If Ukraine could get some more patriot missiles (and launchers) say, today that would be great thanks.
And by "thanks", I mean "Thanks Mike Johnson, you bloody-handed literal servant of Lucifer".
Some Starstreaks and RBS-70s would be nice too. Those Su-25s over Chasiv Yar realizing that their flares do absolutely nothing against beamriding AA missiles would definitely cheer me up.
"The western world sips from a poisonous cocktail: Polarisation, populism, protectionism and post-truth"
-Antje Jackelén, Archbishop of the Church of Sweden
"We are facing a difficult period, but Ukraine will not lose" - Kyrylo Budanov in an interview with the BBC
Kyrylo Budanov : In our opinion, a rather difficult situation awaits us in the near future. But it is not catastrophic, this must also be understood. Armageddon will not happen, as many are now beginning to say. But there will be problems from mid-May.
BBC : And if we talk about the front.
Kyrylo Budanov : I am also talking about the front. This is a comprehensive approach, because the Russians will use a comprehensive approach. They conduct a complex operation. We will not talk about it with you for a long time, but it will be a difficult period. Mid-May, early June.
BBC : Are we also talking about the domestic political situation?
Kyrylo Budanov : It's about everything.
...
(KB on Russians) Regarding the equipment - the equipment of the infantry has definitely become better. Quality of technology? No, it fell because there is not enough new equipment, it is not enough. This is all repaired, restored equipment from warehouses for long-term storage of weapons. It makes no sense to talk about quality there, and that quality is not needed there.
As for the quality of the personnel - those who took part in the first, as they say, wave of the full-scale invasion of the 22nd year - these were real professionals, contract workers with normal combat experience and so on. But during this time there were almost none of them left. Russia is fighting with mobilized forces.
BBC : What is their morale?
Kyrylo Budanov : None, in principle. It strengthened after the capture of Avdiivka, but this was a temporary phenomenon. In principle, the mobilized does not make much sense. They fight for money because they were called up, because they were forced to call up and so on. That is, "go ahead". Well, the Russian mentality also plays an important role. "Go forward", as they say, and the Russian man goes. He does not particularly think what will happen to him there. But to say that he tries hard is also not true.
...
BBC : Recently, by the way, he (Zelensky) called on the West to protect Ukraine in the same way they protected Israel.
Kyrylo Budanov : Excellent thought.
BBC : But we heard what the West says - it does not want a direct confrontation with Russia.
Kyrylo Budanov : Well, you have to understand all these aspects, take them into account. And, in addition, the state of Israel officially has the status of the main ally of the United States of America. Unfortunately, we cannot boast of this yet. Would I like that? I wish. And who is against someone else helping us defend ourselves? I don't think you know a person who would be against it.
The Senate's supposed to take the bill up tomorrow and will probably pass it late in the week or early next, depending on what type of shenanigans the Republicans play to try to delay it.
What's the maintenance regime for a B-1 as compared to a Tu-22? Like, we have B-52s that are generations old, but with proper maintenance, they can do the job.
The Backfire fleet always had pretty high maintenance priority for the VKS because its Russia's primary strategic striking force. Besides bombing Syria, they're how Russia would contest the North Atlantic by posing a long-range missile threat to US carrier groups (the F-14 Tomcat was designed to counter this). Despite this they lost a couple of them before the war to accidents and wear, including one that spectacularly disintegrated while landing just a few years ago.
The Russians also restarted production of the Tu-160 Blackjack, the Backfire's successor, just before the war started.
What Ukraine really needs right now is a supplier willing to just ramp up artillery shell production on a couple of factories to maximum and just send them everything they produce, immediately. Ukraine's problem is their domestic production of ammunion is miniscule (but notably, not zero), meanwhile Russia has an economy more than 10 times the size of Ukraine's more-or-less fully focussed on production, with factories in nice safe locations well away from the front lines. Their supply of ammo comes in fits and starts as individual nations find another couple of thousand shells in their couch cushions that they're willing to part with, what they need now that we know this war is not ending any time soon is a consistent supply of ammunition.
From what I've been able to glean Ukraine has no shortage of financial support; their soldiers are actually fairly well paid and equipped and they're easily able to source parts and materials for their own production, what they're missing is the actual goddamn shells which are a little tricky to build en-masse in a country under constant cruise missile attacks.
Wild Hornets test smart drones with a neural network on Ukrainian electronics
In the video, the drone has a neural network and a target tracker. With the help of a smart system, it itself determines the targets on the battlefield (vehicles, infantry). The operator only needs to pick one of the identified targets and select it with a button on the remote control.
