The Washington Post As war enters bloody new phase, Ukraine again calls for more weapons

[bave]

Tanks, artillery, and aircraft they will need to go on the counter-offensive and take the occupied parts of their country back from Russia.

First, you have the giant problem of a massive escalation.

Second, you have the problem of training. None of the equipment we could provide them are they trained to operate and maintain. Unless you are talking about very old soviet leftovers with questionable maintenance and two generations out of date.

 

[Eatomus]

Same as always. That would be an act of war. Are you ok with the US going to war with Russia?

Try to keep up , and not be so slow witted for some of the time .
It's about giving Ukrainians something more than slingshots & pea shooters .

 

[Questerr]

First, you have the giant problem of a massive escalation.

Second, you have the problem of training. None of the equipment we could provide them are they trained to operate and maintain. Unless you are talking about very old soviet leftovers with questionable maintenance and two generations out of date.

Sounds like a good reason for Ukraine to hire some US contractors. Plus there are plenty of modernized Soviet vehicles that are in operation in NATO that can be provided.

The PT-91 for instance.

 

[jonny5]

Try to keep up , and not be so slow witted for some of the time .

Be civil if you want a debate.

 

[poweRob]

Germany and England are sending equipment which I'm sure the U.S. will backfill them in support. Ukraine is doing what it's doing so well with some great US intel as well which is why Russian generals keep dying not long after they set foot in country. Not to mention all the Javelins and SAMS we've given them. The U.S. is obviously laundering supplies to Ukraine through other countries so that it doesn't look like us doing it.

Ukraine Asks US Navy For Anti-Ship Missiles​

4/7/2022​

Then, voila!

UK To Equip Ukraine With 'lethal' Harpoon Anti-ship Missile Systems To Combat Russia​

4/11/2022​

​

Then we backfill UK's shipments.

 

[Eatomus]

Be civil if you want a debate.

Try and not change the subject if you want to discuss the topic .
I really don't care if it was out of stupidity or out of desperation that you want to equate arming Ukrainians , which is the topic & which we are already doing by the way , with going to " WAR WITH RUSSIA" ( jonnyS)
Just try and keep up young man .

It's about giving Ukrainians something more than slingshots & pea shooters .

 

[jonny5]

Try and not change the subject if you want to discuss the topic .
I really don't care if it was out of stupidity or out of desperation
Just try and keep up young man .

BE CIVIL IF YOU WANT A DEBATE

 

[Dayton3]

President Biden gifts billions of dollars in U.S. weapons to the Taliban in his humiliating feeble brained with drawl from Afghanistan, but refuses to give the Ukrainian people being mass murdered the weapons they need to win .
Why ?
Anyone ?
View attachment 67384965

Easy. He is afraid of the Russians.

 

[Eatomus]

Easy. He is afraid of the Russians.

If not in Ukraine Biden will have to deal Putin in Poland, Finland, Sweden,etc,etc,etc,,,,.
I would not be surprised if Biden's 20 something caregivers & diaper changers have not told him that he will be dead of old age before any of this becomes a do or die threat for U.S. anyway , so just do nothing ,and go have some ice cream and cookies that are ready for you in the White House kitchen.

 

[Eatomus]

ABC News

Ukraine is 'preparing' for attack in the east by Russian forces, Zelenskyy says​

3h ago

Putin has reconfigured his plans in accordance to weapons he now knows the Ukrainians are being limited too.
It is about to get really ugly.
Our publicly announced limitations of what weapons the Ukrainians are going to be allowed to have has actually
been of assistance in helping Putin shift his attack strategy .
The number of Russians killed in helping Putin find out what are the limitations of the Ukrainians is immaterial to him.
Putin could care less how many of his troops are killed in formulating his new attack strategy .
America/NATO needs to give Ukraine all they are asking for today or the slaughter we have seen thus far will seem minor.

 

[bave]

Sounds like a good reason for Ukraine to hire some US contractors. Plus there are plenty of modernized Soviet vehicles that are in operation in NATO that can be provided.

The PT-91 for instance.

The PT-91 is not a particularly good tank. It's effectively a T-72 with a semi modernization. Optics/computers are garbage on it, that makes a big difference. Again, you would need to build a supply chain of parts, mechanics, etc. Ammo is interchangeable which is a good thing though. My biggest issue overall with this entire idea is that if you start supplying heavy weapons then those supply routes and points become valid military targets. Suddenly depots on the Polish and Romanian border might get attacked in an escalation. It's just a bad idea for something that isn't all that useful in changing the direction of the war honestly.

