4 ms·

I'm very pessimistic about such interpretations. They seem to me to be mostly western wishful thinking so I'm trying to consciously correct for that. Yes, russ

by ajuc 3y ago

I'm very pessimistic about such interpretations. They seem to me to be mostly western wishful thinking so I'm trying to consciously correct for that. Yes, russians are incompetent, always have been. But most armies are to some degree, and they have been operating under strict darwinian selection for the last 2 years. They adapted to a lot of early tactics that no longer work. And they have time to adapt if the west doesn't help Ukraine finish the job early enough. What west does is microdosing the antibiotics with pauses between the doses instead of pumping the necessary dose for 2 weeks and solving the problem. It's VERY irresponsible. As for naval situation - Russian fleets have always been a joke, the only thing that matters is whether they can block the Black See (they can't), and whether they can use the ships to launch missiles (they can, but if they can't - they can just use ground and air launchers). So there's not much potential wins for Ukraine left there, even if they destroy the whole black see fleet. From Russian POV it's just more sunk costs (pardon the pun) and more PR problems. They aren't very sensitive to either. Ultimately the war will end when Russia can't afford to keep its army in Ukraine or when it loses its army. The first one is easier to achieve, but that takes mass attacks on Russian infrastructure. Not 15 attacks but 100 or 1000. Repeated over and over, so that damage can't be repaired. The west seems to be very restrictive with how Ukrainians can use the west-provided weapons, and that makes this approach unlikely to work in short term. So then the last possible strategy is just hoping Russian economy will collapse. Which it will, don't get me wrong - but in Russia it's hard to distinguish collapsed and uncollapsed economy anyway.

apaprocki 3y ago
We're in broad agreement. The only unknown is that of timing. Russia will not win. The collective "West" is helping very deeply, and part of the problem has been getting everyone closer to the conflict to realize there are no options other than force. That has taken much longer than it should have. (e.g., France's recent change in tone.) It is not such a doom-and-gloom picture -- Poland is leading the charge in terms of ramping up modern military capacity. Every participant nation is chipping in heavily to get the job done. More expensive air defense systems will give way to cheaper alternatives (F-16s, air drones, eventually lasers to neutralize "slow" drone and cruise missile threats), freeing them up to focus on ballistic threats. The front is going to be increasingly taken over by "unmanned" systems -- mine laying robots, loitering vehicles, automated fire vehicles/stations. Systematic destruction of A-50s is paving the way for fighters to operate with much less risk, taking out bomber threat and continuing to use HARMs to further reduce risk from S-300/400s and EW. Ukraine has been so effective in deep targeting of refineries, factories, airfields, at some point it will be time to turn attention to creative ways of stopping the air-launched threat from Olenya and others at the source. These things are won by logistics, and relying on continual delivered aid is a losing strategy. Everyone wants it to be over yesterday, but the only thing that will counter Russia's ability to whip a mobilization economy faster is collective sustainable local production done right. Russia was counting on the US, UK, etc. losing focus through election cycles, but the Eastern Bloc and Baltics will not lose focus. That was a big hurdle to overcome, and the leadership exhibited there helps ease fears that the outcome will solely be determined by what the US does or doesn't do. You couldn't have convinced me earlier Germany would be the ones dragging their feet and France would unambiguously flex muscle, but here we are.
- ajuc 3y ago
  > You couldn't have convinced me earlier Germany would be the ones dragging their feet and France would unambiguously flex muscle, but here we are. This is a very Polish bias :) For the last 30 years France might as well not exist as far as Polish politicians and analysts go. It's bizzare. There's more on TV about irrelevant countries like Hungary or Israel than about France, and when somebody speaks about France it's almost always the most trivial stereotypes. Half the time is cloned conservative propaganda from USA, the other half - from Russia... As for Baltics - they are doing a good job with what they have, but it's not enough. > the only thing that will counter Russia's ability to whip a mobilization economy faster is collective sustainable local production done right That's false. If west sent all the weapons it sent to Ukraine, but did it in the first 3 months - war would be over by now. It is still possible to finish the war quickly or slowly. Each month of delay is prolonging this war nonlinearly (by more than a month).

by ajuc 3y ago

apaprocki 3y ago

We're in broad agreement. The only unknown is that of timing. Russia will not win. The collective "West" is helping very deeply, and part of the problem has been getting everyone closer to the conflict to realize there are no options other than force. That has taken much longer than it should have. (e.g., France's recent change in tone.) It is not such a doom-and-gloom picture -- Poland is leading the charge in terms of ramping up modern military capacity. Every participant nation is chipping in heavily to get the job done. More expensive air defense systems will give way to cheaper alternatives (F-16s, air drones, eventually lasers to neutralize "slow" drone and cruise missile threats), freeing them up to focus on ballistic threats. The front is going to be increasingly taken over by "unmanned" systems -- mine laying robots, loitering vehicles, automated fire vehicles/stations. Systematic destruction of A-50s is paving the way for fighters to operate with much less risk, taking out bomber threat and continuing to use HARMs to further reduce risk from S-300/400s and EW. Ukraine has been so effective in deep targeting of refineries, factories, airfields, at some point it will be time to turn attention to creative ways of stopping the air-launched threat from Olenya and others at the source. These things are won by logistics, and relying on continual delivered aid is a losing strategy. Everyone wants it to be over yesterday, but the only thing that will counter Russia's ability to whip a mobilization economy faster is collective sustainable local production done right. Russia was counting on the US, UK, etc. losing focus through election cycles, but the Eastern Bloc and Baltics will not lose focus. That was a big hurdle to overcome, and the leadership exhibited there helps ease fears that the outcome will solely be determined by what the US does or doesn't do. You couldn't have convinced me earlier Germany would be the ones dragging their feet and France would unambiguously flex muscle, but here we are.

ajuc 3y ago
> You couldn't have convinced me earlier Germany would be the ones dragging their feet and France would unambiguously flex muscle, but here we are. This is a very Polish bias :) For the last 30 years France might as well not exist as far as Polish politicians and analysts go. It's bizzare. There's more on TV about irrelevant countries like Hungary or Israel than about France, and when somebody speaks about France it's almost always the most trivial stereotypes. Half the time is cloned conservative propaganda from USA, the other half - from Russia... As for Baltics - they are doing a good job with what they have, but it's not enough. > the only thing that will counter Russia's ability to whip a mobilization economy faster is collective sustainable local production done right That's false. If west sent all the weapons it sent to Ukraine, but did it in the first 3 months - war would be over by now. It is still possible to finish the war quickly or slowly. Each month of delay is prolonging this war nonlinearly (by more than a month).