4 ms·

There are enough weapons available, ammo might become tight one day so. Those weapons, from tanks rifles to planes, are modern so. That means that Ukrainian ope

by hef19898 3y ago

There are enough weapons available, ammo might become tight one day so. Those weapons, from tanks rifles to planes, are modern so. That means that Ukrainian operators need training, that takes time. Logistics have to be set-up for everything from spares to consumables, that takes time. Not to forget that some of the stuff wasn't properly maintained for quite some time by the donor nations, so they need repairs, maintenance and overhaul. That takes time. As long as NATO is willing to support Ukraine, a lack of weapons and gear shouldn't be a problem.

dale_glass 3y ago
I mean more the quality than the quantity. There's all sorts of hangups with things like ATACMS. All I'm saying is that I find this gradual escalation very unpleasant. If we side with Ukraine then let's end this as quickly and decisively as possible. Stretching this out to years of gradual escalation where during a given month we decide "Okay, maybe Ukraine now can have HIMARS, or better tanks, or better missiles" seems like the worst way to do things. I think long term the current strategy means more money, more dead people, less clear politics and worse PR.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- chmod600 3y ago
  Gradual escalation could be good in the sense that there's no clear prompt for nuclear war.
  - dale_glass 3y ago
    Yeah, I don't buy that. Part because I don't think Putin is suicidal, or that stupid. He was counting on reaping benefits from this. Nuclear doesn't lead to any kind of benefit. But besides that there are plenty weapons that aren't all that fancy and would have made a huge difference if they were there sooner. Think about the mess HIMARS would have made of that tank column stuck on the way to Kyiv.
    - agloe_dreams 3y ago
      > Part because I don't think Putin is suicidal, or that stupid. I would have agreed with this at the start of the war..but I have no idea what gain he can ever get here short of riding it out to 2025 and hoping that a change in politics in America will change the game for him. Even then, I would not be shocked to see the EU step up in their place. If Russia will overrun Ukraine, they will overrun anyone. They are not gaining meaningful ground and the west is further uniting; NATO is at their doorstop in Finland now, a massive failure, any surrender in Ukraine ends with Ukraine joining NATO. The EU needs Russia to know that the buck stops there. Rumors state Putin is surrounded by yes men and terrified. Media keeps hearing reports of cancer; he may be dying already. He has portrayed himself as brute and strong, gaining ground still has his legacy trashed for the cost, then goes out on that memory. Might I add that nobody actually knows his mental state. I would not be shocked to see a WMD outcome. There are rumors of chemical weapons being prepped. The only way Russia changes the tides is to cut Ukraine off at the top with Zelenskyy, there's only two ways they bring the fight to Kyiv.
      - datavirtue 3y ago
        Agreed. Their blue lives matter propaganda campaign was wildly successful.
- ceejayoz 3y ago
  > All I'm saying is that I find this gradual escalation very unpleasant. It seems to be highly effective at not giving Putin anything big enough to latch upon as a genuine red-line escalation.
- rainworld 3y ago
  If we side with Ukraine then let's end this as quickly and decisively as possible. And how exactly are you going to achieve that? The thing about war is that you can’t just decide to win, you actually have to do it. Stretching this out to years of gradual escalation This gradual escalation is at least as much to the “benefit” of Western audiences as it is to Russia. Just imagine telling people (Germans in particular) about German tanks in Ukraine against Russia at the beginning of 2022… Another psyop targeting Western audiences: the notion that Russia is losing[0], can’t or won’t retaliate, even that its strategic nuclear weapons won’t work, and in any case “MAD” will protect us. All these things are very wrong, no matter how mad that makes people here and elsewhere. [0]: Open your favourite satellite image service, visit an Ukrainian city, count the fresh graves, do the math. Kharkov alone easily has 13k KIAs buried or whatever’s the official count. Meanwhile: https://novayagazeta.eu/articles/2023/04/14/bbc-news-russian-and-mediazona-confirm-over-20000-russian-soldiers-dead-in-ukraine-war-en-news https://novayagazeta.eu/articles/2023/04/14/bbc-news-russian... I‘d say it’s something like 50k total but point is: not even close to what Ukraine has lost. And even if it were, that’s not how you win an existential conflict against a country five times your size. Finally, I don’t agree with everything but here‘s Mearsheimer with a good overview of the situation: https://youtu.be/v-rHBRwdql8?t=385 https://youtu.be/v-rHBRwdql8?t=385
