Russia-Ukraine War - News and Developments PART 2

[jhungary]

1/3rd is exaggerated all forces exaggerate figures. I can guarantee you that if russia had lost so much equipment it would have completely abandon this operation. Osint like organization gathers data for publicly available data which can be fabricated. The tweeter counts of kills could be same equipment images taken from different angle and moved to other place to take more images. This is information era no more nuclear era. Fabricated information from both russia and ukraine both is making the real conclusion beyond possible.

When the war ends the neutral people like me will be shocked when one of them is winner cause most probably 24 hrs before end of war it would look like both are punching through each other and winning.

When americans and ukrainians and other nato supporters say ukraine is winning or using there own social media platforms to promote that ill never take that seriously.

When putin and his supporters say I still wont believe.

Only neutral perspective are right and apparently the role of neutrals is limited in providing right information because global media is in control of western powers.

I worked in Military Intelligence, you never make decision based on just a single source, you look at what the Russian do and what is the condition of the troops and you made decision with that intel in mine.

If you look at the small things. you can piece together what is the condition of Russian armed force now.

Them buying and using Iranian drones means they cannot provide their own intel and survillence system, either those are depleted or not suitable to use anymore.

Them buying Artillery shell from North Korea means they are running out of apporiate ammunition or had exceed the usage they are limited to.

Them using 1970s era armor vehicle means they are going into their strategic reserve. On the other hand, Ukrainian report on bad condition of capture equipment points to those are inactive reserve.

Not sure how much you understand the Military reserve system. Equipements are separated into different category. You have your deployable, which is ready to deploy with active troop and used with combat, when those are exhausted, you started to dip in the ready to use reserve, there are 2 types of Ready to Use reserve, one is being regular serviced, essentially is the back up for the deployable equipment, another is storage reserved, while still being kept in good condition, it will be housed somewhere where minimal work need to be perform before they can be use due to them being in storage, from small things like you have to change the gearbox oil, engine oil, to large thing like retool the barrel or have the electronic system service. Then there is the final category, long term reserve, those are what we called "Just In Case" equipment, it's too old to keep them regularly but to wasteful to recycle it. A lot of work have to be done to these equipment before you can use it. Because it has been stored outside in depot (In the US, we store inactive reserve article in Sierra Army Depot in California)

Judging from the equipment standard, the stuff the Ukrainian capture are from inactive reserve stock, which mean unless they fancy just bringing these vehicles out for a ride and getting them captured, that mean they had exerted their deployable stock and the ready to use stock (which would have been the 1990s-2000s era T-72) Which mean they had expanded enough article to dip into the inactive reserve stock.

There is a joke for us grunt. If you see them use Sierra Army Depot stuff, you may as well acquisition from private collector, it's the same stuff but better look after....

 

[thetutle]

If they use it, Russians recapture it again.

As I've said for a 5th time, this tank will no be used for combat.

do you think any american general/politician is going to have the balls to fire on an enemy that literally has the firepower to erase you from the planet, and turn your entire territory into uninahbitable glass?

Yes I do. They will fire on such an enemy.

Get this ridiculous delusion out of your low iq american skulls...... London, paris, washing dc, and NY would eat several nuclear warheads before a single inch of Russian territory is ceded to NATO, or any "no fly zone" is imposed on the Russian border...

This is very unlikely. In such a confrontation, Russia's ability to do this would be seriously degraded by methods that are classified and that we can only imagine.

" a no fly zone" is a declaration of war. The only reason why NATO has gotten away with it before, is because they have used it on weak and defenseless countries.

NATO is in a war with Russia. This at least is clear to me. NATO weapons are killing troops, NATO advisors and soldiers are on the ground and NATO is supplying active intelligence that leads to Russian casualties every day. If this is not a war, I dont know what is.

 

[jhungary]

What would another invasion of Afghanistan achieve? another trillion and another 20 years of exhausting itself and the treasury. America isn't that stupid. or maybe it is. lets hope we don't find out. History book would say, hey look at americas 40 year occupation of agfanistan and the cost of trillions? in the end it will withdraw again. and what then after a 3rd 9/11? go for 60 year occupation. what you think US tax payer wants to occupy and feed afghans for like 500 years?

You don't understand the American.

We will do stuff because you piss us off, and there are no pissing off than try to attack us. Or what, do you think we wll just take it and let it go?? No way.

On the other hand, 2 trillions over 20 years is not really a big amount of money to spend in war, as they say in any government position, if you don't spend it, you will not have them the next year, 2 trillion over 20 years is like 100 billion a year, that's 1/6 or 1/7 of our defence budget, but well, most of these "Budget" is overblown anyway, or else you probably one of the people who believe a contractor install a toilet seat in Bagram cost the taxpayer $2500 per seat.....

