The Situation in the Ukraine. #31

Isos wrote:The air force is the best advantage they have and they will use it as the first weapon with coordinated missiles strikes.

The air force allows to attack all the targets they want in all Ulraine and moving targets.

If they don't send troops and use just drones and missiles that can push NATO to send forces and then Russia can't risk to attack them directly. If they attack they will go in with everything.

You are thinking about the operation in the wrong way, as a tactical exercise.

The military world and his brother know full well that a combined arms Russian operation would crush Ukraine in a max of probably a week. They know because that would be a type of warfare that many of them would be very familiar with, many in senior positions because they have been in similar themselves in say Iraq.

As such Russia would have won but it would not surprise anyone in US/NATO. It would have been a wasted opportunity. Russia needs to achieve much more than that. Just as the US with the F-117 shocked the World over Baghdad helping to boost the aura of invincibility of the US then, Russia can play the same card now.

Since WW2 the Russian Army has been quietly honing the power, accuracy and effectiveness of its artillery forces. Whilst it can be simulated in a war game it is nothing like seeing the real thing in action and no-one has seen that. Just as the RuAF deployment to Syria in 2015 surprised the West, I suspect that watching the ferocity of an unmanned assault, as I described above, would send shivers down military spines round the World. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity. Do you think that Gerasimov would pass up the opportunity to go down in history?

The strategic effect would be significant. Suddenly much of the West's gear and plans would be scrap. Big changes in spending would be needed to catch up. This would be Russia in role reversal bankrupting the West.

So, the two options are the 'yup of course they won, a couple of days early' or the 'holy shit, wtf happened?' strategies. Which would you take if you were in the Kremlin and pissed off to the back teeth with the US?

Russia isn't looking to shock and awe nor play games, if they go into Ukraine they have one purpose in mind only, no reason to try and complicate matters. John you are thinking way to deeply about it.

flamming_python wrote:
Annihilating the country's infrastructure and killing thousands of conscripts would be completely counterproductive to any conceivable Russian goal in the Ukraine

This is not Iraq to the US, to demonstrate "shock and awe" on. This is a country which neighbors Russia and where millions of Russians have family ties to. And where there are still many, many reasonable people left, even if they have to censor themselves or hide their true opinions.

I agree totally with the conscript part. They are probably mainly in the trench system on the demarcation line. I'd leave that to the DNR/LDR militias, the 'shock and awe' as you put it would be targeted at all units behind them, the artillery/tanks etc plus the military only infrastructure across Ukraine. No bridges etc targeted.

But as I said above, part of the objective would be to rattle the West so hard such that they think that Russia's proposed treaties suddenly become quite a good idea.

Anyway, Russia isn't going to do anything unless Ukraine strikes first and then, to save the infrastructure in Donbas from destruction, Russia is going to have to eliminate Ukraine's artillery and aircraft as fast as it can.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:Russia isn't looking to shock and awe nor play games, if they go into Ukraine they have one purpose in mind only, no reason to try and complicate matters. John you are thinking way to deeply about it.

Maybe, but I doubt I'm the only one. I hope we never find out and if Kiev don't do anything stupid we probably won't.

This weeks discussions will possibly give a pointer, especially if Kiev moves on the Minsk agreement.

JohninMK wrote:

flamming_python wrote:
Annihilating the country's infrastructure and killing thousands of conscripts would be completely counterproductive to any conceivable Russian goal in the Ukraine

This is not Iraq to the US, to demonstrate "shock and awe" on. This is a country which neighbors Russia and where millions of Russians have family ties to. And where there are still many, many reasonable people left, even if they have to censor themselves or hide their true opinions.

I agree totally with the conscript part. They are probably mainly in the trench system on the demarcation line. I'd leave that to the DNR/LDR militias, the 'shock and awe' as you put it would be targeted at all units behind them, the artillery/tanks etc plus the military only infrastructure across Ukraine. No bridges etc targeted.

But as I said above, part of the objective would be to rattle the West so hard such that they think that Russia's proposed treaties suddenly become quite a good idea.

Anyway, Russia isn't going to do anything unless Ukraine strikes first and then, to save the infrastructure in Donbas from destruction, Russia is going to have to eliminate Ukraine's artillery and aircraft as fast as it can.