The neural network is on a Ukrainian-made microcomputer measuring 30x30. That is, it is compactly mounted in a drone.
In addition, the drone you see in the tests is assembled from Ukrainian parts: flight controller, engine regulator, video transmitter, camera, microcomputer, radio receiver (ELRS).
In the near future, we will have a lot of work to increase the combat potential of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. But for this we will continue to need your support.
What Ukraine really needs right now is a supplier willing to just ramp up artillery shell production on a couple of factories to maximum and just send them everything they produce, immediately. Ukraine's problem is their domestic production of ammunion is miniscule (but notably, not zero), meanwhile Russia has an economy more than 10 times the size of Ukraine's more-or-less fully focussed on production, with factories in nice safe locations well away from the front lines. Their supply of ammo comes in fits and starts as individual nations find another couple of thousand shells in their couch cushions that they're willing to part with, what they need now that we know this war is not ending any time soon is a consistent supply of ammunition.
From what I've been able to glean Ukraine has no shortage of financial support; their soldiers are actually fairly well paid and equipped and they're easily able to source parts and materials for their own production, what they're missing is the actual goddamn shells which are a little tricky to build en-masse in a country under constant cruise missile attacks.
My understanding is that the production rampup is a process everywhere else, too. Even the US can only produce about 30,000 shells a month now, is trying to scale up to about twice that by the end of the year, and will probably be stuck there until the resources are made available to actually get additional factories running. Until that happens - if it does - there's a pretty small bandwidth limit that will probably need to be complemented by stuff that can make each individual bang more effective, whether by better use of the rounds that do exist or stuff that will let Ukraine resume going completely to town on the Russian logistical base.
People might have been able to see this kind of situation coming up prior to the war starting; problem is they didn't, and the west is going to be playing catch-up for years to come.
I mean if Russia's not defeated all of those shells will eventually become extremely necessary.
Past that it's not like they're eggs; they have a shelf life but it's measured in decades. Chances are, depressingly enough, that if Zelensky marched triumphantly into the wreckage of the Kremlin next week the remaining shells would still probably find a use in 2029 or 2032 or 2051 or whatever.
Part of the problem is that everyone knows that if Russia is overwhelmingly defeated, all of those shells are going to go back to being useless.
Even if Russia stops the war today Europe and US are still going to need almost a decade of production at current levels to fill the stockpiles to what's the new readiness normal.
P.S: Partially because we've been underestimating how much each artillery piece uses. Partially because the new figures of "how many SPGs do we need?" have been adjusted upwards by somthing to twice as many to 10 times as many depending on the country. The only country that was ready for this level of artillery warfare was South Korea. Feel free to google how many K9s South Korea has.
Fiendishrabbit on
"The western world sips from a poisonous cocktail: Polarisation, populism, protectionism and post-truth"
-Antje Jackelén, Archbishop of the Church of Sweden
+7
Options
SpectrumArcher of InfernoChaldea Rec RoomRegistered Userregular
Ukraine's military needs younger men not only because they are physically fitter than older men but also because they can master technology used on the battlefield faster, President Volodymyr Zelensky told French YouTuber Hugo Travers in an interview published on April 21.
Zelensky signed several laws on mobilization on April 2, one of which lowered the minimum age of compulsory military service from 27 to 25, making men eligible for the draft from age 25.
"There are specific criteria regarding the age and physical condition of combatants so that they can be trained and sent later to the front," Zelensky told Travers.
"This is a request from the military command in response to the specific needs of the Ukrainian Armed Forces," as there is a need to train new soldiers to "replace those who have been fighting for two years," Zelensky said.
Zelensky said the replacement will only work if the new recruits are "properly trained and in good physical condition."
"With all due respect to our fighters, there's a difference between a 25-year-old combatant and a 50-year-old one."
Younger fighters can also master the different technologies used on the battlefield, Zelensky said. "It is a modern type of war," especially in terms of technologies such as UAVs, maritime drones, and cybersecurity.
"The new generation masters new technologies much more rapidly," Zelensky said.
Ukraine has made steps to update the legal framework around conscription in order to ramp up mobilization in 2024, in the works since late last year. Zelensky signed the new law on mobilization on April 16.
Ukraine had a high mobilization age previously (presumably to preserve their youth and future) and it's never great if they have to lower it, regardless of the stated reasons.
Not Ukraine, but Russian news. There's been severe flooding in Central Asia this month. That has apparently now led to the flooding of a uranium mine, with feared contamination of the Tobol River.
Anton Gerashchenko is an advisor to the Ukrainian Ministry of Internal Affairs.
