Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

[Love Mountain]

I find it interesting your defense of any view but your own is claiming somebody is simply listening to a pundit.

It's not everyone. But opinions informed by pundistry are pretty easy to spot.

Has it. Taiwan's non status certainly hurts it. It also leaves it open to conquest by a state it clearly does not not want be part of.

Taiwan's non-status does not hurt it. In fact, the ambiguous nature of its statehood is the only thing that has saved it, but "conquest" wouldn't even be accurate here. De Jure, Taiwan is a breakaway province and China is still in a state of Civil War.

All of that may be true. But the fact remains the supposed second best military on the planet is able to roll out a missile and drone campaign that cans achieve a decisive impact that actually moves the needle n the battlefield and is partially dependent on its f-ing Iran.

"Dependent" is a strong word considering that Shaheds are built in Russia.

Second, strike campaigns don't take ground, but even on the face of it. What actually saved Ukraine was it's legacy vehicle park of extensive air defense systems which are more advanced than anything United States faced since the Vietnam War.

Third, the jury is still out on the effect of the strike campaign. There are tangible effects that are visible and felt by Ukraine's armed forces. How badly this missile barrage is influencing Ukraine's combat power is unknown.

And yet it stopped and Ukraine and its allies got a summer to to work on dealing with the attack.

I don't know what you're trying to say here.

I thought you were arguing we had no real BDA? but now you have but not I - well than here is the great Love Mountain with his third eye to cut through the misinformation...

In any case anyone who cites Plato as a great philosopher losses a notch in my book. Also really what 5 swear emojis come on artful vocabulary would communicate the same.

Who made the tweet Conon? Was it Love Mountain or the UK Ministry of Defense?

[conon394]

It's not everyone. But opinions informed by pundistry are pretty easy to spot.

OK eagle eye

"Dependent" is a strong word considering that Shaheds are built in Russia.

Second, strike campaigns don't take ground, but even on the face of it. What actually saved Ukraine was it's legacy vehicle park of extensive air defense systems which are more advanced than anything United States faced since the Vietnam War.

Third, the jury is still out on the effect of the strike campaign. There are tangible effects that are visible and felt by Ukraine's armed forces. How badly this missile barrage is influencing Ukraine's combat power is unknown.

That is rather funny the sate of Ukraine air defese and it whole army was massively under funded and real joke was that pulled out the rust bin post 2014 it still something the Russia had no answer for.

Who made the tweet Conon? Was it Love Mountain or the UK Ministry of Defense?

The quote is not saying much and and we both no Ukraine is not going to win or loose on the strength of their arms industry.

[Love Mountain]

That is rather funny the sate of Ukraine air defese and it whole army was massively under funded and real joke was that pulled out the rust bin post 2014 it still something the Russia had no answer for.

And thankfully all of these things can be brought online in short order as this war shows, but forget the "rust bin". United States hasn't ever had to pull off SEAD against a double digit SAM before. Nobody has really.

The quote is not saying much and and we both no Ukraine is not going to win or loose on the strength of their arms industry.

It matters now more than ever. Especially since Europe failed to deliver in two years, what North Korea delivered in 3 months.

[conon394]

It matters now more than ever. Especially since Europe failed to deliver in two years, what North Korea delivered in 3 months.

Interesting I was unaware you access to actual raw data on North Korean delivers and I assume also quality?

United States hasn't ever had to pull off SEAD against a double digit SAM before. Nobody has really.

I find this unclear what do you mean.

[Love Mountain]

Interesting I was unaware you access to actual raw data on North Korean delivers and I assume also quality?

We have a high confidence estimate.

https://x.com/Tatarigami_UA/status/1...427761688?s=20



https://rusi.org/explore-our-researc...y-route-russia

500,000 artillery rounds is conservative. Having examined the primary data myself and more shipment satellite scans since, I am inclined to agree with this analysis.