Any unprovoked assault on the Ukraine won't be supported by Russia's population, much less the Ukraine's population - and who needs some costly occupation or provocations against Russian soldiers?

If Russia goes in then either the situation in the world is such that we're coming up to WW3 already, or there's some major revolts against the Maidanists or something and some part of the Ukrainian elite switch to Russia's side and they call for Russian military aid.

A Ukrainian attack on the Donbass will certainly create cause for throwing them out - but not for going deeper into the Ukraine.

They already showed the power of their kalibr and artillery guided munitions. Even Iran has shown precise guided weapon.

No one cares about that anymore since even 3rd world can get them and even produce them.

If they attavk Ukraine the air force will play the biggest role the first days. They will destroy all the tanks and heavy vehicles, AD systems and fuel stocks as well as big weapon depots.

Ground force in the same time will secure Donbass and only when the air force has finished they will go in if they want to take all Ukraine.

There aren't millions of scenarios possible. You use your advantages to win. The sukhois are fast and deadly. Tanks are slow and can shoot only 5km away, artillery some 20-40. Planes are the best military tool specially against an enemy that has no air force, no matter what people think.

this is an exercise in futility.

Russia would break Ukrainian conventional strength within less than 2 weeks.

The airport, Debaltseve and ilovaisk showed , that without naval, air, or even large ground assets, the UAF offensive potential was absolutely savaged and left for dead in 2 weeks time.

What in the world would russian ground forces do to these poor saps?

This is not a serious challenge for Russia, its mental gymnastics.

Whatever psychological impression needed to be made was made in 2015, on the battlefields of the airport, debaltseve, and ilovaisk. Yes many western mercenaries were savaged and killed, and the reports shocked the US army, so much so they came up with many reports about the deadly "reconnaissance strike complex" and about overpowering BTGs with Brigade combat teams, and used vague terms like "overmatch" even though BTG strength would be enough to actually outnumber NATO BCT at least 3 to 1.

So this is all nonsense talk.

If Russia wanted to , it could push to the Vistula River with several CAA, and there is no force between them and Warsaw that can stop them.

There are so many S400s and S300s and shorads across those lines, that they will strike anything leaving Lakenheath airport, and NATOs airforce losses would be enough to write an entire book, on how the era of SEAD had come to an end.

Now what Putin is planning to remove NATO, is beyond conventional strength, he is talking about the proverbial red button, that's all he needs, and the will to use it.

I will repeat: the army , the airforce, and the navy were NOT used during the war in donbass,  and UAF lost more than 50% of operational capacity during those short skirmishes. ... put that in your pipe and smoke it

flamming_python wrote:Annihilating the country's infrastructure and killing thousands of conscripts would be completely counterproductive to any conceivable Russian goal in the Ukraine...

This pussy approach was already attempted after WW2 when USSR failed to implement denazification of the Ukraine which led to this shitstorm Russia has today

Killing conscripts and any other Nazi worshipers should be priority number 1

Everything else is redundant

Don't waste time or money on territory, it's useless, make sure that hostiles are all exterminated

If shit gets serious just get planes and drones in the air, kill everything wearing any kind of uniform or carrying any kind of weapon, take as long as you need and once it's done just move on and don't even bother trying to occupy that shithole, not worth it

Yeah I agree with papa dragon, Russia didnt give a hoot about family ties, infrastructure, or whatever other nonsense was given as a reason.

Not when 14,000 nazis were sent to an early grave, and no russian had a second thought about it once it was said and done.

In fact, just as in the airport, debaltseve, and ilovaisk the only thing that forced Ukraine to sue for peace was a massive extermination of those vermin by MLRS fire strikes.

They also destroyed the nicest airport in the east, so , so much for infrastructure

Flaming, the only reason Ukraine signed minsk 2 is cus so many of them were squeezed through a meat grinder that there was no other choice

PapaDragon wrote:

flamming_python wrote:Annihilating the country's infrastructure and killing thousands of conscripts would be completely counterproductive to any conceivable Russian goal in the Ukraine...