In Kurgan region of Russia, old wells of the Dobrovolnoye deposit, where one of Rosatom's enterprises mines uranium, flooded. The uranium solution could have flowed into the Tobol river. This information is confirmed by environmentalists.
It is reported that the flood washed the radioactive mud into the Tobol river, which had been accumulating for years from the spreading underground water from old wells. An old, "leaking for 35 years well" could be under the water. It is to the right of the road on the video.
For years, Kurgan eco-activists have been pushing for a ban on uranium mining in Dobrovolnoye, fearing that radioactive solution would get into groundwater and the Tobol river. Rosatom explained the protests with "radiophobia." What will they say now?
Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion.
I'm still pretty confident, and more confident watching what Russia has shown the past couple years the US has enough J-whatevers to curb stomp any Russian offensive.
Russia is really no threat to the NATO alliance if everyone shows up and delivers. They can only win politically.
Ukraine had a high mobilization age previously (presumably to preserve their youth and future) and it's never great if they have to lower it, regardless of the stated reasons.
It's kind of weird from an American perspective. We prefer to take away people's futures before they can start developing them, not after they've been developing them for half a decade and likely have a family that's depending on their continued existence.
I'm still pretty confident, and more confident watching what Russia has shown the past couple years the US has enough J-whatevers to curb stomp any Russian offensive.
Russia is really no threat to the NATO alliance if everyone shows up and delivers. They can only win politically.
This is not as comforting as you probably intended it to be.
The US doesn't really need an artillery centric force if they can win the skies, and nothing about this war has indicated that if it was the US fighting and not Ukraine that the US wouldn't have won the sky
Like it's all well and good if russia has ten times as many shells, if the enemy can freely hit your factories and bridges with standoff weapons and has more than enough air power to do so for months straight, they don't really matter
The fact that S-400 and other russian defenses have proven remarkably bad at dealing with ballistic missiles leads me to believe they're probably not so hot against stealth aircraft and low observability cruise missiles
Not that the Pentagon doesn't want a lot of artillery, it wants to be able to fight another Afghanistan or Iraq type conflict with lots of soldiers sitting around needing fire support at any moment, and thats probably more likely than having to fight the Chinese navy anyway
Russians have made a breakthrough at Ocheretyne (north west of Avdiivka). Ukrainian forces allegedly abandoned their positions and the 47th Mechanized brigade have (as ever) been rushed to try and plug the gap.
This is real bad as the settlement is on high ground with many avenues to advance from.
Tweetr is a reliable OSINT account, plenty of maps on Twitter to show why this is bad.
Situation in Ocheretyne (Avdiivka axis), what I know from my friends from that direction it is fucking hell.
Unfortunately, one of the newly arrived brigades, the 115th Mech. Brigade, left its positions without permission, which led to a breakthrough by the Russians.
Due to the incompetence of the brigade command and the cowardice of the soldiers, the soldiers of the 47th Mech. Brigade had to urgently engage in combat with the superior enemy forces
The fucking the 10th Army Corps screwed up even here...
That kind of thing will happen more with fatigue and constant grinding battle where you are outmanned and outgunned. Units and brigades will break if they’re hit by enough artillery or glide bombs etc, without enough to return in kind it’s just a fact of warfare
But hey the press should go back to singing Johnson’s praises as the great Churchill! Because of him the Russians had all this time to grind thousands of good men into dust and break them!
Also whatever war the US wants to fight in the future, it should recognise that most wars it’s going to be involved in are going to be proxy ones where you can’t use your Air Force because the opposing side has nukes or a patron with nukes (China, Russia, etc), so instead you need the basics, and lots of it. The US needs way more focus on its likely role as a patron of many client armies going forward
Prohass on
+19
Options
Grudgeblessed is the mind too small for doubtRegistered Userregular
Yes, the US is probably not going to need any massed artillery themselves, but there is a whole bunch of countries around the world (especially in Europe) who are planning to seriously scale up both their artillery forces and production.
Yes, the US is probably not going to need any massed artillery themselves, but there is a whole bunch of countries around the world (especially in Europe) who are planning to seriously scale up both their artillery forces and production.
Yep this is entirely the problem. Its not good enough for a confident direct conventional victory, because that war isn't going to happen.
We need to be able to ensure that we can allow someone else to win the sort of weird conventional wars which proxy conflicts become confidently.
Ukraine has made it clear we can't do that as the West, and we need to get to the point that we can if we choose easily.
Which should be a fucking easy sell for a couple decades of "buy ammo and build bunkers" - a few entire careers in that enterprise for the rest of the century.
After the promise of a third Patriot system by Germany, Greece now considers sending one system in return for security assurances by the US against Turkey (Greece has been and is very unwilling to send anything from their military stocks because of the their relationship with Turkey), and Germany is pressuring the US to also send at least another Patriot system.
