Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Aug 21, 2023 11:04:11 GMT
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Aug 22, 2023 12:36:37 GMT
This is where the F16s would be so useful, because they can fire missiles from 100km away, to clear out the opposing fighters and helicopters. Would be -when they get them:- Denmark will deliver 19 jets in total, with the first six due to be shipped to Ukraine around New Year, followed by eight in 2024 and five the following year, ( ie 2025) according to Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen . Ukrainians need to know to fly them. UK has been providing 'basic' training but we can't do the 'type' training as RAF don't fly F-16s. See:
Ukrainian pilots to begin F-16 flight training in Augustwww.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing/ukrainian-pilots-to-begin-f-16-flight-training-in-august/154071.articlec-a-r-f-r-e-w points out one aspect of their intended purpose but they have many more capabilities than that. Air supremacy in the era of long-range missiles is perhaps less important when both sides have long range missiles and are prepared to use them which leads to the obvious 'target' (IMO)... launch sites of long-range missiles (which might be in Russian held Ukraine but might also be within pre'14 borders of Russia). That is an 'eyes wide open' decision when you give Ukraine F-16s and train their pilots to be able to fly them (and one I approve of, wish had come sooner, especially noting the 'lead time' aspect) See: "In an air-to-surface role, the F-16 can fly more than 500 miles (860 kilometers), deliver its weapons with superior accuracy, defend itself against enemy aircraft, and return to its starting point"www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104505/f-16-fighting-falcon/#and "Air-to-surface missiles carried on the F-16 include Maverick, HARM and Shrike missiles, manufactured by Raytheon, and anti-ship missiles include Boeing Harpoon and Kongsberg Penguin. Flight tests with the Lockheed Martin joint air-to-surface stand-off missile (JASSM) have been conducted from the F-16"www.airforce-technology.com/projects/f-16-fighting-falcon-multirole-fighter/ |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2023 12:49:15 GMT
Ukrainians need to know to fly them. Of course. My beef is with the timetable. Its just another example of the policy of asking Ukraine to eject Russian occupiers in a Defensive mode-without Offensive capability in order to appease Putin.. The result is always the same . Protracted resistance to Ukrainian requests , followed by grudging acceptance of need -and delivery in trickles months after it could have commenced. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Aug 22, 2023 13:00:42 GMT
Ukrainians need to know to fly them. Of course. My beef is with the timetable. Its just another example of the policy of asking Ukraine to eject Russian occupiers in a Defensive mode-without Offensive capability in order to appease Putin.. The result is always the same . Protracted resistance to Ukrainian requests , followed by grudging acceptance of need -and delivery in trickles months after it could have commenced. Agreed. The other 'Captain Obvious' issue is runways. They clearly need to fly from Ukraine rather than a neighbouring NATO country and Russian forces will know that. With a chute then a combat runway could be as short as 1km but it can be a ploughed field! So a big fuss about eventually saying they'll get the planes, a delay with pilot training and then where will they take-off/land from. I think we agree on the 'urgency' and I was saddened to read your post/links about some of the domestic political issues in Ukraine - I admit to not paying that close attention to Ukraine but Zelenskyy is IMO vital. I can appreciate the 'battle weariness' issue is both domestic and international. Whilst a 'long war' doesn't favour Russia then the BICS+ in BRICS can turn Russia into a source of cheap energy to gain a competitive advantage on those wearing themselves off cheap Russian energy. IMO we (NATO and a coalition of the willing including Pacific nations who are concerned about China) need to speed 'offensive capabilities' up in order to ensure Ukraine 'wins*' and is seen to 'win' - and asap! * It is for Ukraine to decide what constitutes a 'win'. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Aug 22, 2023 13:59:54 GMT