Meanwhile, European partners have struggled to provide half of that in nearly two years of war.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/17/europ...ntl/index.html

"Initially, under the plan, European states would send what they could from their own national reserves. As of July 2023, some 224,000 shells had been delivered to Ukraine, per the EU."

I find this unclear what do you mean.

https://philarchive.org/archive/RADAOI

United States Air Force has not faced an IADS that fielded anything as advanced as S-300, which itself is a decades-old system. We have never faced anythign remotely as advanced or well-organized as Ukraine's air defense system. There was a Reddit comment that touched on Ukraine's aerospace defense battle order before the war, that completely owned me because it proved to be completely correct once the war broke out.

Russia is essentially learning invaluable lessons in this war against potent systems that we've never had to.

This is particularly concerning because the next Pacific War is likely going to be a much, much tougher adversary than Ukraine fielding much more potent air defenses.

[Stario]

Russia is essentially learning invaluable lessons in this war against potent systems that we've never had to.

Russia expected (perhaps falsely expected) the Ukranians to surrender within a few days of their invasion. Russia probably didn't want a gruelling war - where you know - hundreds of thousands of Ukranians die and Ukranian towns/cities get flatten.
Think about it, "What is the daily death toll as a result of this war to Russian civilians in Russia?" How many Russian cities/towns, how much Russian infrastructure has been flattened/destroyed?
Ukraine has no potent systems, the Ukranians are literally dying in droves w so much of their infrastructure and economy already destroyed that it will takes decades to rebuild should the war end today. And the longer the war the worse the outcome for Ukraine.
Sure Russian military is getting invaluable on field experience re: how to conduct real warfare operations, and as far as testing new military technology goes etc., but this is not what you're implying here is it?!

[PointOfViewGun]

The most important Russian infrastructure that is getting destroyed is its military; both in capability and reputation.

[Love Mountain]

Russia expected (perhaps falsely expected) the Ukranians to surrender within a few days of their invasion. Russia probably didn't want a gruelling war - where you know - hundreds of thousands of Ukranians die and Ukranian towns/cities get flatten.
Think about it, "What is the daily death toll as a result of this war to Russian civilians in Russia?" How many Russian cities/towns, how much Russian infrastructure has been flattened/destroyed?
Ukraine has no potent systems, the Ukranians are literally dying in droves w so much of their infrastructure and economy already destroyed that it will takes decades to rebuild should the war end today. And the longer the war the worse the outcome for Ukraine.
Sure Russian military is getting invaluable on field experience re: how to conduct real warfare operations, and as far as testing new military technology goes etc., but this is not what you're implying here is it?!

Sovereign states don't give a about morality actually.

[Ludicus]

Russia is interested in weakening NATO and the West regardless of Ukraine

Let's say, it's all about perceptions.

NATO-Russia: Is the ‘Russian Question' European? Dans Politique étrangère 2009/5 (Hors série), pages 123 à 136 Published in 2009.
Excerpt,
(...)

The grandeur and misery of public diplomacy
The Alliance crystallizes the positions of numerous interest groups in the United States, Europe and Russia, to the extent that it may be asked whether the NATO-Russia relationship is not so much a matter of public diplomacy as it is a military issue. This weighs on the threats perceived by all actors and especially on the handling of crises from a media and hence an operational point of view, as was the case of the war in Georgia in 2008.

An ‘anti-Russian lobby’ exists in the United States. [16] It includes three main groups: the ‘militarist hawks’ who view US hegemony in the world as natural; the ‘liberal hawks’ for whom America’s democratic values have a universal significance; and the ‘East-European nationalists’ for whom Russia is imperial by nature and incapable of transforming itself into a democratic system. This lobby, which is represented in most European capitals, sees NATO as a military, political and territorial spearhead, depending on the situation. It essentially considers Russia to be the principal obstacle to European security.

Conversely, Russia has a powerful ‘anti-Western’ lobby, which feels that NATO is seeking to encircle and bring down Russia. This lobby’s goal is to maintain a massive military machine and a political system organized around questions of security.

