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

[Drag-on Knight 91873]

When I say NATO troops I really mean US troops with different colored helmets. The US is NATO.

And they'd still do worse as we saw with Reddit Battalions. In fact, US troops would be even funnier as we'd send pregnant pilots into dogfights and Russian drones dump fuel on them for the lulz while infantry dilate themselves with their shovels.

 

[The Ugly One]

F16's aren't any better than what the Ukrainian air force had when the war started (which was all destroyed fairly quickly), especially the export version of the F16. Fighter jets have essentially been made obsolete by modern air-defense systems, especially Russia's. Russia and China learned long ago that they couldn't compete with US development of billion-dollar jets and ships and instead focused on advanced radar plus 5-figure missiles that blow the shit out of those billion-dollar jets and ships and stockpiling massive numbers of them. Cheaper drones that just carry hand grenades have changed the game even more. While the US still builds billion-dollar jets and ships (because those are really just a domestic jobs program, not military defense).

I have a feeling that NATO troops will eventually be deployed and that will highlight how little we actually care about Ukrainians since we'll wait until half a million of them are dead first.

AA hasn't made fighters obsolete. Russia is relying heavily on traditional fighters, bombers, and choppers in Ukraine. The deal in modern combat since WW2 is that you can't go on offense until you have air support, and you can't have air support until you can deal with enemy AA. NATO won't and can't give Ukraine the ability to overcome Russian AA, but they also want Ukraine to go on offense, because politically, they can't and won't negotiate a truce with Russia, so what they've chosen to do is twist their dick around and jam it up their own asshole.

Russian AA isn't invulnerable. We have radar-hunting missiles and all kinds of cool shit to blow up Russian AA. But, as with these fancy tanks and HIMARS systems we're sending them, we cannot and will not send them to Ukraine in the volume needed to win a war, because, whoops, it turns out you need a fuckton of resources to do that. Just look at Abrams tanks. If we were to field those in volume in Ukraine, the big boy version that is actually meant to go up against Russian equipment, maybe 500 of them, that's $12b in tanks. $12b is six times the annual budget we spend on ourselves in tanks, and nobody is out there accusing the USA of being thrifty when it comes to our military budget.

Then throw on top of that the fact that we will not send Ukraine any cool shit if it could get captured. They can have HIMARS systems, because those strike from far away. They can't have the good tanks, because those are front-line fighting vehicles, and Russia might snag one. So that's another lesson everyone's learned. The USA might have some badass miltech, but if there's a ghost of a chance we might actually lose something to an enemy, we won't even deploy it. You're safe.

The lesson here is more subtle than "US equipment is obsolete," because it isn't. It kicks ass. The lesson is political - Uncle Sam is simply not going to deploy the best American stuff at volume in a theater we don't completely control. We sent I think 109 Bradleys to Ukraine. We sent 2,200 to Desert Storm. What the fuck are you supposed to do with 109 Bradleys on a 300-mile front and no air support? Oh, it turns out what you do is get killed by Ka-52s.

 

[Secret Asshole]

The problem is that Ukraine needs to make big gains and keep them. I just don't know how you do that without good air support and artillery support, along with a very piece-meal armored division and a lack of manpower.

 

[Kane Lives]

If we were to field those in volume in Ukraine, the big boy version that is actually meant to go up against Russian equipment, maybe 500 of them, that's $12b in tanks. $12b is six times the annual budget we spend on ourselves in tanks, and nobody is out there accusing the USA of being thrifty when it comes to our military budget.

I always wondered about the pricetag of NATO equipment in particular. How much of that is actual material/labour costs and how much is just the pork lining some fat cat's pockets? After all, just because Raytheon says it costs $500 million to build doesn't mean it actually costs that much.

 

[Falcos_Commisar]

The problem is that Ukraine needs to make big gains and keep them. I just don't know how you do that without good air support and artillery support, along with a very piece-meal armored division and a lack of manpower.

Yep, I'd they don't the West is going to look REALLY hard at giving them even more expensive stuff.

Now Germany is saying the Leopard 2 surplus is all used so so they hope Ukraine likes their Leopard 1A5s. Fun fact, the Leopard 1 armor is able to be penetrated by Russian 30mm auto canon fire from every direction except the front of the turret (maybe) and every single Russian ATGMs and in service RPG warhead can punch right through any part of that tank.

