War in Ukraine

[hog88]

Jeez. Weak sauce.

14.) Quality of Ukrainian officers and NCOs we met appears excellent and morale remains high. However, there are some force quality issues emerging with less able bodied and older men called up for service now.

Direct quote. Would you say “quality” is synonymous with incompetent?

They’re capable and trained. They have no experience applying the training and are getting that experience in real time. The ominous part of that quote is the quality could be dropping off.

2.) Ukrainian forces have still not mastered combined arms operations at scale. Operations are more sequential than synchronized. This creates various problems for the offense and IMO [in my opinion] is the main cause for slow progress.

That means they are incompetent or untrained.

4.) Minefields are a problem as most observers know. They confine maneuver space and slow advances. But much more impactful than the minefields per se on Ukraine’s ability to break through Russian defenses is Ukraine's inability to conduct complex combined arms operations at scale. Lack of a comprehensive combined arms approach at scale makes Ukrainian forces more vulnerable to Russian ATGMs, artillery etc. while advancing. So it's not just about equipment. There’s simply no systematic pulling apart of the Russian defensive system that I could observe.

That means they are incompetent or untrained.

16.) It goes without saying that in a war of attrition, more artillery ammunition and hardware is always needed and needs to be steadily supplied. Western support of Ukraine certainly should continue as there is still the prospect that the counteroffensive will make gains. But soldiers fighting on the frontline we spoke to are all too aware that lack of progress is often more due to force employment, poor tactics, lack of coordination between units, bureaucratic red tape/infighting, Soviet style thinking etc. ... and Russians putting up stiff resistance.

That means they are incompetent or untrained.

 

[NorthDallas40]

That means they are incompetent or untrained.



That means they are incompetent or untrained.



That means they are incompetent or untrained.

No it means they are inexperienced. They are using a force doctrine unfamiliar to them against a layered defense with a defending foe. The article was fairly complementary of the Russian defense albeit they did say there was variance in the defenders quality the layered defense was per their doctrine. The article was complementary of Ukraines quality of forces while highlighting their total lack of experience in applying a new doctrine which they had accelerated training on. That’s it. They aren’t incompetent, at least on a large scale, they are inexperienced. Now if they somehow manage to exist for ten years and still exhibit this level of ineffectiveness then you’d have an argument for incompetence. Right now you simply don’t

 

[hog88]

No it means they are inexperienced. They are using a force doctrine unfamiliar to them against a layered defense with a defending foe. The article was fairly complementary of the Russian defense albeit they did say there was variance in the defenders quality the layered defense was per their doctrine. The article was complementary of Ukraines quality of forces while highlighting their total lack of experience in applying a new doctrine which they had accelerated training on. That’s it. They aren’t incompetent, at least on a large scale, they are inexperienced. Now if they somehow manage to exist for ten years and still exhibit this level of ineffectiveness then you’d have an argument for incompetence. Right now you simply don’t

Ok so they are untrained.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Ok so they are untrained.

They had accelerated training and are applying those foreign doctrine concepts in a real time learning environment. That’s inexperience. If they’re fighting five years from now (just an arbitrary number) and still doing the same things and making the same mistakes that’s incompetence.

The article did take a swing at supplying more munitions. Specifically the effectiveness of GPS guided weapons like HIMARS rockets. The Russians have adapted and are applying effective jamming to protect critical rear area targets now. The article did state Ukraine has the edge in tube artillery effectiveness IE largely unguided rounds while stating Russia has the edge on MLRS artillery. The take away to me was future supplied weapons needs to be focused on what’s working or switching away from what isn’t working to another weapon system or tactic.

 

[hog88]

They had accelerated training and are applying those foreign doctrine concepts in a real time learning environment. That’s inexperience. If they’re fighting five years from now (just an arbitrary number) and still doing the same things and making the same mistakes that’s incompetence.