Russia wants to deny NATO the use of that coastline and it wants access to the Danube. This I think is a critical war aim. No so much Donbas. That just my opinion. Let the supercomputer at Langley decide what Russias ultimate goals are. I know on thing, they certainly dont care about the Russian people in Donbas.

I am not denying that is what Russia want, I am saying that is something they CANNOT achieve. And what they are doing now is essentially handing Ukrainian a condition to defeat them in detail. That's what the Russia is going at the moment.

 

[thetutle]

You don't understand the American.

We will do stuff because you piss us off, and there are no pissing off than try to attack us. Or what, do you think we wll just take it and let it go?? No way.

I realise this, it will definitely be in Chains and Russias interest that US spends all its resources on another failed invasion of some far flung place. So expect then to actively try to make this happen.

Im not going to beg US to not tear itself apart. if thats what they want fine, but I'm just trying to be practical.

I believe if another such attack happens they might want to consider bombing the people that did it and greater government surveillance. Repeating the thing again and again, in this case Afghanistan invasion, and expecting a different outcome is the definition of insanity.

 

[The SC]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1571458973982945281

https://twitter.com/x/status/1571438845790687235

 

[alimobin memon]

I worked in Military Intelligence, you never make decision based on just a single source, you look at what the Russian do and what is the condition of the troops and you made decision with that intel in mine.

If you look at the small things. you can piece together what is the condition of Russian armed force now.

Them buying and using Iranian drones means they cannot provide their own intel and survillence system, either those are depleted or not suitable to use anymore.

Them buying Artillery shell from North Korea means they are running out of apporiate ammunition or had exceed the usage they are limited to.

Them using 1970s era armor vehicle means they are going into their strategic reserve. On the other hand, Ukrainian report on bad condition of capture equipment points to those are inactive reserve.

Not sure how much you understand the Military reserve system. Equipements are separated into different category. You have your deployable, which is ready to deploy with active troop and used with combat, when those are exhausted, you started to dip in the ready to use reserve, there are 2 types of Ready to Use reserve, one is being regular serviced, essentially is the back up for the deployable equipment, another is storage reserved, while still being kept in good condition, it will be housed somewhere where minimal work need to be perform before they can be use due to them being in storage, from small things like you have to change the gearbox oil, engine oil, to large thing like retool the barrel or have the electronic system service. Then there is the final category, long term reserve, those are what we called "Just In Case" equipment, it's too old to keep them regularly but to wasteful to recycle it. A lot of work have to be done to these equipment before you can use it. Because it has been stored outside in depot (In the US, we store inactive reserve article in Sierra Army Depot in California)

View attachment 880650

Judging from the equipment standard, the stuff the Ukrainian capture are from inactive reserve stock, which mean unless they fancy just bringing these vehicles out for a ride and getting them captured, that mean they had exerted their deployable stock and the ready to use stock (which would have been the 1990s-2000s era T-72) Which mean they had expanded enough article to dip into the inactive reserve stock.

There is a joke for us grunt. If you see them use Sierra Army Depot stuff, you may as well acquisition from private collector, it's the same stuff but better look after....

Russian buying iranian drones does not mean they lack in every aspect. Remember that americans use rh 120 gun on m1a2 cause there old gun wasnt effective as they wanted so the german gun was tot'd by us of a. Same is the case that the russians lacked drone fleet or numbers for war so compensated by buying from ally. Americans bough some systems from allies that they realized are good in afghanistan and iraq war. But you cannot conclude that since they are buying those means they are compensating loses.

Heres my 2 pence, they are buying ammo from north korea and iran is because as I have stated earlier that the russians are using mostly reserves from ussr era and there ammo is still produced by iran and north korea. Since the armata tank introduction the afv, apc and other combat systems of armata family there focus is shifting. It's not like north korean rounds are being used used yet in ukraine. Rather they are just insurance incase of issues with production and storage since ammos do expire this is just insurance of what if...

Russia always had these reserves which were to be used in war scenario. Not all reserves ae obsolete tanks there are t90s and t80s too in reserves

 

[jhungary]

I realise this, it will definitely be in Chains and Russias interest that US spends all its resources on another failed invasion of some far flung place. So expect then to actively try to make this happen.

Im not going to beg US to not tear itself apart. if thats what they want fine, but I'm just trying to be practical.

I believe if another such attack happens they might want to consider bombing the people that did it and greater government surveillance. Repeating the thing again and again, in this case Afghanistan invasion, and expecting a different outcome is the definition of insanity.

Again, we did not spend that much of anything in Afghanistan....