  - notahacker 3y ago
    Nice of the Russians to support the "Western psyop" by loudly infighting over the losses suffered and struggles to hold the only bit of territory they've managed to capture since their latest conscription waves, following the mass retreats of the autumn, presumably because their numerical advantage left them without any Ukranians to shoot at.
    - rainworld 3y ago
      Nice of the Russians to support the "Western psyop" Yes, but unironically. Decisions Were Made after the US and UK attacked (via Ukraine but fooling nobody) sites of Russia’s strategic nuclear forces at the beginning of December last year.[0][1] They got an immediate answer[2], and a couple more such messages later on, but what the Russians would have realized then (if not earlier) is that you most likely cannot reason with the ruling elites of the dying empire and its rabid little attack Beagle. Let’s hope they find a way still. following the mass retreats of the autumn Every drug peddler knows: Getting high on your own supply is the most dangerous thing. numerical advantage left them without any Ukranians to shoot at. Pretty bad taste, in light of the footage coming in from Zaporozhye rn. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyagilevo_and_Engels_air_bases_attacks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyagilevo_and_Engels_air_bases... [1]: Russia’s nuclear doctrine allows a nuclear response in such a case, for good reason. [2]: Just lol if you think this was an accident: https://www.military.com/daily-news/2023/05/22/b-2-stealth-bombers-flying-again-air-force-still-mum-reason-grounding.html https://www.military.com/daily-news/2023/05/22/b-2-stealth-b...
- bryanlarsen 3y ago
  Whether or not you think gradual escalation prevented nuclear escalation, it's pretty much done now. Given the US policy of not announcing shipments until they've been used in the field, I bet that ATACMS is currently en route to Ukraine. Storm Shadow and ATACMS are roughly equivalent and they already have Storm Shadow. F-16 and ATACMS were pretty much the last things on the Ukraine wish list, and they're now (probably) getting both.
  - eastern 3y ago
    America's war goal is war. If Ukraine 'won' quickly, the next war may not be easy to find quickly. Better for everyone to keep this one going as long as possible.
    - datavirtue 3y ago
      Not sure why this was down voted. The incentives for our politicians to create wars are very strong. They can convince themselves and others of the verocity of their reasons but war is a benefit to them. All they have to do is signal a desire for conflict (or a response to conflict) and the campaign dollars pour in.
OrvalWintermute 3y ago
> Logistics have to be set-up for everything from spares to consumables, that takes time. Not to forget that some of the stuff wasn't properly maintained for quite some time by the donor nations, so they need repairs, maintenance and overhaul. That takes time. This is not representative of what is actually going on. The Russians for the most part have a fairly clean logistics system based on their weapon systems they are employing. Nonstop convoys of Trains and trucks. The Ukrainian logistics system is a debacle because it is a mishmash of Old Soviet and a smorgasboard of Western donations, and many things are being repaired in Poland then shipped back. Becuase the Ukrainian tactics are effectively Russian tactics still, they are using Western vehicles in ways they are not intended to be used (e.g. using a tank as a mobile artillery platform shooting at max range with max charges, wearing out barrels early). Given the tooth to nail ratio (Warfighter to logistics) and given losses already, Ukraine is pretty close to losing generations of men, and a wide depopulation of the country.
- agloe_dreams 3y ago
  But yet, the war is a slaughterhouse for Russia. It seems like the Russian issue is that they lack any modern weapons systems or skilled labor. They have playbooks for logistics but no way to actually move the line they send men to.
- mupuff1234 3y ago
  And how do you know what's going on?
- jemmyw 3y ago
  One thing that Ukraine is not doing is using Russian tactics. A lot of the successes they've had came with using western style C&C. Had Russia invaded for proper in 2014 then yes, but Ukraine undertook an extensive restructure and rebuild since then, obviously limited by their capacity and external support. Well, you did talk more specifically about how they use tanks. Some of their army have had western training. If they are doing that there might be a more contextual reason that applies to Russia too - lack of air support. Western tactics rely a lot on good available air support and air suppression. Russia has more air support than Ukraine but it's still very limited.