Would be -when they get them:- Denmark will deliver 19 jets in total, with the first six due to be shipped to Ukraine around New Year, followed by eight in 2024 and five the following year, ( ie 2025) according to Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen . In the meantime they have to cope with this :- "3:42PM Ukraine's elite armoured brigade targeted by air strikes An elite Ukrainian unit equipped with British Challenger 2 tanks is being hit with “five airstrikes a day” since being deployed on the southern front. The 82nd air assault brigade, which also boasts German Marder vehicles and American Stryker armoured personnel carriers, has been relentlessly targeted since images emerged of it in action last week. Hanna Maliar, a deputy Ukrainian defence minister, said: “The price of the headlines about where the 82nd brigade was moved in the south is five airstrikes on the brigade per day.” Commentators believe the Nato-equipped force was meant to exploit holes in Russian lines, entering the battlefield for the first time amid reports that Ukraine had reached the village of Robotyne. However, Ms Maliar’s statement suggests it is struggling to make headway in Zaporizhzhia against a constant barrage from Moscow’s forces." DT Live blog. Yes, there are the arguments that the delay might be due to fears of escalation, or wanting to drain their opponents rather than win quickly. There are a couple of other things though. The west must surely realise by now that they have little alternative but to supply fighter jets to the Ukraine, much as they are increasingly supplying other weapons. Because it’s no longer so tenable for the Ukraine to get new aircraft (or even spare parts for existing aircraft) from the previous source. Read some analysts say they are eventually going to need two or three hundred fighter jets, the number you would expect for a country of their size in their position. That’s a lot to supply all at once, so they will likely arrive bit-by-bit, not least because training is a big issue. Some things, like downing cruise missiles, might be learned relatively quickly, but close air support is much more demanding. On top of this, training the maintenance crews can take even longer given the complexity apparently, and they are finding that basic English language skills are also not enough. So there are a number of confounding factors, but not necessarily that clear how it plays out. The number of planes being supplied could slowly push Russian forces back but as you point out the numbers are way too small to achieve a 'quick' turn around (unless Russian desire to keep fighting changes). F-16s can be used for other purposes though and given the above then IMO it's fairly Captain Obvious what they would be used for (ie not a painfully slow, high death count, push back of the Russian line). TBC what Putin does when NATO supplied planes flown by NATO trained pilots launch larger scale offensive missions inside Russia - initially targeting 'genuine' military targets but then perhaps doing unto Russia what Russia has been doing unto Ukraine. One single 'retaliation' attack on NATO soil/airspace/shipping and Article 5 of NATO can be triggered and the combined forces of NATO have a lot of planes, tanks and more modern methods of warfare (given I'm surprised that Russia hasn't been that hybrid in 'hybrid' warfare - but we could) If NATO planes trained by NATO doesn't 'goad' Putin into attacking NATO then next step (hopefully a quick one) is to fly the planes from NATO runways and keep pushing. All IMO of course and whilst the delay is frustrating then IMO the supply of NATO planes will set of a chain of events that will probably lead to direct NATO-Russia conflict (unless Russia withdraws and/or Ukraine seek a negotiated settlement). PS Also the possibility of a 'False Flag' attack on NATO to speed up the 'End Game'? Not a prediction - just a possibility. Although after Blair's 'Dodgy Dossier' then probably not one that would be agreed by heads of NATO. One of the 'hybrid' options for NATO would be too use 'General Winter' against Russia - fairly easy to blame that on Russian incompetence or dissident Russians/etc (ie 'deniable' link to NATO) |
|
|
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 22, 2023 14:18:40 GMT
@trev Ah, the game-theoretic implications of how it might play out. Hence perhaps the boiling-frog approach? Plane-by-plane (Or “salami slice-by-slice” tactics as per “Yes Prime minister”) www.youtube.com/watch?v=o861Ka9TtT4 |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2023 14:18:43 GMT
Of course. My beef is with the timetable. Its just another example of the policy of asking Ukraine to eject Russian occupiers in a Defensive mode-without Offensive capability in order to appease Putin.. The result is always the same . Protracted resistance to Ukrainian requests , followed by grudging acceptance of need -and delivery in trickles months after it could have commenced. Agreed. The other 'Captain Obvious' issue is runways. They clearly need to fly from Ukraine rather than a neighbouring NATO country and Russian forces will know that. With a chute then a combat runway could be as short as 1km but it can be a ploughed field! So a big fuss about eventually saying they'll get the planes, a delay with pilot training and then where will they take-off/land from. I think we agree on the 'urgency' and I was saddened to read your post/links about some of the domestic political issues in Ukraine - I admit to not paying that close attention to Ukraine but Zelenskyy is IMO vital. I can appreciate the 'battle weariness' issue is both domestic and international. Whilst a 'long war' doesn't favour Russia then the BICS+ in BRICS can turn Russia into a source of cheap energy to gain a competitive advantage on those wearing themselves off cheap Russian energy. IMO we (NATO and a coalition of the willing including Pacific nations who are concerned about China) need to speed 'offensive capabilities' up in order to ensure Ukraine 'wins*' and is seen to 'win' - and asap! * It is for Ukraine to decide what constitutes a 'win'. Agreed. Particularly your last sentence. