For Those Who Might Be Wondering Why We Might Be In Ukraine

[Chobham]

Unfortunately. combined arms doctrine, to be used effectively, needs both the equipment and years of training and practice practice practice. It's not something where you just shovel in the equipment and expect it all to come together in a year. Ukraine has been moving away from Soviet doctrine, not least building up a strong NCO ethos, as well as training junior officers much closer to NATO doctrine, but a lot of the senior officers are still somewhat mired in the old Red Army days. They are getting their, war is a harsh teacher, but it's slow and it's painful, and with the advent of drones, a lot of the old doctrine is having to be rethought.

As for Biden dragging his feet, they've been trying to "give Putin an off-ramp," ie persuade him to back off and just keep what he's gained, but all that dies is feed the beast. Never forget it was Obama who gave Putin Crimea, and Biden who said it was okay to take more of the Donbas, thereby encouraging Putin to attack. It was also Biden who offered Zelensky a ride out, expecting Ukraine to collapse and not expressing too much concern about it. He then slow-walked aid and is still slow-walking aid. We could send another 500 Bradley's and ten Patriot systems tomorrow without even missing them. Ditto F16's and A10's. They're just sitting there....

Neither side has been able to establish air superiority, a testament to the anti-air weapons both sides are deploying and without air superiority there isn't going to be any major breakthroughs based on maneuver.

Some think the f-16's are going to make a huge difference...........they aren't.

 

[icanhelp1]

Unfortunately. combined arms doctrine, to be used effectively, needs both the equipment and years of training and practice practice practice. It's not something where you just shovel in the equipment and expect it all to come together in a year. Ukraine has been moving away from Soviet doctrine, not least building up a strong NCO ethos, as well as training junior officers much closer to NATO doctrine, but a lot of the senior officers are still somewhat mired in the old Red Army days. They are getting their, war is a harsh teacher, but it's slow and it's painful, and with the advent of drones, a lot of the old doctrine is having to be rethought.

As for Biden dragging his feet, they've been trying to "give Putin an off-ramp," ie persuade him to back off and just keep what he's gained, but all that dies is feed the beast. Never forget it was Obama who gave Putin Crimea, and Biden who said it was okay to take more of the Donbas, thereby encouraging Putin to attack. It was also Biden who offered Zelensky a ride out, expecting Ukraine to collapse and not expressing too much concern about it. He then slow-walked aid and is still slow-walking aid. We could send another 500 Bradley's and ten Patriot systems tomorrow without even missing them. Ditto F16's and A10's. They're just sitting there....

The Ukraine armed forces are up to speed, no better training than actual combat. The problem is Biden forcing them to play defense. The Ukrainian forces are more western style, they shitcanned Soviet doctrine years ago. We have thousands of m1A1s in the desert that could have been retrofitted in no time flat but for some reason we didn’t do it. It’s like we never learned our lessons of the past. Mission creep doesn’t work. Just like what’s happening to Israel.

What makes western battle doctrine effective is a well trained NCO corps. LEADERSHIP!!! Train to fight and fight how you trained

 

[ll74]

The Ukraine armed forces are up to speed, no better training than actual combat. The problem is Biden forcing them to play defense. The Ukrainian forces are more western style, they shitcanned Soviet doctrine years ago. We have thousands of m1A1s in the desert that could have been retrofitted in no time flat but for some reason we didn’t do it. It’s like we never learned our lessons of the past. Mission creep doesn’t work. Just like what’s happening to Israel.

What makes western battle doctrine effective is a well trained NCO corps. LEADERSHIP!!! Train to fight and fight how you trained

Russia is the aggressor. Ukraine has ALWAYS been the defender. It's their country that was invaded.

Seriously you fuckers seem to believe this war was mutually decided.

 

[icanhelp1]

Neither side has been able to establish air superiority, a testament to the anti-air weapons both sides are deploying and without air superiority there isn't going to be any major breakthroughs based on maneuver.

Some think the f-16's are going to make a huge difference...........they aren't.

F-16s do provide stand off capabilities with superior radar and satellite linkup. They can operate outside the layered missile defenses and take out Russian aircraft much farther away. IMHO F-16s need to be able to operate outside Ukraine borders and into Russia proper. They’re not indestructible but they are a combat multiplier. They are also replacement aircraft for the ones they lost. Wild weasels still do a pretty good job against missile platforms. Can’t play defense against the Russians, they lose through attrition.

