4 ms·

Ukraine has exposed Russia as a not-so-great power

16 points by crhulls 4y ago

anovikov 4y ago
Much simple answer is that Russia doesn't have a viable air force. Air force and the navy, not tanks, lets military get things done - land troops are just to seal the results of the already won battle. Having a viable air force requires a viable electronics industry which Russia completely lacks, and metal processing achieving much better tolerances than they shown to be capable of doing - which defines both stealth and engine performance. Sorry but there is no way to "hack" this: having a viable air force requires an advanced economy and science which only a rich country may have.
- faangguyindia 4y ago
  But why will Russia use its all its force against such a weak target. I'd just waste time and use old weapons for fun while rest of the world acts on it. What's the use of getting a quick and easy victory against Ukraine
  - darthrupert 4y ago
    I think they're just behaving far more emotionally and less logically than what you night expect. They think Ukraine and Russia has a shared destiny or some other completely unfounded bullshit like that. Even if they did, so what. If history defined the present, England might be thinking about India, parts of China with a greedy eye.
printvoid 4y ago
I think this article is a deeply flawed analysis of the whole situation. This war is not between Ukraine and Russia,rather Russia and the west backed by USA. It's only that Ukraine is unfortunately at the fore front of it. Russia has suffered terribly so far if you look at it from the pov that Russia is fighting just Ukraine but it's more than Ukraine. Russia is also reasonably thinking of long term consequences about their country as a whole and they don't want to use their whole energy just to defeat Ukraine. Their goal or objective of shared destiny with Ukraine is something which west is no able to digest. Russia has certainly got itself into a dilemma here, win with ease against Ukraine by deploying full scale military operations and get isolated in the international world or do as they call it limited military operations and suffer losses and probably a painful win at the last with military objectives attained and the western arm around Ukraine's neck taken off, which actually is their ultimate goal.
- reducesuffering 4y ago
  > Their goal or objective of shared destiny with Ukraine is something which west is no able to digest. Proceeds to shell and murder Ukrainians left and right; known to every single Russian neighbor: Georgians, Ukrainians, Poles, Latvians, Lithuanians, Estonians. I can't count the number of Eastern European grocery stores I've been to in the west talking about this.
- anovikov 4y ago
  Russia has already deployed absolutely everything it has, and lost most of it. They tried to use air power against Ukraine and failed - suffered incredible losses and haven't achieved anything. For more than two months, they never ventured into airspace over Ukrainian controlled territory. They burned through their entire stocks of modern guided air to surface and surface to surface missiles, achieving some results like shutting down entire Ukrainian oil processing industry and most of military production, but failing to take out most airfields (Ukrainian air force is still intensely operating). Now they are using missiles that aren't suited for attacking ground targets like anti-ship Kh-22 - which misses by hundreds of meters because it has to fly all-inertial - it doesn't seem to get them anything but terrorising civilians. Because they have nothing better left, and they can't use manned aircraft. Their tank force has suffered incredible losses and they burned through entire stocks of combat-ready equipment, all of it is either lost of already committed on the theatre - now they have to replenish with equipment from storage - the famous 15,000+ tanks and 30,000+ APC and IFVs left from the Cold War - which will be sufficient for a few years but this is yeah, old stuff. If they are still making some progress it's only because of artillery, for which they have an advantage of having short supply lines and plenty of munitions in storage - around 6 million tons - but at this rate of usage both munitions and equipment from storage will inevitably run out in a few years.
- eveningcoffee 4y ago
  I refer you to this https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31965687 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31965687 comment, that was written 1h before yours. I quote "They think Ukraine and Russia has a shared destiny or some other completely unfounded bullshit like that." No, it is not a war between the West and Russia. It is an idiotic military campaign Russia is waging because of some unfounded delusions. Nobody in Ukraine wants to have anything shared with Russia. The West was just dragged into this conflict because it just happens next to its border and the West is sympathetic with Ukraine and could not tolerate such unprovoked violence. Now the important question for the context, because what you shared are clear Russian propaganda talking points, are you a Russian? If not, then what you think influenced you to come to this wrong conclusion? I'm trying to figure out some of the paths Russian propaganda is using to get into peoples minds. Thank you in advance if you decide to answer to this question.
jqpabc123 4y ago
All power is economic. Unlike China, Russia has never learned how to play the capitalism game. It's no accident that Russia's military is about as impressive as it's economic output --- which is to say, not very. There are huge gaps of competence in both cases.
- yucky 4y ago
  Good! As a US taxpayer then, that means we should no longer be required to contribute BILLIONS to Ukraine's defense against such a backwards, weak opponent.
  - jqpabc123 4y ago
    Thanks for the insight comrade.
    - yucky 4y ago
      Ah yes, anybody who doesn't want to write blank checks to the military industrial complex must be a secret Russian spy. This isn't Reddit/Twatter, please don't do that.
  - PostOnce 4y ago
    I know I am late to comment, but I just want to point out that the money isn't necessarily solely for Ukraine's defense... it is also in our own self-interest to invest in stabilizing Europe and the global economy by hindering Russia's imperial ambition (and frightening China as to the consequences of any imperial ambition of their own). If Russia had had a cakewalk in Ukraine, the future would look very grim. Instead, because of our dollars and guns, it looks less grim, for Europe, for us, for Ukraine, for Taiwan, we may have prevented a tsunami of blood and violence in the coming decades simply by spending some money sooner rather than all of the money later. The question isn't whether we should protect Ukraine, per se, it is whether we will be worse off if we don't, isn't it?

