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

[WolfBear]

Russian strategic goal is the buffer space of Ukraine, given their position on the North European plain and the desire to anchor their borders on the natural barrier of the Dnieper or, ideally, the Carpathians. Likewise, control of the Ukrainian coastline grants Russia the dominant position in the Black Sea.

As for the Ukrainian women thing, that's....rather dark to consider.

Yeah, probably. Though as Anatoly Karlin said, buffers matter much less in the ICBM age. Would Abkhazia also be necessary for Russia for greater Black Sea control?

Well, thankfully, I don't think that most young Ukrainian men will ever actually get killed, so ...

 

[History Learner]

Yeah, probably. Though as Anatoly Karlin said, buffers matter much less in the ICBM age.

For ICBMs, that's been the case since their inception. For hypersonic conventional missiles, used to take out command and control nodes to assist in launching a successful decapitating nuclear strike? It matters a lot, or for a conventional war it also matters; the Russo-Ukrainian War proves conventional mass warfare isn't dead, like the proponents of 5th Generation Warfare had been claiming for sometime. The more space Russia can trade in a hypothetical war with NATO in the future for time, the more likely it can be to successfully defeat that invasion like 1941.

Would Abkhazia also be necessary for Russia for greater Black Sea control?

Black Sea? No. For the Caucasus? Yes, as does South Ossetia and Armenia. The Russians are wanting to hold all of those areas as hardpoints given the geographic terrain.

Well, thankfully, I don't think that most young Ukrainian men will ever actually get killed, so ...

Given most German and Japanese men survived WWII, yeah.

 

[WolfBear]

Given most German and Japanese men survived WWII, yeah.

Though it's worth noting that for young East German and Russian men, only about 60% of them survived World War II:

Russia\'s Military Losses in WW2. A Few Puzzles.

Greg Cochran\'s recent post on the topic reminded me of a post I began writing but then abandoned ages ago (like in 2012). I can\'t find whatever I wrote (no big loss; there wasn\'t much) but I did come across this graph I had quickly and messily compiled back then: Population figures are taken...

www.unz.com

Still a majority but a bare one.

 

[History Learner]

Though it's worth noting that for young East German and Russian men, only about 60% of them survived World War II:

Russia\'s Military Losses in WW2. A Few Puzzles.

Greg Cochran\'s recent post on the topic reminded me of a post I began writing but then abandoned ages ago (like in 2012). I can\'t find whatever I wrote (no big loss; there wasn\'t much) but I did come across this graph I had quickly and messily compiled back then: Population figures are taken...

www.unz.com

Still a majority but a bare one.

Given the Wehrmacht maintained a 1.5:1 combat effectiveness against fresh and better equipped Anglo-Americans even into the Bulge, not surprised. Likewise not surprised the Russians returned the favor when they got the chance; 5,000 guys returning home from Stalingrad when an entire Army Group went there in late 1942 says a lot.

 

[WolfBear]

5,000 guys returning home from Stalingrad when an entire Army Group went there in late 1942 says a lot.

They got the gulag treatment, didn't they?

 

[History Learner]

They got the gulag treatment, didn't they?

Everyone was doing bad shit, that's WWII and War in general. Fighting on the Western Front matched that on the Eastern Front in intensity, casualties and pure blood thirstiness on both sides. Can't remember the British RAF official who said it, but with regards to the CBO he intoned if they lost the war they would be tried for war crimes and would deserve to hang, given what they were doing.

There is a lesson there to be applied into this conflict, about spinning it as completely Black or White.

 

[Captain X]

I see History Learner has re-emerged for his monthly/bi-monthly ritual self-humiliation.

Everyone's favorite shill is back. Hope he at least gets paid to do this.

 

[Husky_Khan]

Wonder if I can pull off something similar with all the Kit Kat Bars I have leftover from Halloween.

 

[WolfBear]

Russia’s Great Reverse Migration to Central Asia

archived 25 Nov 2022 12:31:20 UTC

archive.ph

 

[strunkenwhite]

Entirely confirmed, as it was recently revealed Russian daily losses in Tanks/AFVs are about five a day but production rates are at about 55 per day. They're gaining in strength, both in manpower and materially, as revealed by surging Russian war production. As for things like missiles, Russian hypersonics entered mass manufacture in August and this NYT headline speaks volumes about the claims they were close to ever running out of munitions:

I was not able to find the specific part of the raamoprusland article that supported your claim of 55 tanks/AFVs being produced per day. Could you cite the specific text you're referring to or inferring from? To my eyes the article would seem to suggest the opposite. (i.e., it said that Russia will need four years of production to make up four months of war. 4 years x 365 days x 55 tanks is over 80,000. Not even the most deluded Ukrainian propagandist would claim this many Russian armored vehicle losses. But I suppose I should ask, do you think Russia has taken this many losses of armored vehicles?)