The only thing we use is soldier, times, money, all of which will be used up regardless whether or not there is a war going on.

Say what you will on the American. we always punch below our weight, not that we only target smaller enemy, but that we will not go all out for a war, and when we do go out for a war. we will drag a bunch of people along, that way the cost is distributed across differnt nation. Which in my mind is the only things the Russia did wrong in this war, they failed to secure partners who are willing to go into this adventure, and they have to go in alone. well, pretty much alone.

You don't need to worry US is tearing itself apart because of another Afghan war. War for us is good for business. And right now, we have another war to support, and people who are willing to die for our clause and a country dumb enough to attack them. That's play really well for us, all the benefit, no lost.

You can believe whatever you want, that does not mean it is true, and as much as I know the US government, if Taliban decided to support another 9/11 a lot of American would want heads, and we will be going in again, its never money or resource stopping us from going to war, it's ALWAYS PUBLIC SUPPORT. As long as public support are there, we will go in.

Russian buying iranian drones does not mean they lack in every aspect. Remember that americans use rh 120 gun on m1a2. The russians lacked drone fleet or numbers for war so compensated by buying from ally. Americans bough some systems from allies that they realized are good in afghanistan and iraq war. But you cannot conclude that since they are buying those means they are compensating loses.

Russia always had these reserves which were to be used in war scenario. Not all reserves ae obsolete tanks there are t90s and t80s too in reserves

The different is we are not buying Rheinmetall tank guns in the middle of the war.

You buy something means you do not have the mean to manufacture something, that translate to you do not have the means to sustain an operation with that something because you cannot freely make it. Set aside the Rheinmetall Tank Gun is actually license production in the US.

You would much rather stick to your existing stock if you have a choice, buying a new platform in the middle of the war means you no longer have that mean to support your operation with your own equipment, in this case, Drone. If this is a non-sustainable item (Like the 120mm main gun from Rheinmetall, you would want to buy surplus before you start a war. Not during a war. Because you can keep up the momentum and have the item in use continuously.

 

[alimobin memon]

Again, we did not spend that much of anything in Afghanistan....

The only thing we use is soldier, times, money, all of which will be used up regardless whether or not there is a war going on.

Say what you will on the American. we always punch below our weight, not that we only target smaller enemy, but that we will not go all out for a war, and when we do go out for a war. we will drag a bunch of people along, that way the cost is distributed across differnt nation. Which in my mind is the only things the Russia did wrong in this war, they failed to secure partners who are willing to go into this adventure, and they have to go in alone. well, pretty much alone.

You don't need to worry US is tearing itself apart because of another Afghan war. War for us is good for business. And right now, we have another war to support, and people who are willing to die for our clause and a country dumb enough to attack them. That's play really well for us, all the benefit, no lost.

You can believe whatever you want, that does not mean it is true, and as much as I know the US government, if Taliban decided to support another 9/11 a lot of American would want heads, and we will be going in again, its never money or resource stopping us from going to war, it's ALWAYS PUBLIC SUPPORT. As long as public support are there, we will go in.


The different is we are not buying Rheinmetall tank guns in the middle of the war.

You buy something means you do not have the mean to manufacture something, that translate to you do not have the means to sustain an operation with that something because you cannot freely make it. Set aside the Rheinmetall Tank Gun is actually license production in the US.

You would much rather stick to your existing stock if you have a choice, buying a new platform in the middle of the war means you no longer have that mean to support your operation with your own equipment, in this case, Drone. If this is a non-sustainable item (Like the 120mm main gun from Rheinmetall, you would want to buy surplus before you start a war. Not during a war. Because you can keep up the momentum and have the item in use continuously.

Problem here is that thinking is not always identical between different armies. In case of war russia can do what I said keep producing and buying additional ammo from allied countries. Even if they run out of ammo then they still got it from friendly countries means the reserves are strong. In the end whether its home grown ammo or bought its causing damage to the enemy.

Again, we did not spend that much of anything in Afghanistan....

The only thing we use is soldier, times, money, all of which will be used up regardless whether or not there is a war going on.

Say what you will on the American. we always punch below our weight, not that we only target smaller enemy, but that we will not go all out for a war, and when we do go out for a war. we will drag a bunch of people along, that way the cost is distributed across differnt nation. Which in my mind is the only things the Russia did wrong in this war, they failed to secure partners who are willing to go into this adventure, and they have to go in alone. well, pretty much alone.

You don't need to worry US is tearing itself apart because of another Afghan war. War for us is good for business. And right now, we have another war to support, and people who are willing to die for our clause and a country dumb enough to attack them. That's play really well for us, all the benefit, no lost.

