• 3 Posts
  • 105 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 15th, 2023

help-circle




  • That’s not what is being reported. They are still making advances. Even pro-Ukrainian channels are reporting this.

    Advancements of a few sq. kms a day mean nothing compared to 2022 or 2023 style movements that the Russian 1st Guards Tank Army (when Russia attacks) or Ukrainian Counter-offensive (in late 2022) performed.

    The line is more static today than ever before.

    Kinda false, there are a number of videos showing artillery hitting moving targets, maybe those are rare, but they are non-zero.

    It requires special rounds like Copperhead (laser guided artillery), or BONUS (Infrared Guided / Heat guided Artillery). These rounds are very special and are not typical artillery. And they only work in very specific circumstances.

    Copperhead needs someone at the frontline shining a laser to pinpoint the target. BONUS only works vs hot tanks or vehicles. So “some”, very rare very expensive artillery rounds, can hit a moving target. But we can ignore them for the most part since the 99% of artillery rounds used are dumb rounds.

    If the glide bombs are easy to intercept, why are Uranians complaining about them all the time?

    Because Ukrainian defenses only work vs glide bombs if they have an ambush setup. And Ukrainians have very few anti-air missiles. Russia only has to attack randomly along the front, and the Ukrainian ground defenses are too slow to reposition to the movements of Russian aircraft.

    But Ukraine is 100% allowed to intercept and kill Russian fighter/bombers using these glide bombs. Ukraine simply doesn’t have the capacity to effectively and reliably do so however. That’s why F16s are so important, they are fast enough to launch air-to-air missiles vs the glide bombers and whittle the Russian aircraft down more reliably.

    As for the American systems, it seems odd that if Ukraine already has unlimited permission, why are there still articles about Ukraine asking for it repeatedly?

    Its not what you said earlier. What the Ukrainians wish is for more permissions. Ukrainians want deep strikes that can target Russian Air Bases. Ukraine wants to hit the fighter/bombers on the ground before they take off. These locations are so deep into Russia that USA is nervous about authorizing it, as it’d definitely be another escalation.

    But Ukraine is 100% allowed (and already has), shot down Russian fighter/bombers on glide bomb maneuvers. Its a difficult shot for a ground-to-air system like Patriot. But it should get much easier to do after F16s arrive.

    To be honest, we both want Ukraine to win, and all was saying is that in a modern war where both sides have access to a lot of resources, there are no wonder weapons that will shift the game sufficiently to push for a quick win and that we should not underestimate the enemy. Things help and we in the West, should be doing more to help.

    F16s should be key for the glide-bomb problem. But I’m seeing estimates that Ukraine needs 200+ F16s for that to really be enough.

    A dozen or so F16s is barely moving the needle. But at least Ukraine has some F16s coming and can start doing something about that particular problem.


  • They don’t need to

    1st Guards Tank Army probably could face M1 Abrams in maneuver warfare. That was literally their training.

    We’ve gone from a position where the Russians had a command of the frontlines, into a position where Russians are forced to use inferior equipment and ambush tactics. Its why the Russians are unable to effectively attack into Ukrainian defenses anymore.

    Now you’re right in that Ukraine may not have the strength to attack into Russian defenses. But that’s what F16s are supposed to change. Is it enough? Who knows, but its better than nothing and better than what was available in 2023. What I can say for sure, is that Russia has also been unable to mount an effective attack.

    In any case, I think the M2 Bradley is probably a match for T-55. M2 Bradley doesn’t have the same firepower, but it does have homing missiles. T-55 thin armor probably gets penetrated by enough M2 Bradley armor-piercing rounds (not that I’m an expert in that, but… M2 Bradley did take down more powerful tanks already). Its not what the M2 Bradley was designed for, but its showing the technological advantage Ukraine now commands on the front.

    Remember: M2 Bradley is a troop-carrier. Not a tank. But it seems to match up favorably against many Russian tanks in practice, because Russians have had their forces degenerate so much.

    at which point they are artillery and drone targets.

    If you move, artillery can’t hit you. Artillery takes over a minute before it lands. That’s why tanks exist, tanks are close enough to bring the guns to the frontlines and instantly strike a target, because striking a target within 3km is just a few seconds at most… while striking a target 20km away with Artillery has all kinds of delays and downsides.

    Drones are subject to electronic warfare and anti-air guns like the German Flakpanzer Gepard, or US’s MACE system (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5e-KIu7t3M). Aimbot + RADAR == dead drones. Yes, Ukraine needs to advance under the cover of anti-air (and those anti-air can be targeted by guide bombs or other more powerful weapons). But there’s a plan in place for that too.