 

[icanhelp1]

Russia is the aggressor. Ukraine has ALWAYS been the defender. It's their country that was invaded.

Seriously you fuckers seem to believe this war was mutually decided.

No I’m not saying that. I’m saying provide the Ukrainian military with every weapons platform available and let them take the fight to them. The Russians are still fighting the Afghanistan war.

 

[ll74]

No I’m not saying that. I’m saying provide the Ukrainian military with every weapons platform available and let them take the fight to them. The Russians are still fighting the Afghanistan war.

We are doing that.

 

[ChloeTzang]

The Ukraine armed forces are up to speed, no better training than actual combat. The problem is Biden forcing them to play defense. The Ukrainian forces are more western style, they shitcanned Soviet doctrine years ago. We have thousands of m1A1s in the desert that could have been retrofitted in no time flat but for some reason we didn’t do it. It’s like we never learned our lessons of the past. Mission creep doesn’t work. Just like what’s happening to Israel.

What makes western battle doctrine effective is a well trained NCO corps. LEADERSHIP!!! Train to fight and fight how you trained

Not really. They had a small core of trained troops and units when the invasion started, they expanded quickly with volunteers, many of them with no prior military experience. They've been putting troops thru basic training in the UK, Germany, etc, but that's basic infantry and IFV / tank training, not combined arms. Their infantry / artillery coordination is not that great, and the nature of the way you fight has also changed. On top of that, they don't have air superiority and there's no chance to apply NATO/US combined arms doctrine which relies heavily on air superiority. As for the M1A1's, yep, we should have handed over more, plus more Bradleys and Strykers and more Himars, and more ammo too..... it's all been slow-walked and it's still being slow walked. Jake Sullivan is trying to manage the war, but the end result of Biden/Sullivan and likely Trump, will be that the US ends up with no influence and disregarded. Ukraine needs to stroke Biden for now, to keep the ammo flowing, and likewise they will do their best to placate Trump, but the end result of all out fucking around is that we may well end up frozen out.....and Ukraine will quite rightly blame the US for playing games, using them to weaken Russia.

 

[Chobham]

F-16s do provide stand off capabilities with superior radar and satellite linkup. They can operate outside the layered missile defenses and take out Russian aircraft much farther away. IMHO F-16s need to be able to operate outside Ukraine borders and into Russia proper. They’re not indestructible but they are a combat multiplier. They are also replacement aircraft for the ones they lost. Wild weasels still do a pretty good job against missile platforms. Can’t play defense against the Russians, they lose through attrition.

The below linked is the best synopsis of the F-16 in the Ukraine problem.

It's the Pilots.

 

[ChloeTzang]

A great little summary if where things are - Andrew Tanner's assessments are usually right on target

Toretsk: Putin's Summer Dream
With ruscist operations degenerating into competing campaigns, Putin's strategy in Ukraine is simple: delay and pray while pretending that his forces will push through to Sloviansk.
ANDREW TANNER
JUL 8

Introduction

With ammunition stocks increasing, modern jets set to arrive, and NATO agreeing to commit at least $40 billion annually to Ukraine’s defense, it is now possible for Kyiv to begin actively preparing counteroffensive operations. Though Moscow’s troops continue to batter themselves against Ukrainian defenses, Ukraine’s forces are already upping the pressure where they can.

Something that observers of the conflict have to keep in mind is that classical NATO and Soviet military doctrine has been shredded during the Ukraine War. Most of the scientific knowledge presently in use at all levels of the defense establishments in every country is now dangerously flawed. Working out how to repackage all the essential ingredients of a successful military operation is a challenge both Ukraine and Putin’s empire are literally bleeding to learn. It isn’t that the basic laws of military science are suddenly invalid, but that the systemic effects they seek to generate are not possible at the same scale as was true in 1991 or 1945. The frontages and force densities that made sense then simply don’t now.

Defense professionals across the world are having to reassess core assumptions - or had better, before it’s too late. As organizations go through the difficult process of shedding old ideas and adopting new ones, mistakes will be made. Especially when the people cling to concepts that happened to be in fashion early in their career. It’s much better to make errors before the consequences are fatal.....

https://roguesystemsrecon.substack....e&r=c5g4v&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

 

[icanhelp1]

The below linked is the best synopsis of the F-16 in the Ukraine problem.