16 points by crhulls 4y ago

Much simple answer is that Russia doesn't have a viable air force. Air force and the navy, not tanks, lets military get things done - land troops are just to seal the results of the already won battle. Having a viable air force requires a viable electronics industry which Russia completely lacks, and metal processing achieving much better tolerances than they shown to be capable of doing - which defines both stealth and engine performance. Sorry but there is no way to "hack" this: having a viable air force requires an advanced economy and science which only a rich country may have.

faangguyindia 4y ago
But why will Russia use its all its force against such a weak target. I'd just waste time and use old weapons for fun while rest of the world acts on it. What's the use of getting a quick and easy victory against Ukraine
- darthrupert 4y ago
  I think they're just behaving far more emotionally and less logically than what you night expect. They think Ukraine and Russia has a shared destiny or some other completely unfounded bullshit like that. Even if they did, so what. If history defined the present, England might be thinking about India, parts of China with a greedy eye.

printvoid 4y ago

I think this article is a deeply flawed analysis of the whole situation. This war is not between Ukraine and Russia,rather Russia and the west backed by USA. It's only that Ukraine is unfortunately at the fore front of it. Russia has suffered terribly so far if you look at it from the pov that Russia is fighting just Ukraine but it's more than Ukraine. Russia is also reasonably thinking of long term consequences about their country as a whole and they don't want to use their whole energy just to defeat Ukraine. Their goal or objective of shared destiny with Ukraine is something which west is no able to digest. Russia has certainly got itself into a dilemma here, win with ease against Ukraine by deploying full scale military operations and get isolated in the international world or do as they call it limited military operations and suffer losses and probably a painful win at the last with military objectives attained and the western arm around Ukraine's neck taken off, which actually is their ultimate goal.

reducesuffering 4y ago
> Their goal or objective of shared destiny with Ukraine is something which west is no able to digest. Proceeds to shell and murder Ukrainians left and right; known to every single Russian neighbor: Georgians, Ukrainians, Poles, Latvians, Lithuanians, Estonians. I can't count the number of Eastern European grocery stores I've been to in the west talking about this.
anovikov 4y ago
Russia has already deployed absolutely everything it has, and lost most of it. They tried to use air power against Ukraine and failed - suffered incredible losses and haven't achieved anything. For more than two months, they never ventured into airspace over Ukrainian controlled territory. They burned through their entire stocks of modern guided air to surface and surface to surface missiles, achieving some results like shutting down entire Ukrainian oil processing industry and most of military production, but failing to take out most airfields (Ukrainian air force is still intensely operating). Now they are using missiles that aren't suited for attacking ground targets like anti-ship Kh-22 - which misses by hundreds of meters because it has to fly all-inertial - it doesn't seem to get them anything but terrorising civilians. Because they have nothing better left, and they can't use manned aircraft. Their tank force has suffered incredible losses and they burned through entire stocks of combat-ready equipment, all of it is either lost of already committed on the theatre - now they have to replenish with equipment from storage - the famous 15,000+ tanks and 30,000+ APC and IFVs left from the Cold War - which will be sufficient for a few years but this is yeah, old stuff. If they are still making some progress it's only because of artillery, for which they have an advantage of having short supply lines and plenty of munitions in storage - around 6 million tons - but at this rate of usage both munitions and equipment from storage will inevitably run out in a few years.
eveningcoffee 4y ago
I refer you to this https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31965687 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31965687 comment, that was written 1h before yours. I quote "They think Ukraine and Russia has a shared destiny or some other completely unfounded bullshit like that." No, it is not a war between the West and Russia. It is an idiotic military campaign Russia is waging because of some unfounded delusions. Nobody in Ukraine wants to have anything shared with Russia. The West was just dragged into this conflict because it just happens next to its border and the West is sympathetic with Ukraine and could not tolerate such unprovoked violence. Now the important question for the context, because what you shared are clear Russian propaganda talking points, are you a Russian? If not, then what you think influenced you to come to this wrong conclusion? I'm trying to figure out some of the paths Russian propaganda is using to get into peoples minds. Thank you in advance if you decide to answer to this question.

jqpabc123 4y ago

All power is economic. Unlike China, Russia has never learned how to play the capitalism game. It's no accident that Russia's military is about as impressive as it's economic output --- which is to say, not very. There are huge gaps of competence in both cases.

yucky 4y ago
Good! As a US taxpayer then, that means we should no longer be required to contribute BILLIONS to Ukraine's defense against such a backwards, weak opponent.
- jqpabc123 4y ago
  Thanks for the insight comrade.
  - yucky 4y ago
    Ah yes, anybody who doesn't want to write blank checks to the military industrial complex must be a secret Russian spy. This isn't Reddit/Twatter, please don't do that.
- PostOnce 4y ago
  I know I am late to comment, but I just want to point out that the money isn't necessarily solely for Ukraine's defense... it is also in our own self-interest to invest in stabilizing Europe and the global economy by hindering Russia's imperial ambition (and frightening China as to the consequences of any imperial ambition of their own). If Russia had had a cakewalk in Ukraine, the future would look very grim. Instead, because of our dollars and guns, it looks less grim, for Europe, for us, for Ukraine, for Taiwan, we may have prevented a tsunami of blood and violence in the coming decades simply by spending some money sooner rather than all of the money later. The question isn't whether we should protect Ukraine, per se, it is whether we will be worse off if we don't, isn't it?