The article did take a swing at supplying more munitions. Specifically the effectiveness of GPS guided weapons like HIMARS rockets. The Russians have adapted and are applying effective jamming to protect critical rear area targets now. The article did state Ukraine has the edge in tube artillery effectiveness IE largely unguided rounds while stating Russia has the edge on MLRS artillery. The take away to me was future supplied weapons needs to be focused on what’s working or switching away from what isn’t working to another weapon system.

Unless Putin is removed from power or we impose some settlement on them, they will be still fighting 5 years from now.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Unless Putin is removed from power or we impose some settlement on them, they will be still fighting 5 years from now.

You might be right. You might be wrong. I guess we’ll know in 5 years. But I don’t see Russia surviving 5 years economically if they don’t break the Western sanctions.

 

[evillawyer]

Darth Putin continues bringing the HEAT.

 

[MontyPython]

They seem to work well when your idiot opponent thinks rushing headlong across an open field is a swell idea.

True that. Bakhmut would have been even *uglier* for Wagner had UKR had them a couple months ago.

 

[AM64]

That isn’t what was said at all hog. They are trained and competent that was in fact stated. They are not experienced and are getting a crash course in that now.

You obviously have reading comprehension problems or your blind support for Ukraine is clouding your judgement. The article clearly (in polite terms) states that the Ukrainian Sr command is incapable of fighting a combined arms battle, so that means either they are incompetent or untrained. If you can't do something even though you have the tools to do it there are only 2 reasons why.

Have to agree with hog here. I got the same thing he did from the analysis. Ukrainians fight hard at the unit level, but the command levels never learned how to integrate the individual fighting groups. That probably came about because Ukraine didn't intend to have to fight so they never really learned how to fight effectively. They instead have some leftover knowledge from how things were done in the days of the USSR - poorly. Bureaucracy and wars or much of anything with a real purpose or end goal are not a mix made in heaven ... one wants to exist in unruffled perpetuity - the other has a definite end game. The USSR was one huge bureaucracy and all militaries tend toward bureaucracy.

There's also the problem with even trying to use larger scale tactics when the enemy is behind minefields. Clearing a path doesn't allow room either for maneuver or for bringing mass fire to bear. It's more like the lead guy (or tank) gets knocked out and "next guy up" ... or being a target in a shooting gallery.

Adding to the problem is lack of close air support by slow moving things like attack helicopters or A-10s with spotters both on the ground and in the air. That's not possible without air superiority. We don't even have the fix for that issue - probably due to lack of memory and having been fighting enemies without air forces. The key in our own military seems to be to use the F-35 both as a stealth fighter and for close air support, and that seems like a completely incongruous mix of tasks ... like we have our own problems with command being incapable of figuring out how to fight a combined arms battle. In our case it may be more one that CAS just isn't a role the AF wants, but to give it up means to lose the means to procure new aircraft ... bureaucracy in motion to perpetuate the bureaucracy.

Ukraine looks like an expansion of trench warfare without the trenches. The minefields are no man's land and the artillery duels are just an exercise in flinging things back and forth in hopes of hitting something useful. The trick would be something to rain down on the minefields that clears the whole thing rather than a path. Only then can you get things rolling.

 

[AM64]

They seem to work well when your idiot opponent thinks rushing headlong across an open field is a swell idea.

Cluster munitions seem to be the artillery version of a shotgun. When you need a dispersed pattern that spreads the effect, one big blast in the middle of a field just doesn't do what cluster munitions can do. Simply a more efficient way to deliver the "message".

 

[AM64]

That means they are incompetent or untrained.



That means they are incompetent or untrained.



That means they are incompetent or untrained.

#4 seems less like being incompetent or untrained, and much more like facing an obstacle that have few solutions and none of those being good solutions. I still think we'd have much the same problem. Maybe we'd find a solution in carpet bombing the minefield with B-52s or something similar ... not an option available to Ukrainian commanders. We might also use airpower to work over the people on the other side of the minefields and lessen the impact of the minefields, again not an option for Ukrainian commanders.