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Aug 22, 2023 14:37:20 GMT
@trev Ah, the game-theoretic implications of how it might play out. Hence perhaps the boiling-frog approach? Plane-by-plane (Or “salami slice-by-slice” tactics as per “Yes Prime minister”) www.youtube.com/watch?v=o861Ka9TtT4?!?! I thought I was fairly clear and quite specifically talking about speeding up the 'End Game'. East Germany no longer exists but should a Russian proxy (eg Belarus) be used for an attack on NATO then NATO could attack the proxy. I'm not in favour of 'regime change' but Belarussians might quite like the chance to change their own regime and taking out a major Russian ally would be... 'useful'. By all means give me a scenario that I'd consider but I'm not the one making the decisions. I'd be quite capable of telling the difference between 'fire fighters' helping out (which let's be honest is not a likely scenario) and an attack on NATO that would qualify as triggering Article 5. We saw Putin boil a frog for years with the Minsk agreements. I'm done with frogs being involved. We need to ensure Ukraine 'win' and asap - getting our hands 'dirty' seems probable IMO and if you're specifically referring to Russian threats to go 'nuclear' then I can see why that has caused some 'dither+delay' but I doubt China* wants a nuclear war so if we're always going to allow Russia to 'scare' us with that threat then we'll always be scared of Russia (and by implication any other nutter country with nukes who can blackmail rWorld to get whatever they want). I'm not blind to the risks of 'upping the ante' but IMO a drawn out war is not something that NATO should want and I'm pretty sure it is not something Ukraine wants. * China probably does want a drawn out war as they need time to build the infrastructure to get more cheap energy from Russia. They'd probably quite like the West to continue to treat Russia as a pariah state trapped behind a new Iron Curtain (with little interest in where that line is drawn through Ukraine). Anyway, the point about China is that they (and only they) likely have much influence over Putin playing the 'nuke' card - a card that only one major power can ever use and then only once. Russia and NATO wiping each other of the map doesn't suit China. |
|
|
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 22, 2023 14:54:35 GMT
Mr Poppy got your point Trev., I was just saying that they might consider cautious ways of getting to that end game
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Aug 22, 2023 16:57:57 GMT
Mr Poppy got your point Trev., I was just saying that they might consider cautious ways of getting to that end game The approach so far has been very 'cautious' but has reached a bit of a stalemate that, without some new impetus, could drag on for years/decades. NB Whilst I obviously can't predict the future then I doubt a full fledged NATO intervention would drag out for long provided the objective was clear (eg Russia pushed backed to borders that Ukraine would accept as being an end to the war in Ukraine). We certainly shouldn't be looking for 'regime change' in anyone else's polity - but what the people in each country do is up to them. If Putin wants to then tell Russians he 'won' then fine. rWorld would have seen a nuclear powered aggressor 'lose' and Ukraine would have chosen its own borders (which NATO might then agree to defend in one way or another). I doubt Ukraine would get fully back to pre'14 borders and whilst it is for Ukraine to choose then I'm sure they'd be some discussion on what is 'realistic' given Western $+€ and security guarantees will be something Ukraine wants from NATO and NATO will want to wrap things up asap. NB2 I'd say we're still being too 'cautious' and whilst I'd like the pace speeded up then I accept the incremental approach given we need a good reason to 'escalate' and we also need to ensure NATO stays united. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2023 8:33:36 GMT
Mixed messages -as ever:-
"John Kirby, White House National Security Council spokesman, said that the United States had “noted over the last 72 hours or so some notable progress by Ukrainian armed forces . . . in that southern line of advance coming out of the Zaporizhzhia area.