The dread of being encircled by the West has shaped Russia’s military representation of the world: progressive encirclement by NATO, with the power to project its resources. When these are deployed on the flanks of the Russian Federation, they can be used to strike deep into Russian territory.

Thus, while Washington sees NATO enlargement as contributing to geopolitical stability, for Moscow it is destabilizing and aggressive – though this should not give the impression that the relationship with NATO is monolithic. [17]

One school of thought in Russia, made up of ‘pragmatic nationalists,’ considers that Russia and NATO may agree to a balance aimed at preserving their respective spheres of influence. This group deplores the enlargement of the Alliance, but at the same time supports the development of NATO/Russia mechanisms.

A second school of thought draws together ‘liberal Westerners’ for whom membership of NATO and acceptance of Western values should have guided Russian foreign policy. This group is clearly in a minority position on Russia’s political chessboard, and was particularly weakened by the Kosovo campaign in 1999. It may split up on the question of possible NATO membership.

The third school of thought brings together the ‘nationalist fundamentalists’ who believe that the Alliance is forever planning the invasion of Russia. This group is present in parliament and is used to brandishing the NATO menace, and the possible breaking-up of the Slavic world, before every set of elections.

[conon394]

Ahh yes of course all Russian paranoid fantasies are true and validate Russisn actions, nobody else gets the same luxury.

[fkizz]

That's really not at all what happened. In the 2019 election the most pro-Russian candidate, Boyko, never polled above 10%.

Well it's tautological that in the last short span of time before Kremlin decides to invade Ukraine, Ukraine was already Kremlin-sceptical.

Ukraine used to look West with cynism since the 90s, and looked East with a lot of trust, they even entrusted Russia their own Nukes. So there are two options:

1) The West became magically good at persuation and changed the public opinion in Ukraine in a quick and effective way (which raises more questions than answers, as to why so much unrest like Yellow Vests in France, riot police used in Greece, Spain and Portugal directly on protesters, Truckers in Canada and so on and on but ok)

2) The Kremlin screwed up in planning on their area of influence, denies responsability, as if taking for granted "Political Infallibility" and everyone became too afraid of delivering the bad news thus screwing up their channels of communication aswell as missing to have a proper feedback chain, leading to an accumulation of bad policies pilling up as time passed.

Which one of the two chances is the most likely, well, up to each person's opinion.

Ludicus,

One school of thought in Russia, made up of ‘pragmatic nationalists,’ considers that Russia and NATO may agree to a balance aimed at preserving their respective spheres of influence. This group deplores the enlargement of the Alliance, but at the same time supports the development of NATO/Russia mechanisms.

This is what is not present or influential enough on the parliament, as your source agrees.

[Love Mountain]

Well it's tautological that in the last short span of time before Kremlin decides to invade Ukraine, Ukraine was already Kremlin-sceptical.

Ukraine used to look West with cynism since the 90s, and looked East with a lot of trust, they even entrusted Russia their own Nukes. So there are two options:

1) The West became magically good at persuation and changed the public opinion in Ukraine in a quick and effective way (which raises more questions than answers, as to why so much unrest like Yellow Vests in France, riot police used in Greece, Spain and Portugal directly on protesters, Truckers in Canada and so on and on but ok)

2) The Kremlin screwed up in planning on their area of influence, denies responsability, as if taking for granted "Political Infallibility" and everyone became too afraid of delivering the bad news thus screwing up their channels of communication aswell as missing to have a proper feedback chain, leading to an accumulation of bad policies pilling up as time passed.

Which one of the two chances is the most likely, well, up to each person's opinion.

It's really not hard to understand what happened.

A pro-European revolution overthrew the previously elected government. I'm not going to comment on how legitimate the revolution was, but it happened. Russia's near immediate reactions was to secure the most important areas of interest, the Crimean peninsula and the industrially-rich Donetsk/Luhansk Oblast. The people of Ukraine were naturally upset over this, and overwhelmingly voted in anti-Russian politicians in power. It was a Black Swan event for Europe.

