtain air parity, so really, nobody in NATO knows what to do.

Also, wasn't the primary focus on making the Stryker protection from IED's? So it's good in trying to make it across those minefields and at least keeping the guys inside alive should they strike anything.

 

[Just Some Other Guy]

So it's good in trying to make it across those minefields and at least keeping the guys inside alive should they strike anything.

Sure, but then the vehicles gets disabled and while the guys might be alive, they then dismount into all of that artillery that they failed to do anything about.

 

[dvorak]

All the fella's (or what every fag name they use) would flood in to KF and try and correct the record. They all seem to have unlimited time on their hands. Not worth the risk.

>Stop spreading heckin ruzzian putler lies! There were only 5 used diapers found at the convention, not 20!

 

[Betonhaus]

You can always tell when a KF poster isn't American because they think there's a limit on the retardation of our ruling class.

This is something important to point out. The stupidity is bottomless. I worked for a company where the management went to a fancy business school and spent more time networking then understanding how to run a business, and got the job due to nepotism despite having zero understanding of the details of how the business industry runs. There were perpetual issues that anyone with half a brain could solve but management refused to listen to so they continued. Then we had a very messy very disastrous project that was badly planned from the very start. Everyone with half a brain could see that things were going horribly and would try to come up with solutions to make it less horrible, but management kept ignoring the issues and common sense solutions until it started to cost them real money. Then they would throw things at a wall to see what sticks, leading to new delays and problems and things generally being, at best, one step forward three steps back. But they simply lacked the understanding needed to realize how BAD things were, to the point that they kept making impossible promises and violating labor laws to try to keep those promises only to break them anyways.

I see the US millitary and its cronies to be just like that. Because the US hasn't fought a real war in years they have allowed their military to populate itself with friends of friends who got their ranks due to networking and not to ability, and now they are so lacking in understanding that they cannot comprehend how badly things are fucked up and so keep trying to do fixes that make it worse, and ignoring advice from people who actually understand things. I honestly bet that Ukraine could be wiped off the map and they will still say THAT Russia is losing.

 

[Fatniggo1488]

There are a lot of BTR variants, and not all of them have armor on par with a Stryker. The Stryker's armor, which is tough enough to withstand heat from just about any crew-served weapon that isn't an outright ATGM, is fine for its role within a NATO combined arms strategy. Sure, it'll get ripped apart by something like the Soviet 30mm autocannon, but under US military doctrine, you don't roll up your armor while anybody's still got anything big enough to mount an autocannon on to point at it. By the time Strykers with troops roll up, you're supposed to have air supremacy and have salted the earth with anything resembling armor.

The Ukies are unable to even obtain air parity, so really, nobody in NATO knows what to do.

Personally I really doubt the claim about the Stryker being able to survive sustained fire from 14.5×114mm. Even if it's true, it seems to be a claim that requires circumstances not really realistic to modern conventional warfare such as the enemy not having access to modern variants of the round that are designed around defeating armor, or not being able to score accurate hits. Granted, from everything I can find, the claim is rather old so it might not have been that misleading at the time it was made.

Also, on the topic of US doctrine, I think the entire concept of air supremacy is going to go the way of the dodo. Air supremacy requires you to completely remove an enemy's ability to operate in the air themselves. That's not really possible in modern warfare since you're never going to be able to completely stop an enemy that has the funds and technology from utilizing small drones. This means most of the world since even the drug cartels are utilizing such drones now. Even in a perfect world for one side, probably the best they're going to be able to do is to deny an enemy full use of air assets, but with the way drone technology has progressed, that's still going to leave them able to preform some limited CAS, and the ability to preform air recon which largely takes away the ability to strike without forewarning at a large scale, and to prevent hostile indirect forces from getting involved. I think on the flip side of that too, AA has gotten good enough to where even if your side has an overwhelming advantage, you can still expect a fair number of air loses.

With that in mind, I think this kind of hits on the overarching point of why NATO wunderwaffe is so seriously under delivering in this war. Most of it is designed around doctrine which has no place on a modern battlefield, which is putting it at a disadvantage against even antiquated weaponry which was just designed to be all around effective regardless of the doctrine used. NATO is slowly learning the hard way why traditional military thinking always considered adaptability to be important.

 

[Falcos_Commisar]

It's alright if you ignore the fact that it's basically all around inferior to the BTRs in almost every conceivable way outside of it being very slightly faster on road which has very limited relevance for an APC. It doesn't even have much going for it that the BTR 60 has which was designed in the 1950s. I get that an APC is not an IFV but from everything I've seen of the Stryker, it's really stretching the "armored" in APC. It's only rated to 14.5×114mm which is basically the Russian 50 bmg and from everything I've found, that's only assuming they're not using anything even remotely similar to SLAP rounds. That's also only with the addition of bolt on ceramic armor which one, doesn't really protect a large surface area of the vehicle, and two, it's highly unlikely to offer good multi hit protection, which is a massive problem since an APC is mainly protecting against heavy machine guns in conventional warfare.