 

[evillawyer]

Cluster munitions seem to be the artillery version of a shotgun. When you need a dispersed pattern that spreads the effect, one big blast in the middle of a field just doesn't do what cluster munitions can do. Simply a more efficient way to deliver the "message".

Whack a bunch of orcs with one round.

 

[norrislakevol]

Have to agree with hog here. I got the same thing he did from the analysis. Ukrainians fight hard at the unit level, but the command levels never learned how to integrate the individual fighting groups. That probably came about because Ukraine didn't intend to have to fight so they never really learned how to fight effectively. They instead have some leftover knowledge from how things were done in the days of the USSR - poorly. Bureaucracy and wars or much of anything with a real purpose or end goal are not a mix made in heaven ... one wants to exist in unruffled perpetuity - the other has a definite end game. The USSR was one huge bureaucracy and all militaries tend toward bureaucracy.

There's also the problem with even trying to use larger scale tactics when the enemy is behind minefields. Clearing a path doesn't allow room either for maneuver or for bringing mass fire to bear. It's more like the lead guy (or tank) gets knocked out and "next guy up" ... or being a target in a shooting gallery.

Adding to the problem is lack of close air support by slow moving things like attack helicopters or A-10s with spotters both on the ground and in the air. That's not possible without air superiority. We don't even have the fix for that issue - probably due to lack of memory and having been fighting enemies without air forces. The key in our own military seems to be to use the F-35 both as a stealth fighter and for close air support, and that seems like a completely incongruous mix of tasks ... like we have our own problems with command being incapable of figuring out how to fight a combined arms battle. In our case it may be more one that CAS just isn't a role the AF wants, but to give it up means to lose the means to procure new aircraft ... bureaucracy in motion to perpetuate the bureaucracy.

Ukraine looks like an expansion of trench warfare without the trenches. The minefields are no man's land and the artillery duels are just an exercise in flinging things back and forth in hopes of hitting something useful. The trick would be something to rain down on the minefields that clears the whole thing rather than a path. Only then can you get things rolling.

It's a bloody stalemate, and that's the way it will stay unless something abnormal happens. Huge losses on both sides, and that will continue.

 

[Orangeburst]

Whack a bunch of orcs with one round.

you don’t give a **** about Ukraine
you just want to get Putin because you think he was in cahoots with Trump

 

[rekinhavoc]

Russian Fronts, Criminal Gangs: US Couldn't Account for Weapons Sent to Ukraine Last Year

Well I'll be damned!

 

[evillawyer]

Damn. That's a sick burn. You can tell that line was work shopped for awhile.

 

[BeardedVol]

Russian Fronts, Criminal Gangs: US Couldn't Account for Weapons Sent to Ukraine Last Year

Well I'll be damned!

You just now realized that in every society, there are people willing to steal weapons and sell them to enrich themselves?
The U.S. Military Doesn't Even Track How Many Weapons It Loses, And It Has Lost Thousands

 

[AM64]

You just now realized that in every society, there are people willing to steal weapons and sell them to enrich themselves?
The U.S. Military Doesn't Even Track How Many Weapons It Loses, And It Has Lost Thousands

The article doesn't even make much sense. It starts with:

"Last year, a Russian-led organized crime group in Ukraine was able to obtain weapons shipped to the country for the war effort -- including a grenade launcher and machine gun -- with the intent of destabilizing the country."

Then goes on to say the US supplied 10,000 grenade launchers. They didn't even show that the grenade launcher came from the shipped inventory rather than from the arms market or Russia ... Russia is bound to have a few of almost anything in our weapons inventory. If you're going to steal some weapons from a huge shipment, at least steal a few. I'd still love to have an M-79; that was the ultimate toy while in AIT.

 

[Burhead]

 

[NorthDallas40]

Tricky Dick with the prophecy on the current situation in Ukraine and rise to power of the bald dwarf.

Declassified Richard Nixon letter to President Clinton proves prophetic on Russia

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Remember that thing about no plan surviving the first punch? Strategies and methods evolve on both sides of the battlefield. Just like any other crisis that someone faces, you have to prioritize and have alternatives. The other thing is there's always a nagging problem with no solution, and one day somebody has the dumb question - the "what if ..." that changes things.