It's the Pilots.

Interesting. I was led to believe their original pilots were up to speed on tactics and further along than they actually are. I’ve listened to retired generals like Jack Keene and others who have stated that if F-16s were introduced into theatre could be a game changer. I guess that’s obviously wrong headed. I agree establishing a western style Air Force to include infrastructure, hard points, maintenance, security, training, recruitment is tedious, labor intensive and apparently time consuming and expensive. Of course recruiting quality personnel for pilot selection has always been a tedious process and training is a very long process. I haven’t payed much attention to Ukraine’s conflict in over a year and a half.

 

[ChloeTzang]

Russia: Lukoil's Kalachevskaya oil depot blew up from Ukrainian drone strikes in Volgograd region. The Governor of Volgograd proudly reported that Ukrainian drones were successfully intercepted. I'm serious. He actually said that. Six drones were successfully intercepted. By the oil depot. Ukraine targets strategic oil depots of military value. Russia targets children's oncology hospitals and maternity wards. All you need to know about the two countries, really.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1810521627010249085

 

[icanhelp1]

A great little summary if where things are - Andrew Tanner's assessments are usually right on target

Toretsk: Putin's Summer Dream
With ruscist operations degenerating into competing campaigns, Putin's strategy in Ukraine is simple: delay and pray while pretending that his forces will push through to Sloviansk.
ANDREW TANNER
JUL 8

Introduction

With ammunition stocks increasing, modern jets set to arrive, and NATO agreeing to commit at least $40 billion annually to Ukraine’s defense, it is now possible for Kyiv to begin actively preparing counteroffensive operations. Though Moscow’s troops continue to batter themselves against Ukrainian defenses, Ukraine’s forces are already upping the pressure where they can.

Something that observers of the conflict have to keep in mind is that classical NATO and Soviet military doctrine has been shredded during the Ukraine War. Most of the scientific knowledge presently in use at all levels of the defense establishments in every country is now dangerously flawed. Working out how to repackage all the essential ingredients of a successful military operation is a challenge both Ukraine and Putin’s empire are literally bleeding to learn. It isn’t that the basic laws of military science are suddenly invalid, but that the systemic effects they seek to generate are not possible at the same scale as was true in 1991 or 1945. The frontages and force densities that made sense then simply don’t now.

Defense professionals across the world are having to reassess core assumptions - or had better, before it’s too late. As organizations go through the difficult process of shedding old ideas and adopting new ones, mistakes will be made. Especially when the people cling to concepts that happened to be in fashion early in their career. It’s much better to make errors before the consequences are fatal.....

https://roguesystemsrecon.substack....e&r=c5g4v&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

I read somewhere that Ukraine lost five M1-A2 battle tanks. Those tanks were used as individual unsupported weapons system and not used in concert with support equipment, M2s, HUMVEES or MRAPS. No tank made can operate on its own especially without air support. I also read that the US is spending 1billion dollars on retro fitting M1s with solid state inertial jamming pods for each tank to offset drone technology. I’m trying to relocate that source, I lost it somehow. I enjoy your input, you seem very knowledgeable on the subject.

 

[ChloeTzang]

 

[Chobham]

Interesting. I was led to believe their original pilots were up to speed on tactics and further along than they actually are. I’ve listened to retired generals like Jack Keene and others who have stated that if F-16s were introduced into theatre could be a game changer. I guess that’s obviously wrong headed. I agree establishing a western style Air Force to include infrastructure, hard points, maintenance, security, training, recruitment is tedious, labor intensive and apparently time consuming and expensive. Of course recruiting quality personnel for pilot selection has always been a tedious process and training is a very long process. I haven’t payed much attention to Ukraine’s conflict in over a year and a half.

Experience has shown that the experienced pilots trained on Soviet equipment and doctrine do very poorly when transitioning to Western equipment and doctrine................especially the F-16. There are the mission sets to be dealt with and then there are the physical aspects. Most of the Soviet era equipment were 6g machines (the F-18 is a 6g machine), the Viper is a 9g machine.