There'S another Ramstein Meeting on the 26th so maybe some more definite news about more anti-air systems then
After the promise of a third Patriot system by Germany, Greece now considers sending one system in return for security assurances by the US against Turkey (Greece has been and is very unwilling to send anything from their military stocks because of the their relationship with Turkey), and Germany is pressuring the US to also send at least another Patriot system.
There'S another Ramstein Meeting on the 26th so maybe some more definite news about more anti-air systems then
While that's awesome of Greece, I think it's an unfortunate reality that the US should no longer be a reliable partner when it comes to a security assurance. If Biden wins? Absolutely. If Trump wins? Erdogan is Trump's buddy, and if he wants to fuck with Greece, well, Trump would probably think that's OK.
It's absolutely fucked that we're a coinflip away from the US electing someone who will betray the ideals of America's European foreign policy for the last eight decades, because he's friendly with authoritarian shitheels.
That'll certainly be an ongoing consideration, but from another perspective; if the US does a 180 and starts supporting belligerent nations, leaves NATO, joins BRICS, and just goes full heel for the foreseeable future, a couple of Patriot systems probably won't be a make or break element of the situation, while they'll likely do very tangible good in Ukraine right now.
I 100% agree that it's something for nations to keep in mind, in regards to long term planning and the unfortunate position it puts many in, needing to spend on defense at levels that may not have been seen in decades, but it seems to be the world we're living in.
In a comic-book'ian way, it's a reason for the EU nations to up-arm/upgrade and focus on the ability to collectively defend themselves. Whether against further Russian aggression, a China that stops giving a shit and goes all conquest'y, or an America that embraces fascism/authoritarianism. Again, and in an even bigger way.
But that feels like it touches on a variety of Perun's videos to date as well. Short term efforts versus long term goals. And it's already having an impact on international weapons sales, with some big players losing pieces of the pie, and some others (I believe the video explicitly on the topic mentioned South Korea several times) stepping up.
I'd of course rather see those vast billions spent on schools and hospitals, but with situations like we're seeing in Ukraine, we have an ongoing stark reminder that a politely worded email will not suffice in the face of naked aggression, and folks have been talking about how unreliable an ally the US can be for likely far longer than Trump's administration, but it certainly brought things to the forefront in a very tangible way.
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
Especially as it is very clear that Russia is going to double and quadruple down on their efforts to amplify authoritarian shitheadery in NATO nations.
There's also the "plan B" component to artillery. A dumb shell always works.
For all we know in a future conflict, an adversary will be able to blanket the sky in so many drones that it will not be feasible for our planes to get through. Or get to our planes while they are on the ground/ship.
It is dangerous to build your strategy on an assumption of air superiority, or any other assumption for that matter.
It's funny how despite all the technology the most important thing in this war seem to be plain old artillery shells, big grenades that you throw really far, and masses of infantry.
Feels so quaint and Great War-esque yet here we are.
There's also the "plan B" component to artillery. A dumb shell always works.
For all we know in a future conflict, an adversary will be able to blanket the sky in so many drones that it will not be feasible for our planes to get through. Or get to our planes while they are on the ground/ship.
It is dangerous to build your strategy on an assumption of air superiority, or any other assumption for that matter.
Artillery shells are only hard to build and ramp for because suppliers have a choice what to build and don't want to invest in new lines when in 3 years time noone will want any of their shells.
If the US government simply ordered like, Ford to begin producing 100k shells a month within 6 months, and here are 10 advisors to help with the lines, then that would be done.
Ukraine can't do it because it has a small industrial base which is under continual attack. Everyone else isn't doing it for economic reasons. The initial investment and disruption to existing contracts isn't worth it. So we see this slow pivot where otherwise idled lines are switched back on or transitioned to shell production at a glacial pace, effectively using people in their down time between more profitable projects.
"That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
+5
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
Other thing is that air superiority will take time, assuming it's doable, and in the meantime you need something that can crump the attacking forces. Iraq 1 and 2 were NATO(ish) forces going on the air offensive for weeks before moving in on the ground. That's a different scenario than Russia going first after deciding they want Poland, Moldova, or the Baltics.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
Part of the problem is that everyone knows that if Russia is overwhelmingly defeated, all of those shells are going to go back to being useless.
that's what everyone thought when they put all that materiel into the storage after the cold war, which is how we ended up with absurdities like Britain having to buy back Belgium's entire artillery corps at markup from a private owner
The problem is the Ukraine conflict is not comparable to what most of the countries who would be doing the artillery shell production would actually be involved in.
