Armchair General's DonbAss Derailed Discussion Thread (Topics Include History, Traps, and the Ongoing Slavic Civil War plus much much more)

[Zachowon]

Iran and Venezuela primarily use NATO weapons. AKs while seen more often in propaganda videos, make up only a 5th of the Inventory. Iranian Soldiers are more likely to carry an M-16 or G-3 than an AK though they do prefer the PKM over the M-60 for the GPMG role. Venezuela bought a limited amount of Russian Gear, but the bulk of it is still stamped made-in-the-USA.

But yeah, do go on.



I'm sure if asked and for a small price, the Taliban will gladly give Zelensky some gear and open up training camps...




Ukrainians have difficulties deploying their SRBMs, an indication that RuAF is doing Scud Hunting and has better air control than realized. We also hardly hear of Ukraine's aerial assets making sorties either. Drones are active, but their effect has been limited and reports have tailed off, an indication of their destruction or inability to do further sorties at the moment.



Well it is currently 4:06pm in Ukraine, so still time for more interesting revelations.

Uh, where the hell are you gettingthis information on Iran and Venezuela?
Though i can beilieve the later, the former? Need citations

 

[Husky_Khan]

Uh, where the hell are you gettingthis information on Iran and Venezuela?
Though i can beilieve the later, the former? Need citations

Venezuela and Iran by and large got those weapons before they shifted alignment against the West. Though there are notable exceptions, such as the Iran-Contra Affair during the Iran-Iraq War.

China and Russia and the like have been the main suppliers of both countries since the breakup with the West. For example in the 2006 Lebanon War you didn't see British ATGM's being used by Iranian/Syrian proxy Hezbollah to strike at Israeli Armor in that conflict. It was mostly Russian style ATGM's (typically either Russian or license built in Iran) which weren't being supplied to Iran by Britain or whatever.

EDIT: I say "mostly" because France was a supplier of Syria for example and Syria sponsors Hezbollah. Plus many armaments are pilfered from Lebanon who has a variety of suppliers open and illicit.

 

[Agent23]

Nope,in Byzantium church never was part of state,not mention secret police.Emperor was head of it,but it is different thing.

And Schism happened,becouse emperors would continue to try boss over pope,when Jesus himself declared that His Church must be lead by Peter and his successors.Not emperor successors.

Byzantines was schizmatics,but KGBstan are not even that.They are not christians at all.

The way the Roman church was set up initially did not give the patriarch of Rome any special power, in our historiography at least, the Pope usurped powers he should not have.

Frankly,I see Byzantinism and Romanism as a major reason for east-west tensions, but we should probably talk to it in another thread.
Frankly I am not much of a christian and have paid very little attention to christian history,didn't get baptized until I was like 18 and even then only because my ailing grandmother wanted my soul to be saved, since then I have gone to church, like, twice. I sometimes even think it would be easier if we just forget this Modernized, Diverse and Inclusive Judaism for Dummies and go back to worshiping Perun.

 

[Marduk]

Iran and Venezuela primarily use NATO weapons. AKs while seen more often in propaganda videos, make up only a 5th of the Inventory. Iranian Soldiers are more likely to carry an M-16 or G-3 than an AK though they do prefer the PKM over the M-60 for the GPMG role. Venezuela bought a limited amount of Russian Gear, but the bulk of it is still stamped made-in-the-USA.

Of course we are talking the stuff they are able to buy and service during the reign of current governments, not old stuff lying around since older, more previous governments, like Iran's very much not serviced by manufacturer F-14's.
However, i'm pretty sure Venezuela's Su-30's and Iran's Su-25's didn't come from USA.

 

[Chiron]

Seems like once Russia obtained air supremacy a couple days into the campaign and the Russians were 20 minutes outside of the capital, that was when he should've surrendered, since from that point on he'd just be delaying the inevitable and pointlessly dooming people to die for no reason. He instead, he handed out weapons to civilians and released criminals onto the streets. Maybe he imagines himself being the leader of a glorious resistance that will go down fighting, or he has orders to drag this out.

Yep, and for what? Putin can and will commit anything if he has to in order to pacify the Ukrainians like he did Chechnya. Is Zelensky prepared to commit 100% to the point of blowing himself up to win. If so good for him, he stands for something and I can respect that. But if he runs after all his words, Ukrainian patriots should hunt him down and give him a cowards death for treason.