Hiring contractors could work, but I suspect there are a ton of special forces already in Ukraine, particularly from the UK and US.

Germany and England are sending equipment which I'm sure the U.S. will backfill them in support. Ukraine is doing what it's doing so well with some great US intel as well which is why Russian generals keep dying not long after they set foot in country. Not to mention all the Javelins and SAMS we've given them. The U.S. is obviously laundering supplies to Ukraine through other countries so that it doesn't look like us doing it.

Ukraine Asks US Navy For Anti-Ship Missiles​

4/7/2022​

Then, voila!
Then we backfill UK's shipments.

We haven't been giving them material SAM systems, just the few Gargoyles that were laying around that rumor has it were destroyed in transit. The MANPADs and Javelins are a big help, but there is a limited supply of them coming.

As for ASMs, good luck. There is already a big shortage of ASMs in the world and the US is putting huge pressure on manufacturing for NSMs for our own use. Any extra that we have should be going to Asia/Taiwan more than Ukraine. There isn't really a naval issue in the Black Sea.

 

[Questerr]

The PT-91 is not a particularly good tank. It's effectively a T-72 with a semi modernization. Optics/computers are garbage on it, that makes a big difference. Again, you would need to build a supply chain of parts, mechanics, etc. Ammo is interchangeable which is a good thing though. My biggest issue overall with this entire idea is that if you start supplying heavy weapons then those supply routes and points become valid military targets. Suddenly depots on the Polish and Romanian border might get attacked in an escalation. It's just a bad idea for something that isn't all that useful in changing the direction of the war honestly.

Hiring contractors could work, but I suspect there are a ton of special forces already in Ukraine, particularly from the UK and US.



We haven't been giving them material SAM systems, just the few Gargoyles that were laying around that rumor has it were destroyed in transit. The MANPADs and Javelins are a big help, but there is a limited supply of them coming.

As for ASMs, good luck. There is already a big shortage of ASMs in the world and the US is putting huge pressure on manufacturing for NSMs for our own use. Any extra that we have should be going to Asia/Taiwan more than Ukraine. There isn't really a naval issue in the Black Sea.

If Russia decides to attack depots in NATO countries, then the escalation is on them.

They could always pull out of Ukraine and take the L instead.

 

[bave]

If Russia decides to attack depots in NATO countries, then the escalation is on them.

They could always pull out of Ukraine and take the L instead.

I would argue otherwise. Any part of a supply chain moving weapons into an active area of engagement would be a legitimate target by pretty much at rule book. It happens in pretty much every modern war going pretty far back.

 

[Questerr]

I would argue otherwise. Any part of a supply chain moving weapons into an active area of engagement would be a legitimate target by pretty much at rule book. It happens in pretty much every modern war going pretty far back.

And yet attacking them has always been seen as the responsibility of the aggressor nation. The escalation is on them.

 

[bave]

And yet attacking them has always been seen as the responsibility of the aggressor nation. The escalation is on them.

It doesn't matter what you or I think, it matters what the leaders of the involved nations think. Is it worth risking escalation? I see a lot of people who are incredibly eager to provoke a war between the West and Russia.

 

[Eatomus]

Polish and Romanian border might get attacked in an escalation. It's just a bad idea for something that isn't all that useful in changing the direction of the war honestly.

Same weak thoughts that handed Hitler Europe on a platter.

" Give him this country and maybe he will become a nice guy and he might not attack another one."
" Give him just one more country and then he will have great respect our pronounced weakness "
" Just let him have genocide on another 100,000 women and children and his cup of blood will be full.

What makes you believe Putin has no continuation plans once he takes Ukraine ?
Especially when their global & by then quite emboldened partner China fulfils it's promise to attack Taiwan, there by further perplexing the free world into not wanting to make anybody any angrier ?
How is that not real imminent possibility ?

 

[Questerr]

It doesn't matter what you or I think, it matters what the leaders of the involved nations think. Is it worth risking escalation? I see a lot of people who are incredibly eager to provoke a war between the West and Russia.

Defeating Russia’s imperialist ambitions here and now is definitely worth it.

