War in Ukraine

[MontyPython]

by providing, you mean selling? I have no exception to us selling goods to whoever, even to the point of providing the goods to only one side of a conflict. We can choose to deal with whoever we want to deal with.

Where I draw the line is us continuing to use American shipping knowing the Germans were targeting us. If Britain needed our goods, they should come and get them. The British dragged us into the line of fire, so that we would get involved and lose even more lives.

So fast forward to today.

I gather you're similarly supportive of the US lend/lease program supplying Ukraine.

You thereby wholly support the current efforts of the US.

As such, you are actually pro-intervention.

/end

 

[hog88]

So fast forward to today.

I gather you're similarly supportive of the US lend/lease program supplying Ukraine.

You thereby wholly support the current efforts of the US.

As such, you are actually pro-intervention.

/end

What we are doing with Ukraine is Lend/Leese in name only. There will be no repayment or return of equipment because there is no requirement for repayment or return.

 

[LouderVol]

So fast forward to today.

I gather you're similarly supportive of the US lend/lease program supplying Ukraine.

You thereby wholly support the current efforts of the US.

As such, you are actually pro-intervention.

/end

we are also supplying training, have some number of "specialists" on the ground, we are actively spying for them, and providing supposedly actionable intelligence, which I do not agree with. We are also giving them money, which I do not agree with.

which means that no- I am not pro-intervention.

 

[KB5252]

What we are doing with Ukraine is Lend/Leese in name only. There will be no repayment or return of equipment because there is no requirement for repayment or return.

In all honesty almost every bit of equipment we've sent, tanks, APC etc, are or will be obsolete by the next conflict.

 

[MontyPython]

we are also supplying training, have some number of "specialists" on the ground, we are actively spying for them, and providing supposedly actionable intelligence, which I do not agree with. We are also giving them money, which I do not agree with.

which means that no- I am not pro-intervention.

Non sequitur.

By supporting the provision of Ukraine materiel, you are 100% an interventionist.

non·in·ter·ven·tion·ist
/ˌnänˌin(t)ərˈven(t)SH(ə)nəst/

adjective
adjective: non-interventionist

1. favoring the principle of not becoming involved in the affairs of other countries.

 

[MontyPython]

What we are doing with Ukraine is Lend/Leese in name only. There will be no repayment or return of equipment because there is no requirement for repayment or return.

So what?

Not my point.

 

[AM64]

How's the spring/summer offensive going? Don't hear much about gains on the ground for either side.

Have you honestly looked? Because the ISW publishes daily updates and while slow the AFU is advancing while Russia is not.

Or, it's difficult moving entrenched forces without control of the sky.

I read in the last day or so that Ukraine is having to advance without armor because of the minefield issue. There's just no way to advance quickly and in force in that situation. Can't find the article that specifically mentioned the change, but this one touches on the reason. In the end you can't take a few new tanks and go blazing across minefields Blitzkrieg style, or take time destroying mines out in the open. The Russians may be crude, but sometimes crude wins the day until somebody comes up with an effective solution. We and other modern armies would likely be stuck just as Ukraine is in this situation.

The emphasis on counter-battery fire could well be part of a shift in tactics as the counteroffensive continues. The New York Times reported Saturday that Ukraine changed tactics after the first two weeks of combat saw “as much of 20 percent of the weaponry it sent to the battlefield was damaged or destroyed.”

Ukraine Situation Report: Kyiv's Growing Counter-Battery Advantage

 

[hog88]

In all honesty almost every bit of equipment we've sent, tanks, APC etc, are or will be obsolete by the next conflict.

Ok, still should have sold them and not given them.

 

[hog88]

So what?

Not my point.

Do you ever have a point other than blind support?

 

[hog88]

I read in the last day or so that Ukraine is having to advance without armor because of the minefield issue. There's just no way to advance quickly and in force in that situation. Can't find the article that specifically mentioned the change, but this one touches on the reason. In the end you can't take a few new tanks and go blazing across minefields Blitzkrieg style, or take time destroying mines out in the open. The Russians may be crude, but sometimes crude wins the day until somebody comes up with an effective solution. We and other modern armies would likely be stuck just as Ukraine is in this situation.



Ukraine Situation Report: Kyiv's Growing Counter-Battery Advantage

We would not be stuck. We have the equipment to clear a path through a minefield pretty quickly. Makes you wonder why Ukraine isn't requesting M1150s and M58s if they are so bogged down with mines

 

[MontyPython]

Ok, still should have sold them and not given them.

Ukraine's economy collapsed. GDP down 30%.

I'll bet you charged your kids for room & board while you raised them.

 

[MontyPython]

We would not be stuck. We have the equipment to clear a path through a minefield pretty quickly. Makes you wonder why Ukraine isn't requesting M1150s and M58s if they are so bogged down with mines

If only war were actually so simple, Hogg.