Now Putin can justify maximum violence to crush the current holdouts in the pockets he formed and say afterwards that Ukrainians had a chance to avoid all this.

Open question, are Ukrainians willing to commit 100% to resistance to the point of blowing themselves up more than the Russians can round them up before they do so? If not, then throw in the towel, become an autonomous republic of Russia while that is still on the table and wait.

 

[Battlegrinder]

I'm not sure about that. For one, "we lost but resisted heroically" or "we're having a rough time but there's some bright spots" is the sort of narrative that counties frequently adopt as internal propaganda. The Alamo and Dunkirk come to mind.

As for "specifically crafted with intent", the obvious question is "crafted by who?", with "and how do you know this?" as the followup.

 

[Zachowon]

Whoever is in charge of logistics, I'm surprised they haven't quit yet.

They even still have 40 F-14s in flyable condition with 3 more in overhaul and thanks to an under-the-table deal with South Korea, even have 64 F-4s still flying after the South Koreans, 'accidentally,' shipped them enough parts to build 30 of them.

But yeah as another poster said, this is common knowledge, what rock have you been living under? Then again the US lost to the Taliban and still can't figure out the difference between fighting a Colonial War with a 3rd world nation and fighting a Mass Maneuver War with an industrial nation. Ah well.



TOS-1s are now in action. An indication UkA's counter-battery capabilities have been knocked out or degraded enough to not take out these bad boys.

Overall, its looking more and more clear the Ukrainian Military no longer has the means to counter-attack in a strong enough blow to throw the Russians back, nor the means to wrest the skies from the Russians, or engage in effective counter-battery fires.

Despite an on paper, impressive SRBM capability, it has not been able to hit Russian staging bases, the missiles either being intercepted or the launchers unable to pop up long enough to launch without being whacked.

Zelensky has no good options anymore.

"Lost".
The US government lost the war.
The military didn't.

And I honestly didn't know Iran was still using stuff we had given them. They seem to have fully pushed away from jt and ha been embracing Societ style things they produce.

 

[Marduk]

Yep, and for what? Putin can and will commit anything if he has to in order to pacify the Ukrainians like he did Chechnya. Is Zelensky prepared to commit 100% to the point of blowing himself up to win. If so good for him, he stands for something and I can respect that. But if he runs after all his words, Ukrainian patriots should hunt him down and give him a cowards death for treason.

Well here's the problem. Chechnya is place with the population of Estonia and half the area.
Ukraine is a place with something like 25 times the population and 20 times the territory.
Just because Russia can handle 1 Chechnya, doesn't mean it can handle 10 or 20 of them at the same time.

 

[FriedCFour]

The US government lost the war.
The military didn't.

Absolute cope. The military is a part of the government, the military lost. You can blame the gov but the military still lost.

Ukraine is a place with something like 25 times the population and 20 times the territory.
Just because Russia can handle 1 Chechnya, doesn't mean it can handle 10 or 20 of them at the same time.

Which is why the peace deal that Russia is seeking is with the territory with the most people more favorable to him, more ethnic Russian speakers and people, and a demilitarized Ukraine on the other side. Either way I sincerely doubt the Ukrainians will be even a quarter as violent as the Chechens. Was there even the smallest insurgency within Crimea? Even just lone bombers or gun men?

 

[Bacle]

"Lost".
The US government lost the war.
The military didn't.

I know that the US military likes to view Vietnam and now A-stan like that, to protect their own pride.

However the reality is the US military's ability to fight and kill our enemies is not what wins wars or secures victory.

'Wars don't end on the battlefield, they end at the negotiating table.' - Chrisjen Avasarala.

 

[Chiron]

"Lost".
The US government lost the war.
The military didn't.

And I honestly didn't know Iran was still using stuff we had given them. They seem to have fully pushed away from jt and ha been embracing Societ style things they produce.

1. That argument doesn't fly. If that was really true, then the military leadership had a moral and ethical duty to resign en masse. Since they didn't, they own the failure, wasted the lives of their troops and must be sacked en masse and replaced with leaders who can deliver results with the resources given to them or have the courage to resign if they find them inadequate.

2. Iran is merging the best of both into indigenous designs and upgrades that suite their own needs.

Well here's the problem. Chechnya is place with the population of Estonia and half the area.
Ukraine is a place with something like 25 times the population and 20 times the territory.
Just because Russia can handle 1 Chechnya, doesn't mean it can handle 10 or 20 of them at the same time.