 

[The Ugly One]

I always wondered about the pricetag of NATO equipment in particular. How much of that is actual material/labour costs and how much is just the pork lining some fat cat's pockets? After all, just because Raytheon says it costs $500 million to build doesn't mean it actually costs that much.

The cost overruns mostly take the form of feature creep, buying things nobody really needs, making things in districts where it costs 2x as much and, of course, minority preferences in sourcing parts.

But also, things are just expensive. For example, a Tomahawk missile is basically a 9-foot autonomous jet plane with a rocket booster that can fly 1000 miles. You're not going to build one of those and sell it for the price of an economy car.

 

[Just Some Other Guy]

Fun fact, the Leopard 1 armor is able to be penetrated by Russian 30mm auto canon fire from every direction except the front of the turret

Hence why when people were joking that the Russians would start breaking out T34-85s I thought hell, those have a fair shake against a Leo 1 lol. Give them modernized optics and good recon to not get ambushed and shit, they'd shrug off light AT better than a Leo.

Leopard 1s are a joke. A tank that uses armor as a dump stat because the Germans went retarded and forgot that protection against light and medium AT is still a thing.

 

[Drag-on Knight 91873]

The lesson here is more subtle than "US equipment is obsolete," because it isn't. It kicks ass. The lesson is political - Uncle Sam is simply not going to deploy the best American stuff at volume in a theater we don't completely control. We sent I think 109 Bradleys to Ukraine. We sent 2,200 to Desert Storm. What the fuck are you supposed to do with 109 Bradleys on a 300-mile front and no air support? Oh, it turns out what you do is get killed by Ka-52s.

Batchall logic. America really is like the Clans, at least doctrinally. Despite the reputation of being great warriors with the most advanced technology known to Man for decades, the amount of equipment and people trained to use it in any functional military capacity is so small that it causes defeat against a technologically inferior enemy.

 

[Got Milk!]

Back with Vidya again. Sorry for any reposts. Been gone a few days:

Porcupine with a petal mine (he was reportedly safely demined):

Russian ship takes out more boat drones:

Advance! Oh wait, fuck:

Sniper eliminated:

1,385m tank shot and kill (on second shot):

Accurate representation of Ukrainian tactics for vehicle/personnel recovery:

Fighting like cats and dogs:

All I got for now. Hopefully be back sooner with more Vidya to enjoy. For now:

EETA: hot new meme

 

[The Ugly One]

Batchall logic. America really is like the Clans, at least doctrinally. Despite the reputation of being great warriors with the most advanced technology known to Man for decades, the amount of equipment and people trained to use it in any functional military capacity is so small that it causes defeat against a technologically inferior enemy.

Kind of, but it's more complicated than that. Our military absolutely crushed Saddam's in Desert Storm. 3 Bradleys lost out of 2200 while we just annihilated his tanks. The problem is nukes. Due to nukes, our military is designed to fight Literally Anybody Except Russia. And due to bribes, add China to the list.

We're built to faceroll the Third World while completely avoiding direct confrontation with Russia and China. When people compare, say, the F-35 to the Su-57, they don't realize they're making an irrelevant match-up. Russia's never going to invade a country that we allow to buy F-35s, because the only countries we let F-35s to are under the protection of our nuclear umbrella anyway. Su-57s will only ever be deployed against the kind of country that we begrudgingly give a few moldy F-18s to.

What Ukraine is showing is that NATO is no longer able to handle indirect confrontation with Russia. We assumed that our economic power could crush Russia with sanctions, and when that failed, uhhh...uhhh...have a few Bradleys? I guess? Some antique Polish MiGs? Uhhh....

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Our State Media writes that Dutch Military Intelligence (MIVD) found out that Ukraine was planning to sabotage Nord Stream in June last year. They relayed this to the CIA, who warned Ukraine not to do it. In September, the pipeline was sabotaged anyway, in the exact scenario that the MIVD exposed.

The report tries to clear Clown-In-Chief Zelensky's name, instead pinning the blame on hohol vegetable Zaluzhny.
Google-translated article (Archive)

>CIA telling people to not commit terrorism

They could at least try to make this sound believable.