After the promise of a third Patriot system by Germany, Greece now considers sending one system in return for security assurances by the US against Turkey (Greece has been and is very unwilling to send anything from their military stocks because of the their relationship with Turkey), and Germany is pressuring the US to also send at least another Patriot system.
There'S another Ramstein Meeting on the 26th so maybe some more definite news about more anti-air systems then
While that's awesome of Greece, I think it's an unfortunate reality that the US should no longer be a reliable partner when it comes to a security assurance. If Biden wins? Absolutely. If Trump wins? Erdogan is Trump's buddy, and if he wants to fuck with Greece, well, Trump would probably think that's OK.
It's absolutely fucked that we're a coinflip away from the US electing someone who will betray the ideals of America's European foreign policy for the last eight decades, because he's friendly with authoritarian shitheels.
I'm honestly kind of sanguine about Ukraine's prospects in a 2nd Trump presidency. Trump is extremely susceptible to flattery and quid pro quo bargains, both of which are things Zelensky can do.
"oh mr president, those javelins you approved really saved us more than anything Obamna or Sleepy Joe did. Here is a medal."
The problem is the Ukraine conflict is not comparable to what most of the countries who would be doing the artillery shell production would actually be involved in.
or so they *hope*. The renewed prospect of Large Scale Combat Operations (LSCO) is the new meme for all the NATO armies. Nobody is comfortable with a one-month war reserve of shells anymore.
After the promise of a third Patriot system by Germany, Greece now considers sending one system in return for security assurances by the US against Turkey (Greece has been and is very unwilling to send anything from their military stocks because of the their relationship with Turkey), and Germany is pressuring the US to also send at least another Patriot system.
There'S another Ramstein Meeting on the 26th so maybe some more definite news about more anti-air systems then
While that's awesome of Greece, I think it's an unfortunate reality that the US should no longer be a reliable partner when it comes to a security assurance. If Biden wins? Absolutely. If Trump wins? Erdogan is Trump's buddy, and if he wants to fuck with Greece, well, Trump would probably think that's OK.
It's absolutely fucked that we're a coinflip away from the US electing someone who will betray the ideals of America's European foreign policy for the last eight decades, because he's friendly with authoritarian shitheels.
I'm honestly kind of sanguine about Ukraine's prospects in a 2nd Trump presidency. Trump is extremely susceptible to flattery and quid pro quo bargains, both of which are things Zelensky can do.
What?
Over the past decade literally the only thing Trump has shown loyalty to other than himself is Russia, and he's completely internalized Ukraine as being central to whatever insane Biden-centric conspiracy world he lives in. Zelensky is an enemy as far as Trump's concerned, and he holds permanent grudges.
Assistance to Ukraine would vanish on day one of a Trump presidency. Assistance to Russia starting on day two wouldn't surprise me in the least, given Trump's take on the whole conflict when the war started.
After the promise of a third Patriot system by Germany, Greece now considers sending one system in return for security assurances by the US against Turkey (Greece has been and is very unwilling to send anything from their military stocks because of the their relationship with Turkey), and Germany is pressuring the US to also send at least another Patriot system.
There'S another Ramstein Meeting on the 26th so maybe some more definite news about more anti-air systems then
While that's awesome of Greece, I think it's an unfortunate reality that the US should no longer be a reliable partner when it comes to a security assurance. If Biden wins? Absolutely. If Trump wins? Erdogan is Trump's buddy, and if he wants to fuck with Greece, well, Trump would probably think that's OK.
It's absolutely fucked that we're a coinflip away from the US electing someone who will betray the ideals of America's European foreign policy for the last eight decades, because he's friendly with authoritarian shitheels.
I'm honestly kind of sanguine about Ukraine's prospects in a 2nd Trump presidency. Trump is extremely susceptible to flattery and quid pro quo bargains, both of which are things Zelensky can do.
What?
Over the past decade literally the only thing Trump has shown loyalty to other than himself is Russia, and he's completely internalized Ukraine as being central to whatever insane Biden-centric conspiracy world he lives in. Zelensky is an enemy as far as Trump's concerned, and he holds permanent grudges.
Assistance to Ukraine would vanish on day one of a Trump presidency. Assistance to Russia starting on day two wouldn't surprise me in the least, given Trump's take on the whole conflict when the war started.
The asshole has already been talking about forcing Ukraine to surrender.
The aid package includes vehicles, Stinger air defense munitions, additional ammunition for high-mobility artillery rocket systems, 155 millimeter artillery ammunition, TOW and Javelin anti-tank munitions and other weapons that can immediately be put to use on the battlefield, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
After the promise of a third Patriot system by Germany, Greece now considers sending one system in return for security assurances by the US against Turkey (Greece has been and is very unwilling to send anything from their military stocks because of the their relationship with Turkey), and Germany is pressuring the US to also send at least another Patriot system.