As someone famous once said,

"There are decades where nothing happens; and there are weeks where decades happen."

[fkizz]

It's really not hard to understand what happened.

A pro-European revolution overthrew the previously elected government. I'm not going to comment on how legitimate the revolution was, but it happened. Russia's near immediate reactions was to secure the most important areas of interest, the Crimean peninsula and the industrially-rich Donetsk/Luhansk Oblast. The people of Ukraine were naturally upset over this, and overwhelmingly voted in anti-Russian politicians in power. It was a Black Swan event for Europe.

As someone famous once said,

"There are decades where nothing happens; and there are weeks where decades happen."

Well, I accept several readings of reality can be had, but any described causal nexus as if the Kremlin literally has a "Political Infallibility" Aura on Policy making makes one raise more questions than answers.

[saamohod]

For the first time in history, an AWACS plane was destroyed yesterday.

[conon394]

Seems like Ukraine managed to get a PAC3 Patriot missile or one of their old S-200s (refurbished and upgraded?) placed pretty far forward. Risky but probably worth the shot. Russia has not so many A-50s and its replacement is vapor ware. Anything that pushes them back away from the front is good (for Ukraine)

[Love Mountain]

It's unlikely that it was shot down by a Patriot, but it is possible.

The area where it the A-50 was "shot down", is at the edge of PAC-2 GEM range. A much more likely explanation is fratricide.

[conon394]

It's unlikely that it was shot down by a Patriot, but it is possible.

The area where it the A-50 was "shot down", is at the edge of PAC-2 GEM range. A much more likely explanation is fratricide.

As I said I would have to have been moved and there is a bit of game of what to make of reported range PC2 or 3 as to if it marginally or more than that understated. Also of course effective range of SAM against a lumbering target like a AWACs plane vs a high performance fighter will be different.

Otherwise kind of a bad look for Russia not exactly the track of cruise missile or suicidal MIG 29 from out of Ukraine airspace.

[saamohod]

A much more likely explanation is fratricide.

It isn't more likely, but is the version Russia wants to spin because it is a much less embarrassing one.

Random friendly fire on planes that have been patrolling the area for almost two years? No, no buying it. But not surprised that a person with Russia fetish like yourself sees it as a "much more likely one".

However it is possible that friendly fire took place as a result of Ukrainian operation (there are some speculations and explanations online) that made Russians mistakenly shoot their own aircraft.

[Love Mountain]

As I said I would have to have been moved and there is a bit of game of what to make of reported range PC2 or 3 as to if it marginally or more than that understated. Also of course effective range of SAM against a lumbering target like a AWACs plane vs a high performance fighter will be different.

200 km is beyond the very edge of PAC 2's capability. I was being generous to the Patriot theory. For one thing, we don't even have any confirmation of an A-50 shootdown in the first place.

Otherwise kind of a bad look for Russia not exactly the track of cruise missile or suicidal MIG 29 from out of Ukraine airspace.

Or it was fratricide. A much more likely theory. Especially considering where the alleged incident took place, existing history of fratricide, and lack of any evidence (or indeed much noise) from Ukrainians themselves. Again, we don't even have confirmation of a crashed A-50 in the first place.

It isn't more likely, but is the version Russia wants to spin because it is a much less embarrassing one.

Random friendly fire on planes that have been patrolling the area for almost two years? No, no buying it. But not surprised that a person with Russia fetish like yourself sees it as a "much more likely one".

However it is possible that friendly fire took place as a result of Ukrainian operation (there are some speculations and explanations online) that made Russians mistakenly shoot their own aircraft.

Yeah. A friendly fire incident is unlikely, but an Ukrainian operation that "caused" a friendly fire incident is more likely. It's all thanks to the genius work of the SBU!

What a retarded theory.

[PointOfViewGun]

Or it was fratricide.

There is no basis or logic for this suggestion.