 

[Zachowon]

I was not able to find the specific part of the raamoprusland article that supported your claim of 55 tanks/AFVs being produced per day. Could you cite the specific text you're referring to or inferring from? To my eyes the article would seem to suggest the opposite. (i.e., it said that Russia will need four years of production to make up four months of war. 4 years x 365 days x 55 tanks is over 80,000. Not even the most deluded Ukrainian propagandist would claim this many Russian armored vehicle losses. But I suppose I should ask, do you think Russia has taken this many losses of armored vehicles?)

He is more saying that no matter what Ukraine takes out for the Russians, the Russians will always be able to out produce the West

 

[Megadeath]

He is more saying that no matter what Ukraine takes out for the Russians, the Russians will always be able to out produce the West

That's not what he said though? He said their production outstrips their losses, and then as evidence used an article that says the exact opposite, and that it'll take 5-10 years to replace the material lost and used up, depending on category. Because he's an idiot, and hopes we're idiots too.

 

[History Learner]

I was not able to find the specific part of the raamoprusland article that supported your claim of 55 tanks/AFVs being produced per day. Could you cite the specific text you're referring to or inferring from?

This section was the start:

The bulk of the modernised and new AFVs were received by the Russian Armed Forces during the implementation of the 2011−2020 State Armament Programme (SAP), which continued with the 2018−2027 SAP (the overlapping of the SAP 2020 and the SAP 2027 is due to Russian bureaucratic logic). Each year, Russian industry supplied an average of about 650 tanks and other AFVs. Of these, tanks alone were supplied in numbers of no more than 160−170 T-72B3/B3M units per year under the 2011−2020 SAP from the UralVagonZavod (UVZ) facilities in Nizhny Tagil and Omsk (in 2021, only 34 of these tanks were supplied), and no more than 45−50 T-80BVM tanks were supplied from the Omsk plant in 2017−2021. Altogether about 1,900−2,000 upgraded tanks out of about 3,300 units were combat-ready before the attack on Ukraine. This is not counting the tanks that remained in storage. The rest were other types of AFVs. And if one considers that the armed forces had at least 16,000 AFVs of various types just before the war, the proportion of those produced or upgraded since the early 2010s was little more than a quarter of the total fleet.​

I went through the links, couldn't find where they were getting the "650 tanks and other AFVs per year" bit, but the breakdown they do on Uralvagonzavod is immediately telling, given they have multiple subsidiaries with tank and AFV production at plants outside of Nizhny Tagil and Omsk.

To my eyes the article would seem to suggest the opposite. (i.e., it said that Russia will need four years of production to make up four months of war. 4 years x 365 days x 55 tanks is over 80,000. Not even the most deluded Ukrainian propagandist would claim this many Russian armored vehicle losses. But I suppose I should ask, do you think Russia has taken this many losses of armored vehicles?)

No, I don't. Given the author claims 2,000 Russian tank kills four months into the war when official Ukrainian sources in September were still claiming less than 2,000 should say a lot on that aspect.

 

[History Learner]

He is more saying that no matter what Ukraine takes out for the Russians, the Russians will always be able to out produce the West

I don't recall saying the former, and the latter is out of context.

In the case of the former, I pointed out Russian loss rates are made up for by their production as is, which is quite a bit different than saying Ukraine could never inflict sufficient loss rates. As for the latter, on select goods, I can definitely say the Russians are outproducing the United States, particularly on things like artillery shells, tanks, etc. Clearly, the United States outproduces Russia on things like Naval hardware and airframes, for example. This could change too, as I noted, if the United States puts the money forward and maintains the political will to increase capacity.

That's not what he said though? He said their production outstrips their losses, and then as evidence used an article that says the exact opposite, and that it'll take 5-10 years to replace the material lost and used up, depending on category. Because he's an idiot, and hopes we're idiots too.

Why would I have to "hope" that's the case when you demonstrate your status as one on a regular basis for me? Please, do continue to seethe though, I find it enjoyable.

 

[strunkenwhite]

This section was the start:

That section does not support 55 per day. Rather, it says 650 per year. I promise you that an Earth year is longer than 12 days, although your home planet may be different. BTW, 650 per year in a 365 day year is less than 2, not more than 5, so production is not keeping up with losses per your source.