There'S another Ramstein Meeting on the 26th so maybe some more definite news about more anti-air systems then
While that's awesome of Greece, I think it's an unfortunate reality that the US should no longer be a reliable partner when it comes to a security assurance. If Biden wins? Absolutely. If Trump wins? Erdogan is Trump's buddy, and if he wants to fuck with Greece, well, Trump would probably think that's OK.
It's absolutely fucked that we're a coinflip away from the US electing someone who will betray the ideals of America's European foreign policy for the last eight decades, because he's friendly with authoritarian shitheels.
I'm honestly kind of sanguine about Ukraine's prospects in a 2nd Trump presidency. Trump is extremely susceptible to flattery and quid pro quo bargains, both of which are things Zelensky can do.
What?
Over the past decade literally the only thing Trump has shown loyalty to other than himself is Russia, and he's completely internalized Ukraine as being central to whatever insane Biden-centric conspiracy world he lives in. Zelensky is an enemy as far as Trump's concerned, and he holds permanent grudges.
Assistance to Ukraine would vanish on day one of a Trump presidency. Assistance to Russia starting on day two wouldn't surprise me in the least, given Trump's take on the whole conflict when the war started.
Also a reminder, it was Zelensky specifically who he tried to extort, and that act got him impeached the first time.
I can't think of a foreign leader that Trump would be nursing a bigger grievance against, than the current President of Ukraine. Trump might forget favors. He rarely forgets slights.
Yes, he allows Graham and Cruz and Rubio to kiss the ring despite blasting him, but as we see repeatedly, that's a political calculus, and he's happy to humiliate and demean them when the mood strikes. It's part of his power play.
I'm going to get yelled at for even putting this out into the universe, but fuck it, 'manifesting things' is bullshit, don't @ me.
I'm feeling pretty confident that Ukraine, nations of the EU, and other allied sorts have been doing a lot of math on what to do if Trump wins in November.
Hell, short of something that would actually get folks executed, it'd be just swell if someone 'forgot' a bunch of long range strike munitions with the keys still in them (I know, I know) on the Polish border. Repeatedly. Every week between November and January 20th 2025.
Once he takes office and goes through the motions to restrict/rescind support, and maybe even redirect it to that glorious stallion of a man, Putin, his best friend, a good man who says such nice things about him, etc, obviously the calculus will change once again.
Basically, we all lamented that many nations put off certain systems or training for months or years.
We *know*, with certainty, that we are ~9 months away from things potentially going extra pear shaped, and will have a much clearer idea in ~6.5 or so.
Hopefully contingency planning is happening now, in preparation for that possible outcome.
Now, obviously, I'm not saying that they should hold back help. I hope all the help possible goes out as fast as possible.
But as the long running joke goes about nations having contingency plans for fighting off zombies or an alien invasion, this seems like a very realistic potential outcome that I hope has had good people putting a lot of thought and work into.
Forar on
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
Poland and all of NATO strongly condems Ukraine raiding our storage site situated 10 meters from the Polish - Ukrainian border. NATO should be free to store supplies on sovereign territory, and there will be consequences for Ukraine attempting this again. To demonstrate our resolve, we will be storing several months of supplies and munitions, as well as two squadrons of F-16s in the same spot.
Given the observed history of the past eight years of disaster with no effective response or prevention, I think that hoping leadership would have an effective plan for the return of Trump is plainly unwarranted.
Posts
Some Starstreaks and RBS-70s would be nice too. Those Su-25s over Chasiv Yar realizing that their flares do absolutely nothing against beamriding AA missiles would definitely cheer me up.
-Antje Jackelén, Archbishop of the Church of Sweden
https://www.bbc.com/ukrainian/articles/cmm35ry9v70o?
https://www-bbc-com.translate.goog/ukrainian/articles/cmm35ry9v70o?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en
"We are facing a difficult period, but Ukraine will not lose" - Kyrylo Budanov in an interview with the BBC
Busy passing dumb fuck spying bill
The Backfire fleet always had pretty high maintenance priority for the VKS because its Russia's primary strategic striking force. Besides bombing Syria, they're how Russia would contest the North Atlantic by posing a long-range missile threat to US carrier groups (the F-14 Tomcat was designed to counter this). Despite this they lost a couple of them before the war to accidents and wear, including one that spectacularly disintegrated while landing just a few years ago.