“They have achieved some success against that second line of Russian defences,” he said. “That is not to say that they aren’t mindful that they’ve still got some tough fighting ahead of them as they try to push further south”, or that Russia could launch a counter-effort."
"Hanna Maliar, a deputy defence minister in Kyiv, said that troops were advancing in the other parts of the Zaporizhzhia region. “There is an offensive in several directions and in certain areas,” she said. “And in some places, in certain areas, this first line was broken through. In some areas it was not broken through, the situation is different there.”
Maliar added that Kyiv’s troops who had been battling to advance through heavily mined areas for almost three months had run into defensive Russian fortifications.
“Where we have already moved to the next line the enemy is much more fortified there and, in addition to the mining, we also see concrete fortifications, for example, under the main commanding heights, and our armed forces have to overcome a lot of obstacles in order to move forward,” she said."
"“This offensive is going slow. It’s bloody, it’s high casualties on both sides,” Mark Milley, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, told AFP. “But the Ukrainians still have a significant amount of combat power in reserve.” He also credited Ukraine with “at least partial success”.
All from The Times.
also in the Times a note of caution about time and the seasons :-
"Boguslaw Pacek, a retired Polish army general, went further, writing on the Biznesalert website that the current rhythm of the counter-offensive “does not permit the hope that it will meet its targets before the start of the rainy season this year”.
And from Die Welt a cautious look ,from further back, at the vast area occupied by Russia- from Robert Brieger, chairman of the EU military committee:-
" “the Russians will be able to continue this war for a long time”.
“It remains questionable whether Ukraine’s full sovereignty can be restored with the means available.”
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2023 10:33:55 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2023 10:47:52 GMT
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,136
|
Post by domjg on Sept 9, 2023 22:46:04 GMT
But they don't need to recover that territory inch by inch. Currently the aim is simply to breach the east west land bridge to Crimea. Achieve that and it's hoped the southern front would collapse. As for the east, a lot of that territory will likely never be recovered. |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,136
|
Post by domjg on Sept 9, 2023 22:46:52 GMT
A provable deliberate attack. |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Sept 10, 2023 6:02:09 GMT
colin - "So-what does it take, NATO?" That's a little bit silly, to be honest. An accidental incursion from a non-lethal bit of equipment arising from a legitimate attack close to but on the other side of the border simply does not warrant that kind of post. It's almost as if you want Putin to attack the alliance. Perhaps worth remembering that in the past, the US accidentally blasted a jumbo jet full of Iranians out of the sky, and even that didn't lead to war, because everyone accepted it was categorically a mistake. I also think you are a little bit pessimistic on the course of the war. Russia is feeling the pressure, and I see o real prospect they can hold their Ukrainian territories in the long term.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2023 6:55:26 GMT
But they don't need to recover that territory inch by inch. Currently the aim is simply to breach the east west land bridge to Crimea. Achieve that and it's hoped the southern front would collapse. As for the east, a lot of that territory will likely never be recovered. I'm not aware that Kiev has conceded the East to Putin. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2023 7:08:45 GMT