    For now they are unfortunately still making gains everyday.

    Russia has still lost territory since 2022 actually. Russia has been unable to secure Donbas or Luhansk. Russia then starts a new front in Kharkiv and immediately stalls out.

    Russia, even with all their meatwave attacks, was unable to cause anything like the 2022 Kharkiv counteroffensive (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Kharkiv_counteroffensive). It is Kyiv / Ukrainians who have effectively counter-attacked and changed territory last. Everything else is just a rounding error.

    It seems that currently glide bombs are a large problem but for f16 to be effective, they need to have permission to engage russian fighter/bombers that tend to fire from deep inside russia, out of “allowed” reach for western missiles. To me thats a massive issue.

    That’s not how glide-bombs work. Glide bombs don’t have any rockets, they literally fall into their target with little wings to extend the range a bit. Glide Bombs only have like 100km range or something like that, and the Fighter/Bombers that launch these glide bombs have already been taken out by well placed Patriot systems (or … something??. But probably Patriot missiles given what has been publicly released. I think there were some discussions that the Ukrainians made a ground-launched tube that can shoot air-to-air missiles from the ground… so its not necessarily the “Patriot” system that killed those fighter-bombers. But whatever it was, the Ukrainians have the capability for that kind of ground-based ambush today).

    The problem is that its very difficult to constantly move Patriot systems (or any other ground-based system), so the Russians can just attack elsewhere. The Ukrainians need an aircraft that can meet the speed of enemy aircraft so that anti-air can follow Russians as they fly around the frontlines. But Ukraine is actually already in a position where they can position Patriot missiles (or whatever ground-based system they’re using) to stop glide-bomb attacks in one area. Ukraine just can’t afford to defend the whole frontline, and Ukraine cannot move those Patriots / ground defenses faster than Russia can move Glide-bomb / Jets.

    Finally, USA has given permission to use American equipment anywhere the Russians are attacking from. Your point is moot as of a month or two ago, the Ukrainians already have that permission. Its simply an issue of capabilities.

    Neither apparent hurt for vehicles or manpower losses deters them. Do see Ukrainians making some gains recently from time to time, but overall, its still not going well enough.

    No one expects Ukraine to make gains this year. Everyone expects Russians to attack and pin everything on the hopes of Donald Trump winning the 2024 election (wherein Donald Trump then cuts off funding, preventing Ukrainians from counter-attacking next year).

    That’s Russia’s plan. Ukraine has placed their trust / counter-offensive in the hands of the election. I don’t think Ukraine will surrender if Donald Trump becomes President though, Europe should be strong enough to keep Ukraine going even without the USA in 2025.


  • Problem is that they still have thousands in storage, even if they are in bad condition, a tank is a tank, it still has its place in war.

    When we get to T-55, these tanks are unable to damage an M1 Abrams. Furthermore, T-55 are a stop-and-shoot tank, they’re unable to attack while moving. Etc. etc. And again: Russia has runout of tanks and IFVs in practice. A lot of today’s attacks in Kharkiv are motorcycle and golf-cart attacks.

    I’m not saying that it will be easy. I’m saying that the change from highly regarded Russian 1st Guards Tank Army that took over huge swaths of Ukraine in the first weeks of the war is over. 1st Guards Tank Army has been crushed. Russia is reconstituting them now, but they are noticeably absent from the battlefield.

    Then Wagner showed up with tanks and other advanced equipment. Now they’re gone.

    And then we have shitty ass T-55s that are wholly outmatched by Leopard and Abrams. In an ambush maybe the T55 can still disable the tread and score mobility kills, but its really not as threatening as what Russia was sending initially. Luckily, the best Russian equipment seems to have already been wiped out from 2022 and 2023.


    Obviously its not the time to get complacent. But we can’t deny the shift in Ukrainian’s favor.


  • Its not people that Russia will run out of, but instead equipment.

    Russia moved from T-72 tanks, to T-55 tanks, and now golf-carts and motorcycles. Russia has moved from 152mm artillery and regular thermobaric rockets to heavy mortar. And now that mortar is getting blown up, the Russians are begging the North Koreans for more shells and artillery.

    We’re clearly witnessing the degeneration of the entirety of Russian force technology. Meanwhile, F16s are about to join the Ukrainian side as Ukraine gets more and more upgrades.


    Once the equipment runs out, then what? No number of Russians on golf-carts / motorcycles will allow for a match vs a Ukrainian M2 Bradley.





  • Though there aren’t many female heroes in history, the few that existed made huge marks.