 

[Vaermina]

Indeed, they took back Kherson but, once again, failed to achieve the encirclement of Russian forces. If Kherson was being besieged in September, when I posted that, explain the lack of any major encirclements of Russian troops? Likewise, Surovikin's announcement of tough decisions preceded the official start of the Ukrainian offensive on Kherson in late October/early November by almost two weeks. The decision to abandon the city had been made in advance of any military realities on the ground. 19fortyfive explains why this was the case well:

As part of Putin’s response to the deteriorating situation in his Ukrainian war effort, he announced a mobilization of 300,000 reservists in September. Despite significant difficulties and shortcomings by the Russian state in conducting the effort – and reportedly up to 700,000 Russian men fleeing the border to avoid serving – there are now more than 200,000 new troops (82,000 of the 300,000 mobilized reservists have already been deployed to Ukraine) preparing for a winter offensive that could completely change the nature of this war.​

​

By surrendering Kherson city without a fight and blowing the bridges over the Dnipro, Surovikin has preserved 30,000 of his best-trained and experienced troops for use in the coming offensive, sealed off the southern front from a risk of a Ukrainian flanking action and will soon have a massive new force to employ (I will publish a separate analysis next week looking at potential objectives of this offensive).​

​

Once this force is ready to launch Putin’s winter offensive (likely in late December/early January when the ground has sufficiently frozen), it will likely be preceded by a massive new attack on the Ukrainian energy infrastructure to plunge the country into darkness, cripple the remainder of its electrified rail system, and significantly hamper the government’s ability to supply its troops with basic needs, complicate their ability to move troops around the battlefield, and most critically, degrade their ability to communicate with troops in the field.​

​

Further evidence of this:

Cool, and Russia will launch this assault with what equipment?

 

[ATP]

Basically, the fundamentals of the war remain in the Russian favor, both in material and manpower terms. Ukraine can't sustain the 1:1 overall ratio seen to date, given their opponent has the higher resource base. It's a war of attrition, and that favors the Russians. It's why Milley and others have started moving to encourage peace talks, simply because there is no long term path to victory:

If USA wanted Ukraine victory,they would send F.16 and Abrams there.In which case,ukrainians would arleady win.
No,my friend - they wanted deal with postsoviets from the start.And gave Europe to them.

If not for comrade colonel stupidity,that would arleady happened.When other kgb goons finally kill him,we would have deal with Moscov over Europe corpse.
So - long live colonel putin.Or,at least,live till entire postsoviet army die.

P.S It is 1:3 ratio,at least in tanks.And since ukrainians use some of postsoviet tanks later,it is even worst for postsoviets.
And,during WW2,soviets even in 1945 lost 3-4 soldiers for one german.
Compared to 1:30 in 1941.

Could you deliver some funny soviet sources about evil spirits fighting them in Ukraine?
You are like @Chiron,but unless him,you never delivered such funny info.

P.S.S For your info - germans planned to genocide Poland again,and USA would sell us again,BUT - comrade Putin decided to take all by himself.
Thanks God for him,otherwise Europe would be gone under german-postsoviet yoke.

 

[Marduk]

If USA wanted Ukraine victory,they would send F.16 and Abrams there.In which case,ukrainians would arleady win.

Biden is slow with such decision, and they also have an excuse that training Ukrainians to service these things has to take a lot of time. Especially with F-16. for which training is happening, but training the ground technicians may take even more than pilots.

Slava Ukraine! US Approves To Train Ukrainian Pilots On US Fighter Jets Like F-16, F-15EX. But There's A Catch

The United States House of Representatives approved $100 million for training Ukrainian pilots to fly American fighter jets, putting Ukraine one step closer to acquiring battle-prooven warplanes. The House authorized the funding on July 14 as part of the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act...

eurasiantimes.com

With this timing it's not possible to send F-16 before summer next year, and even that's with very compressed training schedules.

As for Abrams and Bradley, the servicing logistics are also an issue (and moving so many such heavy vehicles to Poland through whole Ukraine for maintenance all the time won't do, it's hard enough with the western artillery which does need it), also Ukraine has a lot of tanks and supply of T-72's from the West still didn't dry up. Probably will happen once no more T-72's can be scrounged up.

 

[Sailor.X]

Poland is the Guy in a bar that puts a pool ball in a Gym Sock right before a Bar Fight begins.

 

[The Whispering Monk]

Poland is the Guy in a bar that puts a pool ball in a Gym Sock right before a Bar Fight begins.

it works though.