 

[make_it_so]

Depleted Uranium Rounds 2; Electric Boogaloo



What happened to the ones the bongs gave them?

Pretty sure they went up with one of those ammo dumps the Russians took out right before the long awaited Counter-Offensive.

Anyway, I actually wouldn't worry too much about the land being salted by the use of DU rounds. Going by their performance so far, the Ukrainians probably won't even get a chance to fire the damn things.

 

[Nicholas II of Russia]

Porcupine with a petal mine (he was reportedly safely demined):
View attachment 5161933

I hope that whoever tried to use this porcupine as a weapon gets blown up into pieces.

 

[Got Milk!]

I hope that whoever tried to use this porcupine as a weapon gets blown up into pieces.

I'm pretty sure they are spread from an airborne munition, not individually. And while I agree with you, I think the poor guy was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

 

[Falcos_Commisar]

The cost overruns mostly take the form of feature creep, buying things nobody really needs, making things in districts where it costs 2x as much and, of course, minority preferences in sourcing parts.

But also, things are just expensive. For example, a Tomahawk missile is basically a 9-foot autonomous jet plane with a rocket booster that can fly 1000 miles. You're not going to build one of those and sell it for the price of an economy car.

Don't forget general inflation and the insane Clinton defense cuts which led to FIVE prime defense contractors and massive amounts of sub components and sub assemblies becoming SOLE SOURCE aka I can charge WHATEVER I WANT. Short of nationalizing defense manufacturing, this shit will continue because no one wants to drop the insane amount of capital to make goods that are legally barred from export and that have exactly ONE buyer in the USA.

 

[Nicholas II of Russia]

I'm pretty sure they are spread from an airborne munition, not individually. And while I agree with you, I think the poor guy was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Thank you for clarifying this, I didn't knew it could happen like that from airborne munition, at least it wasn't some psycho asshole doing that with the animals. At least the little buddy got saved from a horrible death.

 

[make_it_so]

I hope that whoever tried to use this porcupine as a weapon gets blown up into pieces.

More likely the poor little critter got one caught up in his spines by accident.

 

[Badungus Kabungus]

Obviously none of you ever got bitten by a hedgehog. These guys are dicks.

But still, it doesn't deserve to be blown up by a hohol mine.

 

[ForTheHoard]

The cost overruns mostly take the form of feature creep, buying things nobody really needs, making things in districts where it costs 2x as much and, of course, minority preferences in sourcing parts.

But also, things are just expensive. For example, a Tomahawk missile is basically a 9-foot autonomous jet plane with a rocket booster that can fly 1000 miles. You're not going to build one of those and sell it for the price of an economy car.

Most of government money skimming doesn't come off the top. I have a great example in mind. The wing of an AV-8B Harrier is held on by only 4 bolts. Each bolt has a set of washers and a bushing. We paid about $1,000 per bolt and $25 per washer. The bolts were somewhat special, but the washers weren't. They were a standard size and made out of a standard material that could have been picked up at the local hardware store for a few cents each.

When the spending bills for the Harrier went through congress, a bunch of dickheads in congress would threaten to vote against the bill if their district didn't get a cut, so they build a factory in Connecticut that does nothing but make a 2 or 3 standard parts for the Harrier at 2,000x the cost. In turn, that company takes a big chunk of its government contract profits and gives it to the politician that demanded the washer factory either through lobbying or campaign donations. Now apply this principle to every nut, bolt, and screw that you would find on any military hardware.

This is also why it takes so long for military contractors to do anything. A part sometimes has to be shipped multiple times to multiple states by multiple people that could otherwise be done in 1 factory by 1 team. It creates 2-3x more jobs in the industry than necessary which also contributes to astronomically high prices.

An efficiency expert could come in and cut military spending by probably 50% and it would have no bearing on operational readiness, but it would piss off that congressman from Connecticut because he needs to tell his constituency that he created jobs for them if he wants reelected.

 

[BikeLock]

>CIA telling people to not commit terrorism

They could at least try to make this sound believable.

Wonder how they commited this terroism without being detected and stopped by the... *checks notes* US NAVY doing UNDERWATER DRONE OPERATIONS in that area at that exact time?