 

[jomar]

Successful implementation of combined arms air/land battle doctrine relies on air superiority. Experienced Mig-21 pilots are pretty sharp, most of the flight training and tactical expertise has already been imprinted on their souls. I would guess 3 months tops to train m21 pilots to F-16s. The hard part is already done. Same with experience tank crews. They’ve already been trained in armored combat tactics the rest is training on equipment proficiency. Tactics is the hard part. If the threat was fear of Russians using tactical nukes doesn’t that threat exist today. Just think that in the first year of the conflict A-10s and 16s were introduced into the battle space combined with HIMARS, Tripple7s, M1s, M-2, and NATO ASSETS to include British choppers, German tanks, designed to take property not defense. In for the penny in for the pound.

Holy shit and thanks, it really is that simple! Now that you’ve solved the air and ground superiority with planes and tanks, clue us in on how you’ve solved the logistics pipeline for resupply of parts and maintenance crews.

 

[icanhelp1]

Holy shit and thanks, it really is that simple! Now that you’ve solved the air and ground superiority with planes and tanks, clue us in on how you’ve solved the logistics pipeline for resupply of parts and maintenance crews.

I never said it was easy or simple. What I stated was the level of vulnerability of Russian forces at the beginning was very evident. Russia had been building up forces along the Ukrainian border for almost a year and the west didn’t match it. Had NATO Responded with overwhelming support at the beginning things could be different. Why do you think Russia invaded? Just answer that question. They believed NATO wouldn’t respond aggressively. They were right. The west tip toed past the graveyard. This conflict will be a study for the ages. There are American generals that criticized Biden and the West for not taking a more aggressive role. Logistically speaking, NATO was slow to react. I don’t believe the West believed Putin would invade and they didn’t prepare for that outcome.

 

[ll74]

I never said it was easy or simple. What I stated was the level of vulnerability of Russian forces at the beginning was very evident. Russia had been building up forces along the Ukrainian border for almost a year and the west didn’t match it. Had NATO Responded with overwhelming support at the beginning things could be different. Why do you think Russia invaded? Just answer that question. They believed NATO wouldn’t respond aggressively. They were right. The west tip toed past the graveyard. This conflict will be a study for the ages. There are American generals that criticized Biden and the West for not taking a more aggressive role. Logistically speaking, NATO was slow to react. I don’t believe the West believed Putin would invade and they didn’t prepare for that outcome.

Ukraine isn't a NATO country. If it were one, NATO forces would be fighting the war against Russia currently. We do not have an agreement with Ukraine that involves our military response.

 

[ChloeTzang]

Interesting. I was led to believe their original pilots were up to speed on tactics and further along than they actually are. I’ve listened to retired generals like Jack Keene and others who have stated that if F-16s were introduced into theatre could be a game changer. I guess that’s obviously wrong headed. I agree establishing a western style Air Force to include infrastructure, hard points, maintenance, security, training, recruitment is tedious, labor intensive and apparently time consuming and expensive. Of course recruiting quality personnel for pilot selection has always been a tedious process and training is a very long process. I haven’t payed much attention to Ukraine’s conflict in over a year and a half.

Read Tom Cooper - he focus's a lot on the air war and his articles are truly fascinating and very educational. Work your way thru the articles on his substack - my brain overloaded a few times but you do learn a lot. The F16's aren't a gamechanger - merely another tool, and I have no doubt the Ukraine's will come in with the skillset to use them effectively - they have the best coaches and trainers after all LOL. Ain't nobody that outfights NATO and the USA in the airwar.

They will need more than they're getting, and it'll be interesting to see how fast and many Mirage 2000's they get. I still think the Gripen is the right aircraft for Ukrainian conditions and the war. I'm sure they'll go that way eventually altho they also seem to have buddied up with the Turks on that new aircraft of theirs. The Kaan.

https://xxtomcooperxx.substack.com/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

https://www.overtdefense.com/2024/0...rkeys-fifth-generation-kaan-fighter-aircraft/

 

[icanhelp1]

Ukraine isn't a NATO country. If it were one, NATO forces would be fighting the war against Russia currently. We do not have an agreement with Ukraine that involves our military response.

I wasn’t referring to combat support, I was referring to logistical support.