This pussy approach was already attempted after WW2 when USSR failed to implement denazification of the Ukraine which led to this shitstorm Russia has today

Killing conscripts and any other Nazi worshipers should be priority number 1

Everything else is redundant

Don't waste time or money on territory, it's useless, make sure that hostiles are all exterminated

If shit gets serious just get planes and drones in the air, kill everything wearing any kind of uniform or carrying any kind of weapon, take as long as you need and once it's done just move on and don't even bother trying to occupy that shithole, not worth it

**sigh**

Don't take advice on how to prosecute a war with your neighbour from a Serb, or any ex-Yugoslav for that matter

PapaDragon wrote:

flamming_python wrote:Annihilating the country's infrastructure and killing thousands of conscripts would be completely counterproductive to any conceivable Russian goal in the Ukraine...

This pussy approach was already attempted after WW2 when USSR failed to implement denazification of the Ukraine which led to this shitstorm Russia has today

Killing conscripts and any other Nazi worshipers should be priority number 1

Everything else is redundant

Don't waste time or money on territory, it's useless, make sure that hostiles are all exterminated

If shit gets serious just get planes and drones in the air, kill everything wearing any kind of uniform or carrying any kind of weapon, take as long as you need and once it's done just move on and don't even bother trying to occupy that shithole, not worth it

If Russia did invade they would have to occupy it, there is no going back at that stage.

Not really, Russia could pull off a 2006 israel Lebanon type of deal , just go in there, scorch earth the place, and dip out.

Afterward it could just fly sorties into Ukraine at will and blow up any arms shipments it sees are transporting dangerous weapons.

Like our jewish partners have shown us time and time again.

Hell su34s can go hide by the rc135 snooping around and let it take missiles up the wazoo like IDF does all the time

lyle6 wrote:The Russians already have a core group of Ukrainians that are deeply loyal to them and have a mountain of grudges to settle.

Transplant those dudes to Kiev and have them run the show.

They even come with their own army so you won't have to occupy the country.

Those forces aren't nearly enough to occupy all of Ukraine.

lyle6 wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Those forces aren't nearly enough to occupy all of Ukraine.

The maidanuts were a tiny minority and yet they came to dominate the country with support from the outside. Same thing applies here.

Because the area of ukraine they are in is supportive of it.

There is no need to do an occupation. Just obliterate any resistance and leave.

Been to Ukraine multiple times, was there in the Donbass when war broke out, and just after Crimea annexation. Ukraine wasn't prepared, and panicked, and started drafting in teenagers which were highly inexperienced as we found out when one wanted to shoot us while sitting in a car at a check point. And even though they are beating the drum of a Russian invasion they still aren't prepared for such or even a take over of the Donbass.

Another thing to point out majority of Ukrainian Soviet ammunition was sold off to rebels in Syria and that operation was covered up with all the so-called accidental fires at various Ukrainian ammo dumps which investigators found very little ammo had been destroyed but cast amounts missing. Majority of the ammo destroyed was very old and obsolete. And now been fighting in the Donbass for years ammo will be low and buying in ammo from countries like Bulgaria etc is most likely their only option and with the economy being in a mess money won't be free flowing for purchases other than small arms. Even some of their own homegrown weapons and vehicles have only seen production in small amounts.

Ukraine would probably run out of ammo fairly quickly, and their only gamble they have is that NATO comes to their aid within the first couple of weeks if not they are screwed. And let's face it NATO or any country won't come to their aid directly. So Ukraine is playing a dangerous gamble.

Yes, let's invade then leave Ukraine ensuring it joins NATO because if left unoccupied that would happen.

The entire reason to invade Ukraine would be to prevent it from joining NATO which means you have to keep troops there to ensure that.

Because relying on mere words worked so well for the Russians the first time when it came to Ukraine. Remind me what happened?

Long story short leaving after invading would be the biggest tactical blunder you could make, thankfully for the Russians. They do not have armchair experts has generals.

... Georgia does not ring a bell inside a head, but that might be a case of lacking it ...

ALAMO wrote:... Georgia does not ring a bell inside a head, but that might be a case of lacking it ...

Geogra is a much much different situation than Ukraine, before you insult someone. Might I ask you to use your own common sense.