However, in the scheme of things, as I recall, Hawks came up months ago. It seems like Spain was sending some to Ukraine. And a quick search says Ukraine got Hawks last year. Perhaps they've been successful and Ukraine is working their way through existing inventories when other countries offer them.

Spain to send two more HAWK air defence systems to Ukraine

I'm aware there were hawks sent in the past. My thing is that for the US, that is all we have left to give. If we really want Ukraine to succeed and be armed properly, we would be sending them more of those glorious Patriot systems.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Probably the best analysis of what's happening with the Ukrainian offensive that's been presented. Nothing really surprising - just a very solid "this is what, and this is why clearly and concisely written". Even the critical analysis of Ukrainian command is what you'd expect of any country that had not planned to wage war on anybody or expected to have one forced on them.

A Sobering Analysis Of Ukraine's Counteroffensive From The Front

What a total fabrication. NATO and Ukraine had been planning this for 8 years. Hell, Poroshenko, Merkel and Hollande all admitted that Minsk agreements were just stalling tactics to buy Ukraine more time to get armed and trained.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Is that not true? I'm sure Germany would have some comments on what Putin is saying.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

They seem to work well when your idiot opponent thinks rushing headlong across an open field is a swell idea.

You mean the Kyiv regime? Because that is exactly what their NATO handlers are telling them to do.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Have to agree with hog here. I got the same thing he did from the analysis. Ukrainians fight hard at the unit level, but the command levels never learned how to integrate the individual fighting groups. That probably came about because Ukraine didn't intend to have to fight so they never really learned how to fight effectively. They instead have some leftover knowledge from how things were done in the days of the USSR - poorly. Bureaucracy and wars or much of anything with a real purpose or end goal are not a mix made in heaven ... one wants to exist in unruffled perpetuity - the other has a definite end game. The USSR was one huge bureaucracy and all militaries tend toward bureaucracy.

Ukraine had 8 years of arms and training from NATO and were possibly the best NATO trained military in Europe. Don't throw them under the bus now. This isn't their fault.

The blame squarely falls on the US/NATO for encouraging them to keep on fighting after they had a deal in place last March with the promise of unlimited NATO support.

There's also the problem with even trying to use larger scale tactics when the enemy is behind minefields. Clearing a path doesn't allow room either for maneuver or for bringing mass fire to bear. It's more like the lead guy (or tank) gets knocked out and "next guy up" ... or being a target in a shooting gallery.

It still boggles my mind that these experts and strategists are surprised at the use of minefields. I don't buy it. I think they are using the minefields as an excuse to cover the fact that they didn't expect the Russians to have the amount of support behind those minefields as they do now. The anticipated the same outcome in this offensive as they saw in last fall's offensive, when Russia didn't have the numbers and were forced to retreat in Kherson and Kharkiv.

Adding to the problem is lack of close air support by slow moving things like attack helicopters or A-10s with spotters both on the ground and in the air. That's not possible without air superiority. We don't even have the fix for that issue - probably due to lack of memory and having been fighting enemies without air forces. The key in our own military seems to be to use the F-35 both as a stealth fighter and for close air support, and that seems like a completely incongruous mix of tasks ... like we have our own problems with command being incapable of figuring out how to fight a combined arms battle. In our case it may be more one that CAS just isn't a role the AF wants, but to give it up means to lose the means to procure new aircraft ... bureaucracy in motion to perpetuate the bureaucracy.

I was exactly a year ago when I started mocking you guys about A10 Warthogs and you guys were in here saying that A-19s were going to be the gamechangers that were going to be coming as soon as late September 2022. I knew last July that was BS, but you guys kept on. And today... still no air support and no A-10s. But yet we see the Ukrainians getting thrown under the bus now for failing to advance when even you all know that the US wouldn't be expected to perform in this manner.