Ukraine has been using line charges effectively, but then Russia fires a bunch of mine-laden artillery shells in front and behind them... just like Ukraine has done to Russia.

 

[AM64]

We would not be stuck. We have the equipment to clear a path through a minefield pretty quickly. Makes you wonder why Ukraine isn't requesting M1150s and M58s if they are so bogged down with mines

Have we ever used the M1150 when there was effective artillery and/or lack of air control? No doubt they'd be useful, but would they just be targets? The Mine Clearing Line Charge is pretty slick, but I did also read (discussion about cluster bombs) that not all mines are detonated by shock type overpressure. Again using it in the face of artillery and without air superiority seems risky. In either case you are still talking opening lanes which still gets back to that old thing about trying to advance with critical mass over a bridge, through a gap, or across a beachhead.

 

[hog88]

Ukraine's economy collapsed. GDP down 30%.

I'll bet you charged your kids for room & board while you raised them.

Nothing stopping the rest of Europe from buying them and sending the equipment to Ukraine.

Show me where I am responsible for raising Ukraine or quit asking dumbass questions.

 

[hog88]

If only war were actually so simple, Hogg.

Ukraine has been using line charges effectively, but then Russia fires a bunch of mine-laden artillery shells in front and behind them... just like Ukraine has done to Russia.

You're candy butt wouldn't know the first thing about it so keep the pie hole shut.

 

[hog88]

Have we ever used the M1150 when there was effective artillery and/or lack of air control? No doubt they'd be useful, but would they just be targets? The Mine Clearing Line Charge is pretty slick, but I did also read (discussion about cluster bombs) that not all mines are detonated by shock type overpressure. Again using it in the face of artillery and without air superiority seems risky. In either case you are still talking opening lanes which still gets back to that old thing about trying to advance with critical mass over a bridge, through a gap, or across a beachhead.

I don't think either side has air superiority, both sides have artillery. At some point Ukraine has to **** or get off the pot, we can't fund this war indefinitely.

 

[AM64]

I don't think either side has air superiority, both sides have artillery. At some point Ukraine has to **** or get off the pot, we can't fund this war indefinitely.

Exactly, but this isn't and certainly never started as a battle of equals. Ukraine would have had essentially no air power at all if not flying planes left over from the USSR days while Russia benefitted by being the major arms supplier for the USSR. No news there ... just that Ukraine like all the other old USSR captives were left with the ball in very risky positions and facing a larger and better equipped opponent. but Ukraine didn't give up, and they've at least held their own once on their feet.

 

[LouderVol]

Non sequitur.

By supporting the provision of Ukraine materiel, you are 100% an interventionist.

non·in·ter·ven·tion·ist
/ˌnänˌin(t)ərˈven(t)SH(ə)nəst/

adjective
adjective: non-interventionist

1. favoring the principle of not becoming involved in the affairs of other countries.

so in your opinion simply trading with a country is intervention? Thats a pretty extreme opinion to take imo.

I don't consider trade to be intervention. and your provided definition doesn't include trade, so you need to try again stretch armstrong.

 

[LouderVol]

We would not be stuck. We have the equipment to clear a path through a minefield pretty quickly. Makes you wonder why Ukraine isn't requesting M1150s and M58s if they are so bogged down with mines

they did request back in June for M1150s. or at least some of their military leaders did.

and they have, and have been using the Miclics. They just haven't been enough.

 

[Orangeburst]

I don't think either side has air superiority, both sides have artillery. At some point Ukraine has to **** or get off the pot, we can't fund this war indefinitely.

wait until all this is over and reconstruction welfare starts
of course the virtue signal supporters of Ukraine that fly the flag and have the sticker on their vehicle could send their own money..sure that would raise a lot

 

[hog88]

wait until all this is over and reconstruction welfare starts
of course the virtue signal supporters of Ukraine that fly the flag and have the sticker on their vehicle could send their own money..sure that would raise a lot

Yep, reconstruction will be a boon to the multi-nationals and European firms. Lots of our tax dollars will be laundered through them and into various politician/bureaucrats pockets.

 

[MontyPython]

You're candy butt wouldn't know the first thing about it so keep the pie hole shut.

Struck a nerve I see.

I'll wallow back under my palm tree here in Oahu.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

One other serious thought is that Crimea is Ukraine's bargaining chip - Russia out of Ukrainian territory in exchange for Crimea and Kerch access.

There is no bargaining chip or negotiations to be had. Crimea is back with Russia and that is that.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

You're right; there's nothing earth shattering or new in that. Russia just has limited sea access, and Putin seems to be more interested in taking what he wants by force than working with neighbors.

There was no crisis with Crimea until the Obama administration plotted the Coup in 2014.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Hey @Rasputin_Vol, still no biggie?

Donetsk and Rostov??? Trying to imagine how the Kerch Bridge being out relates to this...