dale_glass 3y ago

I mean more the quality than the quantity. There's all sorts of hangups with things like ATACMS. All I'm saying is that I find this gradual escalation very unpleasant. If we side with Ukraine then let's end this as quickly and decisively as possible. Stretching this out to years of gradual escalation where during a given month we decide "Okay, maybe Ukraine now can have HIMARS, or better tanks, or better missiles" seems like the worst way to do things. I think long term the current strategy means more money, more dead people, less clear politics and worse PR.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
chmod600 3y ago
Gradual escalation could be good in the sense that there's no clear prompt for nuclear war.
- dale_glass 3y ago
  Yeah, I don't buy that. Part because I don't think Putin is suicidal, or that stupid. He was counting on reaping benefits from this. Nuclear doesn't lead to any kind of benefit. But besides that there are plenty weapons that aren't all that fancy and would have made a huge difference if they were there sooner. Think about the mess HIMARS would have made of that tank column stuck on the way to Kyiv.
  - agloe_dreams 3y ago
    > Part because I don't think Putin is suicidal, or that stupid. I would have agreed with this at the start of the war..but I have no idea what gain he can ever get here short of riding it out to 2025 and hoping that a change in politics in America will change the game for him. Even then, I would not be shocked to see the EU step up in their place. If Russia will overrun Ukraine, they will overrun anyone. They are not gaining meaningful ground and the west is further uniting; NATO is at their doorstop in Finland now, a massive failure, any surrender in Ukraine ends with Ukraine joining NATO. The EU needs Russia to know that the buck stops there. Rumors state Putin is surrounded by yes men and terrified. Media keeps hearing reports of cancer; he may be dying already. He has portrayed himself as brute and strong, gaining ground still has his legacy trashed for the cost, then goes out on that memory. Might I add that nobody actually knows his mental state. I would not be shocked to see a WMD outcome. There are rumors of chemical weapons being prepped. The only way Russia changes the tides is to cut Ukraine off at the top with Zelenskyy, there's only two ways they bring the fight to Kyiv.
    - datavirtue 3y ago
      Agreed. Their blue lives matter propaganda campaign was wildly successful.
ceejayoz 3y ago
> All I'm saying is that I find this gradual escalation very unpleasant. It seems to be highly effective at not giving Putin anything big enough to latch upon as a genuine red-line escalation.
rainworld 3y ago
If we side with Ukraine then let's end this as quickly and decisively as possible. And how exactly are you going to achieve that? The thing about war is that you can’t just decide to win, you actually have to do it. Stretching this out to years of gradual escalation This gradual escalation is at least as much to the “benefit” of Western audiences as it is to Russia. Just imagine telling people (Germans in particular) about German tanks in Ukraine against Russia at the beginning of 2022… Another psyop targeting Western audiences: the notion that Russia is losing[0], can’t or won’t retaliate, even that its strategic nuclear weapons won’t work, and in any case “MAD” will protect us. All these things are very wrong, no matter how mad that makes people here and elsewhere. [0]: Open your favourite satellite image service, visit an Ukrainian city, count the fresh graves, do the math. Kharkov alone easily has 13k KIAs buried or whatever’s the official count. Meanwhile: https://novayagazeta.eu/articles/2023/04/14/bbc-news-russian-and-mediazona-confirm-over-20000-russian-soldiers-dead-in-ukraine-war-en-news https://novayagazeta.eu/articles/2023/04/14/bbc-news-russian... I‘d say it’s something like 50k total but point is: not even close to what Ukraine has lost. And even if it were, that’s not how you win an existential conflict against a country five times your size. Finally, I don’t agree with everything but here‘s Mearsheimer with a good overview of the situation: https://youtu.be/v-rHBRwdql8?t=385 https://youtu.be/v-rHBRwdql8?t=385
- notahacker 3y ago
  Nice of the Russians to support the "Western psyop" by loudly infighting over the losses suffered and struggles to hold the only bit of territory they've managed to capture since their latest conscription waves, following the mass retreats of the autumn, presumably because their numerical advantage left them without any Ukranians to shoot at.
  - rainworld 3y ago
    Nice of the Russians to support the "Western psyop" Yes, but unironically. Decisions Were Made after the US and UK attacked (via Ukraine but fooling nobody) sites of Russia’s strategic nuclear forces at the beginning of December last year.[0][1] They got an immediate answer[2], and a couple more such messages later on, but what the Russians would have realized then (if not earlier) is that you most likely cannot reason with the ruling elites of the dying empire and its rabid little attack Beagle. Let’s hope they find a way still. following the mass retreats of the autumn Every drug peddler knows: Getting high on your own supply is the most dangerous thing. numerical advantage left them without any Ukranians to shoot at. Pretty bad taste, in light of the footage coming in from Zaporozhye rn. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyagilevo_and_Engels_air_bases_attacks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyagilevo_and_Engels_air_bases... [1]: Russia’s nuclear doctrine allows a nuclear response in such a case, for good reason. [2]: Just lol if you think this was an accident: https://www.military.com/daily-news/2023/05/22/b-2-stealth-bombers-flying-again-air-force-still-mum-reason-grounding.html https://www.military.com/daily-news/2023/05/22/b-2-stealth-b...
bryanlarsen 3y ago
Whether or not you think gradual escalation prevented nuclear escalation, it's pretty much done now. Given the US policy of not announcing shipments until they've been used in the field, I bet that ATACMS is currently en route to Ukraine. Storm Shadow and ATACMS are roughly equivalent and they already have Storm Shadow. F-16 and ATACMS were pretty much the last things on the Ukraine wish list, and they're now (probably) getting both.
- eastern 3y ago
  America's war goal is war. If Ukraine 'won' quickly, the next war may not be easy to find quickly. Better for everyone to keep this one going as long as possible.
  - datavirtue 3y ago
    Not sure why this was down voted. The incentives for our politicians to create wars are very strong. They can convince themselves and others of the verocity of their reasons but war is a benefit to them. All they have to do is signal a desire for conflict (or a response to conflict) and the campaign dollars pour in.