 

[bave]

What makes you believe Putin has no continuation plans once he takes Ukraine ?
Especially when their global & by then quite emboldened partner China fulfils it's promise to attack Taiwan, there by further perplexing the free world into not wanting to make them any angrier ?
How is that not real imminent possibility ?

Because he doesn't have the military or economic might to do so. The hard truth is the West has no obligation or interest in Ukraine. Russia is struggling in a military conflict with a borderline third world nation that is right in their back yard. The idea of them pushing the Fulda Gap at this point is comical.

Taiwan on the other hand is a material flashpoint that is in our interest. China is a larger threat and Taiwan is far more important to US interests for a variety of strategic and economic reasons. We should be focusing on assisting Taiwan defend itself and let Russia tire itself out grinding in Ukraine. Russia is a declining nation, let them continue to decline and don't give them a reason to widen the conflict.

 

[Eatomus]

It doesn't matter what you or I think, it matters what the leaders of the involved nations think. Is it worth risking escalation? I see a lot of people who are incredibly eager to provoke a war between the West and Russia.

Yes history has clearly shown us that as long as you do everything possible not to make mass murdering dictators angry then we will have peace .

 

[bave]

Defeating Russia’s imperialist ambitions here and now is definitely worth it.

We don't have to defeat their ambitions, they are incapable of achieving them. Why is it worth it? Can anyone explain why Ukraine is relevant to the US interests?

 

[bave]

Yes history has clearly shown us that as long as you do everything possible not to make mass murdering dictators angry then we will have peace .

Then why is it that we care so much about Ukraine when far worse atrocities happen constantly in Africa? Why do we ignore China's concentration camps and steamrolling of HK? Moreover, why is this America's problem? The EU has 3x the population and 15x the economy, they can more than handle the problem. Let them play that game.

 

[Questerr]

We don't have to defeat their ambitions, they are incapable of achieving them. Why is it worth it? Can anyone explain why Ukraine is relevant to the US interests?

They absolutely are capable of achieving them if there is no interference from NATO.

It is wasn’t for the flow of ATGMs, Manpads, and the like to Ukraine, the Russians would have already been able to force their demands on them.

As they did in Crimea and as they did with Georgia.

How was Czechoslovakia relevant to British interests? It wasn’t, but I’m betting they were kicking themselves for not checking Hitler’s desires at the Sudetenland Crisis rather than later.

 

[bave]

They absolutely are capable of achieving them if there is no interference from NATO.

It is wasn’t for the flow of ATGMs, Manpads, and the like to Ukraine, the Russians would have already been able to force their demands on them.

As they did in Crimea and as they did with Georgia.

I disagree. The impact of the MANPADs is hard to say, but the ATGMs is not nearly as big a deal as the media wants you to believe. The vast majority of Russian AFV losses have not been related to PZ3/NLAW/Javelins. They have been far more related to IEDs, mines, abandonment, and close range anti tank attacks. ATGMs are largely worthless in the urban fights.

 

[Questerr]

I disagree. The impact of the MANPADs is hard to say, but the ATGMs is not nearly as big a deal as the media wants you to believe. The vast majority of Russian AFV losses have not been related to PZ3/NLAW/Javelins. They have been far more related to IEDs, mines, abandonment, and close range anti tank attacks. ATGMs are largely worthless in the urban fights.

You have sources for these claims?

 

[bave]

You have sources for these claims?

Attack On Europe: Documenting Russian Equipment Losses During The Russian Invasion Of Ukraine

www.oryxspioenkop.com

Their data tends to lag a few days as they validate the numbers and photos etc.

However their data suggests that of the ~450 Ru tank losses less than half were destroyed in combat. Of that minority, estimates are approximately 35% are related to ATGMs, which the bulk related to closer range shoulder fired missiles in bulk (as in Chechnya), with another chunk being driven by IEDs and mines.

The ATGM videos are great for visual, political, and propaganda effect, but there have also been several noted failures. There have been a few popular videos that got out showing urban warfare with ATGMs and how the Ukrainians were failing to use them properly. I have seen two where Ukes fired Nlaws at point blank range not understanding minimum arming distance, thus launching their missile right into a tank to no effect. Meanwhile, a good old RPG-7 would have popped that tank for 1% of the price tag.

Edit: MANPADs are pretty much only good for helicopters. Total attack helicopter losses are less than two dozen so far. Their value has been limiting air assault and cas operations by rotary aircraft.