But is your average Ukrainian 100% committed? Answer is probably most likely not once the hard cores are excised as in Chechnya and the rest bought off.

Fact is, Putin knows how to win wars and win the peace after. Hence Chechnya is a willing ally despite him leveling the area to the ground. Georgia after its bitchslap in 08, now makes sure it stays under his radar. Armenia and Azerbaijan can have their spats, but at the end of the day, they both know Daddy Putin will spank them if they get too out of hand. Same for the rest except the Baltics who wisely grabbed NATO membership when Putin's back was turned, quelling Chechnya.

 

[Agent23]

Well here's the problem. Chechnya is place with the population of Estonia and half the area.
Ukraine is a place with something like 25 times the population and 20 times the territory.
Just because Russia can handle 1 Chechnya, doesn't mean it can handle 10 or 20 of them at the same time.

Why do you:
Assume it will annex it?
If it annexes it, why do you assume it will annex all of it, he'd IMHO just help the Donbass/Eastern Ukraine become a separate republic, then force the Western part to amend its constitution and add a demilitarization/never joining NATO clause.

 

[Marduk]

Why do you:
Assume it will annex it?
If it annexes it, why do you assume it will annex all of it, he'd IMHO just help the Donbass/Eastern Ukraine become a separate republic, then force the Western part to amend its constitution and add a demilitarization/never joining NATO clause.

Eastern Ukraine isn't nearly as Russia loving as it used to be.
The "force" part is important here.
Whether Russia annexes eastern Ukraine beyond DNR/LNR is less important, either way they will want a puppet government ruling the rest of Ukraine.
If they get the population too hostile, that government will get overthrown the moment they stop occupying Ukraine.
Ditto for the annexed parts.
Hence they may need to occupy a large chunk of Ukraine in effect, even if the legal/political arrangements of how that will work are up in the air.

Which is why the peace deal that Russia is seeking is with the territory with the most people more favorable to him, more ethnic Russian speakers and people, and a demilitarized Ukraine on the other side. Either way I sincerely doubt the Ukrainians will be even a quarter as violent as the Chechens. Was there even the smallest insurgency within Crimea? Even just lone bombers or gun men?

Crimea was the most pro-Russian part of the country by far, and those unhappy with it had the rest of Ukraine to leave to.
The "demilitarized Ukraine" everyone is talking about is a fancy term for "puppet government". Those unhappy with it, and there will be many, will not have an independent Ukraine to move to.

1. That argument doesn't fly. If that was really true, then the military leadership had a moral and ethical duty to resign en masse. Since they didn't, they own the failure, wasted the lives of their troops and must be sacked en masse and replaced with leaders who can deliver results with the resources given to them or have the courage to resign if they find them inadequate.

2. Iran is merging the best of both into indigenous designs and upgrades that suite their own needs.



But is your average Ukrainian 100% committed? Answer is probably most likely not once the hard cores are excised as in Chechnya and the rest bought off.

Fact is, Putin knows how to win wars and win the peace after. Hence Chechnya is a willing ally despite him leveling the area to the ground. Georgia after its bitchslap in 08, now makes sure it stays under his radar. Armenia and Azerbaijan can have their spats, but at the end of the day, they both know Daddy Putin will spank them if they get too out of hand. Same for the rest except the Baltics who wisely grabbed NATO membership when Putin's back was turned, quelling Chechnya.

There is no real "buy off" option for Ukraine, not with the sheer size and the sanctions inflicted.
Its not like all Chechens fought in their war either, the force estimates are 20-40k.

 

[BlackDragon98]

"Lost".
The US government lost the war.
The military didn't.

The Jews, Communists, and politicians stabbed us in the back!

The Imperial German Army and Navy was undefeated in the field!

Sound familiar?

 

[Carrot of Truth]

Finland and maybe Sweden join NATO, completing the European NATO wall. NATO is now more unified, and more under America's control, than ever. A big fall in Euroskepticism and moves towards the EU (Le Pen is screwed, for example).

I think this is actually a bad outcome for the US as well, Because it draws its attention away from the real rising threat that is China.

 

[Abhorsen]

I think this is actually a bad outcome for the US as well, Because it draws its attention away from the real rising threat that is China.

With Russia's alliance with China, it's not as bad as it would be, but yes, the focus on Russia, when there's China (so, so, so much worse) is definitely a problem.