OrvalWintermute 3y ago

> Logistics have to be set-up for everything from spares to consumables, that takes time. Not to forget that some of the stuff wasn't properly maintained for quite some time by the donor nations, so they need repairs, maintenance and overhaul. That takes time. This is not representative of what is actually going on. The Russians for the most part have a fairly clean logistics system based on their weapon systems they are employing. Nonstop convoys of Trains and trucks. The Ukrainian logistics system is a debacle because it is a mishmash of Old Soviet and a smorgasboard of Western donations, and many things are being repaired in Poland then shipped back. Becuase the Ukrainian tactics are effectively Russian tactics still, they are using Western vehicles in ways they are not intended to be used (e.g. using a tank as a mobile artillery platform shooting at max range with max charges, wearing out barrels early). Given the tooth to nail ratio (Warfighter to logistics) and given losses already, Ukraine is pretty close to losing generations of men, and a wide depopulation of the country.

agloe_dreams 3y ago
But yet, the war is a slaughterhouse for Russia. It seems like the Russian issue is that they lack any modern weapons systems or skilled labor. They have playbooks for logistics but no way to actually move the line they send men to.
mupuff1234 3y ago
And how do you know what's going on?
jemmyw 3y ago
One thing that Ukraine is not doing is using Russian tactics. A lot of the successes they've had came with using western style C&C. Had Russia invaded for proper in 2014 then yes, but Ukraine undertook an extensive restructure and rebuild since then, obviously limited by their capacity and external support. Well, you did talk more specifically about how they use tanks. Some of their army have had western training. If they are doing that there might be a more contextual reason that applies to Russia too - lack of air support. Western tactics rely a lot on good available air support and air suppression. Russia has more air support than Ukraine but it's still very limited.