The Russians also restarted production of the Tu-160 Blackjack, the Backfire's successor, just before the war started.
From what I've been able to glean Ukraine has no shortage of financial support; their soldiers are actually fairly well paid and equipped and they're easily able to source parts and materials for their own production, what they're missing is the actual goddamn shells which are a little tricky to build en-masse in a country under constant cruise missile attacks.
https://nitter.poast.org/wilendhornets/status/1782080094770549226#m
My understanding is that the production rampup is a process everywhere else, too. Even the US can only produce about 30,000 shells a month now, is trying to scale up to about twice that by the end of the year, and will probably be stuck there until the resources are made available to actually get additional factories running. Until that happens - if it does - there's a pretty small bandwidth limit that will probably need to be complemented by stuff that can make each individual bang more effective, whether by better use of the rounds that do exist or stuff that will let Ukraine resume going completely to town on the Russian logistical base.
People might have been able to see this kind of situation coming up prior to the war starting; problem is they didn't, and the west is going to be playing catch-up for years to come.
Past that it's not like they're eggs; they have a shelf life but it's measured in decades. Chances are, depressingly enough, that if Zelensky marched triumphantly into the wreckage of the Kremlin next week the remaining shells would still probably find a use in 2029 or 2032 or 2051 or whatever.
Even if Russia stops the war today Europe and US are still going to need almost a decade of production at current levels to fill the stockpiles to what's the new readiness normal.
P.S: Partially because we've been underestimating how much each artillery piece uses. Partially because the new figures of "how many SPGs do we need?" have been adjusted upwards by somthing to twice as many to 10 times as many depending on the country. The only country that was ready for this level of artillery warfare was South Korea. Feel free to google how many K9s South Korea has.
-Antje Jackelén, Archbishop of the Church of Sweden
Anton Gerashchenko is an advisor to the Ukrainian Ministry of Internal Affairs.
- John Stuart Mill
Russia is really no threat to the NATO alliance if everyone shows up and delivers. They can only win politically.
It's kind of weird from an American perspective. We prefer to take away people's futures before they can start developing them, not after they've been developing them for half a decade and likely have a family that's depending on their continued existence.
This is not as comforting as you probably intended it to be.
Like it's all well and good if russia has ten times as many shells, if the enemy can freely hit your factories and bridges with standoff weapons and has more than enough air power to do so for months straight, they don't really matter
The fact that S-400 and other russian defenses have proven remarkably bad at dealing with ballistic missiles leads me to believe they're probably not so hot against stealth aircraft and low observability cruise missiles
Not that the Pentagon doesn't want a lot of artillery, it wants to be able to fight another Afghanistan or Iraq type conflict with lots of soldiers sitting around needing fire support at any moment, and thats probably more likely than having to fight the Chinese navy anyway
This is real bad as the settlement is on high ground with many avenues to advance from.
Tweetr is a reliable OSINT account, plenty of maps on Twitter to show why this is bad.
I made a game, it has penguins in it. It's pay what you like on Gumroad.
Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
But hey the press should go back to singing Johnson’s praises as the great Churchill! Because of him the Russians had all this time to grind thousands of good men into dust and break them!
Also whatever war the US wants to fight in the future, it should recognise that most wars it’s going to be involved in are going to be proxy ones where you can’t use your Air Force because the opposing side has nukes or a patron with nukes (China, Russia, etc), so instead you need the basics, and lots of it. The US needs way more focus on its likely role as a patron of many client armies going forward
Yep this is entirely the problem. Its not good enough for a confident direct conventional victory, because that war isn't going to happen.
We need to be able to ensure that we can allow someone else to win the sort of weird conventional wars which proxy conflicts become confidently.
Ukraine has made it clear we can't do that as the West, and we need to get to the point that we can if we choose easily.
Which should be a fucking easy sell for a couple decades of "buy ammo and build bunkers" - a few entire careers in that enterprise for the rest of the century.
There'S another Ramstein Meeting on the 26th so maybe some more definite news about more anti-air systems then
While that's awesome of Greece, I think it's an unfortunate reality that the US should no longer be a reliable partner when it comes to a security assurance. If Biden wins? Absolutely. If Trump wins? Erdogan is Trump's buddy, and if he wants to fuck with Greece, well, Trump would probably think that's OK.
It's absolutely fucked that we're a coinflip away from the US electing someone who will betray the ideals of America's European foreign policy for the last eight decades, because he's friendly with authoritarian shitheels.
I 100% agree that it's something for nations to keep in mind, in regards to long term planning and the unfortunate position it puts many in, needing to spend on defense at levels that may not have been seen in decades, but it seems to be the world we're living in.