    St. Olga of Kyiv famously slaughtered (!!!) her enemies (the Drevlians) to protect Kyiv and avenge her husband. She then converted to Catholicism and spread the message to the Slavs. And her lineage then founded Moscow. She’s considered the reason why Catholicism spread to the East, despite a patriarchy at her time.

    But perhaps bloody stories of revenge and the spreading of the good word (a trope of the Middle Ages I know, but she’s known for it), is a bit “Just a man with different bits”. Still, she was smart, she was cunning, she was ruthless, she conquered, she ruled.


    Perhaps a more traditional “Feminine Strength” is St. Joan of Arc, who raised an army and marched with them, though she never really won battle accolades or ruthless terror like St. Olga. St. Joan of Arc comes from humble beginnings and rises to become a leader of a movement in the 100 years war. Despite being tried for being a witch (erm, talking to the Devil? Something like that), she never gave up on her values and is widely recognized as a key figure in her time.

    I think Joan of Arc is closer to what the English-speaking world would consider feminine strength. St. Joan of Arc never betrayed anyone, and largely served as an inspiring figure. (As opposed to the cunning St. Olga who has multiple atrocities in her name). She stood her ground as she was tried, and was burned at the stake at the young age of 19. Still, despite her young age, she was a key leader (though not a ruler), who inspired many to fight for France.

    In any case, Joan of Arc was confident. She benefited from prophesies that a maiden would come to save France in the hundred years war, and she stepped up to be that role. She traveled across the country raising and inspiring soldiers. She marched into battle (though I don’t believe she was ever seen as a warrior or tactician type given her age and small stature), but this grossly improved the morale of the soldiers around her. Women (or really, young girls) like her weren’t supposed to be on the front lines like she was. But just arriving to dangerous positions and being confident, and telling everyone that they’re cause is righteous and they’re doing the right thing is hugely important.

    Being around to witness the horrors of war, to tell people that things are alright and they’re fighting for the right things. Its… important. People need to know that.

    Note that Joan was also on trial for wearing men’s clothes. Suggesting that she’s an early feminist who did fight for equality centuries earlier than other feminists. Truly ahead of her time.





  • I stand by what I said before.

    1948 is a stupid start date for understanding this problem. The Israeli state was promised by the British in 1917, years before the British took over the region of Palestine. Deal with it. Before the founding of Mandatory Palestine of 1920 (which only existed as a piecemeal state the British took over after the Ottoman collapse), Britain already had plans for Israel.

    History is a wee bit deeper than you might think it seems. Balfour Declaration is rather significant to the discussion, and your avoidance of the subject is quite telling. The plans for Israeli settlement were laid out nearly three decades before 1948.



  • It all started the moment they stole the land in 1948

    That’s a fucking stupid start date.

    It all started when the Ottoman Empire collapsed in 1917. The breakup of the empire leads to the modern Middle East crisis. Part of the deal from WW1 was Britain’s plan for the former Ottomans. Yes, it involves Israel and Palestine. It also involves a bunch of other things.

    Palestine always was under another state. Yes, It was a Muslim Controlled Empire of the past few centuries, but that power doesn’t exist anymore.

    Israel is stealing more land and homes and on a daily basis

    Like all the settlers they removed from Gaza in 2005 and all the soldiers they removed?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_disengagement_from_Gaza

    This is fucking why Gaza vs West Bank matters dude. Gaza is the side the Israeli’s left and returned. To be attacked from “this side” is a huge deal from the perspective of the greater Palestinians vs Israel conflict… and for those who want peace in this region. Hamas has shattered the peace in a way that seemingly cannot be put back together.


    Just 6 months ago, Israel was far more focused on West Bank issues than Gaza. Or have you forgotten? Its like history of the last 15 years is completely missing from your understanding, and you are choosing exceptionally weird dates (wtf? 1948 ain’t even the start of the Israel plan. Why the fuck are you choosing this date historically? Most people would choose Balfour Declaration or some shit).


  • Would been nice if Israel did not do illegal settlements, stealing more homes.

    Yeah that’s called the West Bank. That’s not even part of Gaza / where Hamas has control. You’re conflating issues as if I’m a dumbass who doesn’t know what’s going on in that region.

    Want to talk about warcrimes? Check Israel’s history and ongoing warcrimes first.

    So do you condone Oct. 7th or not? Both sides can be jackasses. Whataboutism fucking sucks when Republicans do it, I’m not going to tolerate it here either. If both sides suck, then we have other things to do.

    But just saying “Oh, these warcrimes are fine but those aren’t” is no way to solve any issue. You wouldn’t be able to solve two 5-year-olds fighting with that kind of nonsense, and it obviously wouldn’t work on adults who are literally launching bombs at each other.