 

[icanhelp1]

Read Tom Cooper - he focus's a lot on the air war and his articles are truly fascinating and very educational. Work your way thru the articles on his substack - my brain overloaded a few times but you do learn a lot. The F16's aren't a gamechanger - merely another tool, and I have no doubt the Ukraine's will come in with the skillset to use them effectively - they have the best coaches and trainers after all LOL. Ain't nobody that outfights NATO and the USA in the airwar.

https://xxtomcooperxx.substack.com/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

It’s been a while since I focused any interest on the Ukrainian conflict. A couple of years ago there was a poster that went in depth on Ukrainian military tactics a battle plans, very knowledgeable and detailed, very interesting but he’s been gone now for about a year, I forgot his name. I didn’t follow US news media because they constantly fucking lie, I will look into Tom Cooper. I’m back to reading about Ukraine military opps, what they’re doing with drone tech is quite remarkable, especially against Russian oil refineries. Thanks for your input.

 

[ll74]

I wasn’t referring to combat support, I was referring to logistical support.

Ok, I am following. I don't disagree, but I'm also not sure we had the foresight to understand what was needed then.

 

[ChloeTzang]

It’s been a while since I focused any interest on the Ukrainian conflict. A couple of years ago there was a poster that went in depth on Ukrainian military tactics a battle plans, very knowledgeable and detailed, very interesting but he’s been gone now for about a year, I forgot his name. I didn’t follow US news media because they constantly fucking lie, I will look into Tom Cooper. I’m back to reading about Ukraine military opps, what they’re doing with drone tech is quite remarkable, especially against Russian oil refineries. Thanks for your input.

Yeah, Tom is very informative. Andrew Tanner also, from a slightly different perspective. Aussie General Mick Ryan is another very informative source, and a very knowledgeable and experience source too. Much more reliable and knowledgeable than Jackson Hinkle LOL

https://mickryan.com.au/ukraine-commentary

 

[icanhelp1]

Ok, I am following. I don't disagree, but I'm also not sure we have the foresight to understand what was needed then.

We did know from ISR data combined with satellite imagery the exact type of units deployed, equipment, force structure and I believe they even knew the level of training each unit possessed. I believe they could discern conscripts from regulars. Don’t quote me on that, I just read that somewhere.

 

[ll74]

We did know from ISR data combined with satellite imagery the exact type of units deployed, equipment, force structure and I believe they even knew the level of training each unit possessed. I believe they could discern conscripts from regulars. Don’t quote me on that, I just read that somewhere.

Yah, I'm sure we had quite a bit of data, but we didn't really know enough to predict strategies.....I think it was expected that Russia would go hard at Kyiv, which it did, and we got enough logistic/arm support there to push them back....but after that, Russia has bounced around on different fronts, so it's difficult to defend.

I'd suggest listening to the Telegraph's Ukraine today podcast for a good summary of recent events. It's obviously based in the west, but I think it's more objective than many.

 

[jomar]

I never said it was easy or simple. What I stated was the level of vulnerability of Russian forces at the beginning was very evident. Russia had been building up forces along the Ukrainian border for almost a year and the west didn’t match it. Had NATO Responded with overwhelming support at the beginning things could be different. Why do you think Russia invaded? Just answer that question. They believed NATO wouldn’t respond aggressively. They were right. The west tip toed past the graveyard. This conflict will be a study for the ages. There are American generals that criticized Biden and the West for not taking a more aggressive role. Logistically speaking, NATO was slow to react. I don’t believe the West believed Putin would invade and they didn’t prepare for that outcome.

Ukraine isn't a NATO country. If it were one, NATO forces would be fighting the war against Russia currently. We do not have an agreement with Ukraine that involves our military response.

Ok, I am following. I don't disagree, but I'm also not sure we had the foresight to understand what was needed then.

I wasn’t referring to combat support, I was referring to logistical support.

We did know from ISR data combined with satellite imagery the exact type of units deployed, equipment, force structure and I believe they even knew the level of training each unit possessed. I believe they could discern conscripts from regulars. Don’t quote me on that, I just read that somewhere.

Yah, I'm sure we had quite a bit of data, but we didn't really know enough to predict strategies.....I think it was expected that Russia would go hard at Kyiv, which it did, and we got enough logistic/arm support there to push them back....but after that, Russia has bounced around on different fronts, so it's difficult to defend.

I'd suggest listening to the Telegraph's Ukraine today podcast for a good summary of recent events. It's obviously based in the west, but I think it's more objective than many.

Quoted for conversation continuity.

Besides difficulty predicting strategy and moves, a couple of things at least. The west was probably seeing what would happen after the disastrous vehicle march to Kyiv with fingers crossed. The west was also threading a needle in how much support to provide without spreading the scope of the war and staring WW3. Of course, it can be argued how much and how soon.