In a comic-book'ian way, it's a reason for the EU nations to up-arm/upgrade and focus on the ability to collectively defend themselves. Whether against further Russian aggression, a China that stops giving a shit and goes all conquest'y, or an America that embraces fascism/authoritarianism. Again, and in an even bigger way.
But that feels like it touches on a variety of Perun's videos to date as well. Short term efforts versus long term goals. And it's already having an impact on international weapons sales, with some big players losing pieces of the pie, and some others (I believe the video explicitly on the topic mentioned South Korea several times) stepping up.
I'd of course rather see those vast billions spent on schools and hospitals, but with situations like we're seeing in Ukraine, we have an ongoing stark reminder that a politely worded email will not suffice in the face of naked aggression, and folks have been talking about how unreliable an ally the US can be for likely far longer than Trump's administration, but it certainly brought things to the forefront in a very tangible way.
For all we know in a future conflict, an adversary will be able to blanket the sky in so many drones that it will not be feasible for our planes to get through. Or get to our planes while they are on the ground/ship.
It is dangerous to build your strategy on an assumption of air superiority, or any other assumption for that matter.
Feels so quaint and Great War-esque yet here we are.
Artillery shells are only hard to build and ramp for because suppliers have a choice what to build and don't want to invest in new lines when in 3 years time noone will want any of their shells.
If the US government simply ordered like, Ford to begin producing 100k shells a month within 6 months, and here are 10 advisors to help with the lines, then that would be done.
Ukraine can't do it because it has a small industrial base which is under continual attack. Everyone else isn't doing it for economic reasons. The initial investment and disruption to existing contracts isn't worth it. So we see this slow pivot where otherwise idled lines are switched back on or transitioned to shell production at a glacial pace, effectively using people in their down time between more profitable projects.
that's what everyone thought when they put all that materiel into the storage after the cold war, which is how we ended up with absurdities like Britain having to buy back Belgium's entire artillery corps at markup from a private owner
I'm honestly kind of sanguine about Ukraine's prospects in a 2nd Trump presidency. Trump is extremely susceptible to flattery and quid pro quo bargains, both of which are things Zelensky can do.
"oh mr president, those javelins you approved really saved us more than anything Obamna or Sleepy Joe did. Here is a medal."
or so they *hope*. The renewed prospect of Large Scale Combat Operations (LSCO) is the new meme for all the NATO armies. Nobody is comfortable with a one-month war reserve of shells anymore.
What?
Over the past decade literally the only thing Trump has shown loyalty to other than himself is Russia, and he's completely internalized Ukraine as being central to whatever insane Biden-centric conspiracy world he lives in. Zelensky is an enemy as far as Trump's concerned, and he holds permanent grudges.
Assistance to Ukraine would vanish on day one of a Trump presidency. Assistance to Russia starting on day two wouldn't surprise me in the least, given Trump's take on the whole conflict when the war started.
The asshole has already been talking about forcing Ukraine to surrender.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-preparing-1-bln-weapons-package-ukraine-officials-say-2024-04-23/
Also a reminder, it was Zelensky specifically who he tried to extort, and that act got him impeached the first time.
I can't think of a foreign leader that Trump would be nursing a bigger grievance against, than the current President of Ukraine. Trump might forget favors. He rarely forgets slights.
Yes, he allows Graham and Cruz and Rubio to kiss the ring despite blasting him, but as we see repeatedly, that's a political calculus, and he's happy to humiliate and demean them when the mood strikes. It's part of his power play.
I'm feeling pretty confident that Ukraine, nations of the EU, and other allied sorts have been doing a lot of math on what to do if Trump wins in November.
Hell, short of something that would actually get folks executed, it'd be just swell if someone 'forgot' a bunch of long range strike munitions with the keys still in them (I know, I know) on the Polish border. Repeatedly. Every week between November and January 20th 2025.
Once he takes office and goes through the motions to restrict/rescind support, and maybe even redirect it to that glorious stallion of a man, Putin, his best friend, a good man who says such nice things about him, etc, obviously the calculus will change once again.
Basically, we all lamented that many nations put off certain systems or training for months or years.
We *know*, with certainty, that we are ~9 months away from things potentially going extra pear shaped, and will have a much clearer idea in ~6.5 or so.
Hopefully contingency planning is happening now, in preparation for that possible outcome.
Now, obviously, I'm not saying that they should hold back help. I hope all the help possible goes out as fast as possible.
But as the long running joke goes about nations having contingency plans for fighting off zombies or an alien invasion, this seems like a very realistic potential outcome that I hope has had good people putting a lot of thought and work into.
Ukraine must not repeat their actions.
P.s. - wink.