I'm also extremely critical of the lack of firepower in the actual APC configuration, but that's more back to comparison with the BTRs and less on just how it is as an APC. Technically an APC needs minimal fire power since it's not an IFV, but to me it makes sense to have something able to actually provide real suppression since it doesn't do you a lot of good to have an APC if all the dismounts get absolutely waxed as soon as the ramp drops.

The BTR series, excepting the Ukrainian BTR-4, have God awful crew and dismount ergonomics and the way the troops get out of a BTR has hilariously bad. A ramp in the back plus roof hatches is far better. Some Stryker variants have 30mm autocanon although the US army always thought of the Stryker as an 8x8 apc until recently.

The question is would it really fit, though? NAFO themselves aren't volunteers that actually go over to see combat in Ukraine (or pretend to do so), they're just a bunch of keyboard warriors that cheerlead from behind the safety of their monitors and watch as other people go off and get killed.

Also, wasn't the primary focus on making the Stryker protection from IED's? So it's good in trying to make it across those minefields and at least keeping the guys inside alive should they strike anything.

Not exactly although they came out with the doubt v hull Stryker in the mid 2000s after IEDs became a big threat. However the basic Stryker is... Ok against mines, probably about the same as a BTR or french VAB.

 

[Drag-on Knight 91873]

With that in mind, I think this kind of hits on the overarching point of why NATO wunderwaffe is so seriously under delivering in this war. Most of it is designed around doctrine which has no place on a modern battlefield, which is putting it at a disadvantage against even antiquated weaponry which was just designed to be all around effective regardless of the doctrine used. NATO is slowly learning the hard way why traditional military thinking always considered adaptability to be important.

It also doesn't help that NATO insist on fighting with Batchall logic where they send the least amount of equipment they believe is necessary to win the war. Only now is Biden willing to send F-16s at some point. Maybe some gimped Abrams which will probably end up like those Leopards a few months from now.

 

[World Famous Quasi Payer]

Re: Stryker

The Stryker was never designed to fight in a conventional war. It was a stop gap solution for the Army which needed a replacement for the M113 that was cheaper than the Bradly. That's why it has no armor or serious armaments besides what the average Humvee has. It exists to survive the average IED and keep the occupants alive from small arms, machine guns and light anti-tank weapons (with the slat armor package). They've tried giving some versions more firepower, either anti-tank, auto-cannon or anti-air.

 

[Slur Generator]

I see the US millitary and its cronies to be just like that. Because the US hasn't fought a real war in years they have allowed their military to populate itself with friends of friends who got their ranks due to networking and not to ability, and now they are so lacking in understanding that they cannot comprehend how badly things are fucked up and so keep trying to do fixes that make it worse, and ignoring advice from people who actually understand things. I honestly bet that Ukraine could be wiped off the map and they will still say THAT Russia is losing.

I think Russia is in the same boat but they are changing faster.

 

[marfusha]

They are paying in slav lives. I think they are dreaming that Russia will be forced to pay war reparations.

They sure do, I'm just curious whether Ukraine will be forced to repay the equipment they're getting now. Text of the lend lease act kinda implies it.

(3) CONDITION.—Any loan or lease of defense articles to the Government of Ukraine under paragraph (1) shall be subject to all applicable laws concerning the return of and reimbursement and repayment for defense articles loan or leased to foreign governments.

 

[Drag-on Knight 91873]

They sure do, I'm just curious whether Ukraine will be forced to repay the equipment they're getting now. Text of the lend lease act kinda implies it.

Would be funny if we got based Ukrainians going Aloha Snackbar on Blackrock businesses after the war is over.

 

[Stasi]

Would be funny if we got based Ukrainians going Aloha Snackbar on Blackrock businesses after the war is over.

Wonder if they would still find a way to blame Russia if that happened. Don't know if anyone else noticed but saw this a few times now, during the Polish tractor fiasco and now the dam where Pentagon and Gov officials when asked if Ukraine might be responsible said "well, whoever did it it was still Russia's fault because they started it".

Its a shame only glowie approved "journalists" are allowed in these briefings. I would pay good money for someone to ask in response "Is that official US policy? Are we officially accepting full responsibility for every death and terrorist act that resulted from Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan etc. because we started it?" Seeing some braindead Pentagon mouthpiece try to logic that out in their head would be glorious.

 

[Feline Supremacist]

Would be funny if we got based Ukrainians going Aloha Snackbar on Blackrock businesses after the war is over.

Blowback-how could this have happened?

Edit: Those cannibal hohols are at it again

Spoiler: This is who the US/EU believes shares their values

Наваристий бульйон з голови орка

Rich broth from the head of an orc

https://t.me/c/1194883300/4332

"European values" "Fighting for Freedom" "They attack us for no reason"

All righty then.