It remains to be seen what this causes in East Asia. This could have no effect, or it could cause countries there to start looking to the US for help (cause there's nowhere else to look when the opposition is China, as India's busy with Pakistan). But the way to successfully combat China is more likely to be a massive trade agreement (a la the TPP) excluding China, rather than some military alliance.

To be clear, there are legit reasons people (including me) didn't like the TPP (its secrecy, its selling out to corporatism, etc), but the basic idea of it, a big trade deal with east asian countries and the US, absolutely screws China. Trump killing that ultimately did help China, and is a chief reason Obama is not the worst president ever, as much as people (again, including me) justly don't like him.

 

[Chiron]

Delusional. You seem to be mistaking China for a charity. China doesn't give away 10 figure sums for shits and giggles because Putin wants to play empire in Ukraine, China has plenty of own imperial ventures it would be more eager to sponsor. China would expect massive concessions from Russia in return, which Russia would be about as likely to give as it is to leave Ukraine alone.

China needs Russia's resources to keep its economy running and needs the support of Russia to counter the US. Its a mutual relationship. EU needs Russian gas and oil or their economies shut down.

Again divorced from reality. Ukrainians in WW2 fought pretty much on all imaginable sides, because Soviets weren't exactly their friends.

Bulk of Ukrainians stayed home and let the Nazis and Soviets kill each other. They only picked sides under duress, returning home when said duress ended.

And it holds true now. Bulk of Ukrainians are trying to escape the fighting, the cream of the Army is being frittered away in local counter-attacks, and those left are mostly untrained civilians good for absorbing rounds while the trained troops maneuver.

When Putin wins, the resistance will be minor and snuffed out. The bulk of Ukrainians will live their lives the same way they always have, just paying their taxes to a different master. The extent of the help they give any resistance will be simply looking the other way and saying nothing.

 

[Agent23]

]

 

[Marduk]

China needs Russia's resources to keep its economy running and needs the support of Russia to counter the US. Its a mutual relationship. EU needs Russian gas and oil or their economies shut down.

They need any resources, not Russian ones specifically. Meanwhile, the basic rule of economics is, if Russia has no alternative but China to make deals with, Russia will not be getting favorable deals at all.

Bulk of Ukrainians stayed home and let the Nazis and Soviets kill each other. They only picked sides under duress, returning home when said duress ended.

And it holds true now. Bulk of Ukrainians are trying to escape the fighting, the cream of the Army is being frittered away in local counter-attacks, and those left are mostly untrained civilians good for absorbing rounds while the trained troops maneuver.

When Putin wins, the resistance will be minor and snuffed out. The bulk of Ukrainians will live their lives the same way they always have, just paying their taxes to a different master. The extent of the help they give any resistance will be simply looking the other way and saying nothing.

I gave you the numbers form Chechnya. That of course is true for any country that vast majority of the population doesn't become insurgents, anywhere in the world, ever. So far Ukrainians are more willing to fight than ever expected.
If we scale these numbers to population, we may be talking of as much as a million resistance fighters. Even if Ukrainians are only quarter as militant as Chechens, its still quarter million, a big fucking force to deal with for any occupation army.
Or in other terms, if we assume just 1% of Ukrainians are angry nationalists who want to fight no matter what, its still 400k people.

 

[WolfBear]

They need any resources, not Russian ones specifically. Meanwhile, the basic rule of economics is, if Russia has no alternative but China to make deals with, Russia will not be getting favorable deals at all.


I gave you the numbers form Chechnya. That of course is true for any country that vast majority of the population doesn't become insurgents, anywhere in the world, ever. So far Ukrainians are more willing to fight than ever expected.
If we scale these numbers to population, we may be talking of as much as a million resistance fighters. Even if Ukrainians are only quarter as militant as Chechens, its still quarter million, a big fucking force to deal with for any occupation army.
Or in other terms, if we assume just 1% of Ukrainians are angry nationalists who want to fight no matter what, its still 400k people.

1% of all Ukrainians or 1% of young Ukrainian males? Because 1% of young Ukrainian males might be more in the range of 100k people. Maybe 150k people if middle-aged Ukrainian males are also included. But still a fairly large number, enough to cause a lot of trouble, no doubt. There's obviously the potential to engage in terrorism if one cannot win a conventional war. And there's also the possibility of mass strikes.