You can believe whatever you want, that does not mean it is true, and as much as I know the US government, if Taliban decided to support another 9/11 a lot of American would want heads, and we will be going in again, its never money or resource stopping us from going to war, it's ALWAYS PUBLIC SUPPORT. As long as public support are there, we will go in.


The different is we are not buying Rheinmetall tank guns in the middle of the war.

You buy something means you do not have the mean to manufacture something, that translate to you do not have the means to sustain an operation with that something because you cannot freely make it. Set aside the Rheinmetall Tank Gun is actually license production in the US.

You would much rather stick to your existing stock if you have a choice, buying a new platform in the middle of the war means you no longer have that mean to support your operation with your own equipment, in this case, Drone. If this is a non-sustainable item (Like the 120mm main gun from Rheinmetall, you would want to buy surplus before you start a war. Not during a war. Because you can keep up the momentum and have the item in use continuously.

Media is tricky maybe the order was prior war but matured during the conflict. North korea providing ammo in bulk so fast means nk were ready for this before war.

 

[RoadAmerica]

Agreed. But lets not conclude russia loosing so early. Remember as more russia loses more russia gets desperate and more they invest and send more forces to theatre.

Very true

https://twitter.com/x/status/1571524980143276038

What makes you sure Russia can't make aircraft carrier? Russian warships are some of the best in the world.

Gremyashchiy-class corvette - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

They don’t have the large dry docks needed, this was confirmed by Russia back in ‘18 when their PD-50 dry dock was damaged and they can no longer repair their aircraft carrier.
I believe this was part of the reason they wanted to buy Frances LHC

 

[jhungary]

Problem here is that thinking is not always identical between different armies. In case of war russia can do what I said keep producing and buying additional ammo from allied countries. Even if they run out of ammo then they still got it from friendly countries means the reserves are strong. In the end whether its home grown ammo or bought its causing damage to the enemy.


Media is tricky maybe the order was prior war but matured during the conflict. North korea providing ammo in bulk so fast means nk were ready for this before war.

Well, you are doing what we in the intelligence field called "Scenario Fulfillment"

You are looking at one way and only that way you can interpret the situation. But then I raised 5 issues here (Including the OSINT), how much of a chance all are based on your scenario?

Step back, look at each issue independently and objectively and find common ground of the 5 pieces of intel. You will have your answer, instead of going for what you want to go and use the intelligence to try to justify your scenario. Many wars are fought and lost because people in power interpret data and information only to a tune that they wanted. But ignore the more simple and straight forward explanation because that does not fulfill their requirement. Until it is too late.

 

[thetutle]

You don't need to worry US is tearing itself apart because of another Afghan war. War for us is good for business. And right now, we have another war to support, and people who are willing to die for our clause and a country dumb enough to attack them. That's play really well for us, all the benefit, no lost.

So why not stay in Afghanistan? why leave?

 

[jhungary]

So why not stay in Afghanistan? why leave?

Did I just explained that?

It's because of one man and his quest to fulfill a campaign promise to get re-elected....

Ad subsequent administration inabilty to act to counter that deal.

Had Trump never in power, we would still be in Afghanistan.

 

[alimobin memon]

Well, you are doing what we in the intelligence field called "Scenario Fulfillment"

You are looking at one way and only that way you can interpret the situation. But then I raised 5 issues here (Including the OSINT), how much of a chance all are based on your scenario?

Step back, look at each issue independently and objectively and find common ground of the 5 pieces of intel. You will have your answer, instead of going for what you want to go and use the intelligence to try to justify your scenario. Many wars are fought and lost because people in power interpret data and information only to a tune that they wanted. But ignore the more simple and straight forward explanation because that does not fulfill their requirement. Until it is too late.

Oh I havent concluded anything I am more of what if this and what if that. Gives me many angles. Ukraine after offensive has morale boost but russians are not yet loosing.

 

[zartosht]

As I've said for a 5th time, this tank will no be used for combat.

Yes I do. They will fire on such an enemy.

This is very unlikely. In such a confrontation, Russia's ability to do this would be seriously degraded by methods that are classified and that we can only imagine.

NATO is in a war with Russia. This at least is clear to me. NATO weapons are killing troops, NATO advisors and soldiers are on the ground and NATO is supplying active intelligence that leads to Russian casualties every day. If this is not a war, I dont know what is.

In your mind, hollywood movies and your pants , the muricans would open fire

Past history, logic, and the fact that the people with their hands on such buttons are extremely. Well off elites who value their material possessions and lives, tells you they will not be pressing any buttons.

I assure you of this, but your more then welcome to fap to whatever fantasy you like

 

[The SC]