colin - "So-what does it take, NATO?" That's a little bit silly, to be honest. An accidental incursion from a non-lethal bit of equipment arising from a legitimate attack close to but on the other side of the border simply does not warrant that kind of post. It's almost as if you want Putin to attack the alliance. Perhaps worth remembering that in the past, the US accidentally blasted a jumbo jet full of Iranians out of the sky, and even that didn't lead to war, because everyone accepted it was categorically a mistake. I also think you are a little bit pessimistic on the course of the war. Russia is feeling the pressure, and I see o real prospect they can hold their Ukrainian territories in the long term. It wasn't an "accident" -and it wasn't !"legitimate" ( ? ) The "border " in question is where three countries meet on the Danube. A river being used by Romania & Ukraine to shift grain which Putin has denied egress elsewhere in Ukraine. The ports in each country are meters apart.The third country which touches the other two -Moldova, is subject to Russian internal interference. Whilst you are splitting hairs Putin is not concerned where is bombs fall. With regard to the counteroffensive Gen Mark Milley said there are 30 days of effective fighting left this year before the seasonal weather changes battlefield conditions. I agree that Russia is feeling pressure-its defences have been breached in the south. But its a long way yet to the Sea of Azov. As for the East , you seem to disagree with domjg who thinks it will be conceded to Russia. I dont know if thats right or not-but its a very big chunk of occupied, Russian speaking Ukraine to take by force. |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Sept 10, 2023 11:53:11 GMT
colin - my understanding was that it was wreckage from a drone that had attacked port facilities inside Ukraine. Lie the west attacked Iraqi civil infrastructure. It's a war, and I don't think we should apply different standards to Russia as we apply to ourselves in terms of what is and isn't legitimate. There are also alot of anti escalation voices in the US giving a false narrative. They don't want to 'upset' Russia, and are the ones holding back stronger support, and they have been behind many of the more downbeat assessments. Last year, fighting progressed well beyond the end of September, so I dont understand why this year it can't. And the Ukrainians think otherwise anyway - www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraines-counteroffensive-continue-after-onset-bad-weather-spy-chief-2023-09-09/#:~:text=KYIV%2C%20Sept%209%20(Reuters),Kyrylo%20Budanov%20said%20on%20Saturday
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2023 12:10:18 GMT
colin - my understanding was that it was wreckage from a drone that had attacked port facilities inside Ukraine. Lie the west attacked Iraqi civil infrastructure. It's a war, and I don't think we should apply different standards to Russia as we apply to ourselves in terms of what is and isn't legitimate. There are also alot of anti escalation voices in the US giving a false narrative. They don't want to 'upset' Russia, and are the ones holding back stronger support, and they have been behind many of the more downbeat assessments. Last year, fighting progressed well beyond the end of September, so I dont understand why this year it can't. And the Ukrainians think otherwise anyway - www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraines-counteroffensive-continue-after-onset-bad-weather-spy-chief-2023-09-09/#:~:text=KYIV%2C%20Sept%209%20(Reuters),Kyrylo%20Budanov%20said%20on%20Saturday I don't think any attack by Russia on Ukraine territory and peop!e is legitimate. Thanks for the link. |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Sept 10, 2023 14:18:04 GMT
colin - "I don't think any attack by Russia on Ukraine territory and peop!e is legitimate." Yes - see what you mean.
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,136
|
Post by domjg on Sept 10, 2023 20:57:09 GMT
But they don't need to recover that territory inch by inch. Currently the aim is simply to breach the east west land bridge to Crimea. Achieve that and it's hoped the southern front would collapse. As for the east, a lot of that territory will likely never be recovered. I'm not aware that Kiev has conceded the East to Putin. Or Crimea for that matter but they're still very unlikely to get it back. |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Sept 10, 2023 21:06:11 GMT
colin - this may be of interest - Germany states publicly that they are budgeting until 2032 to ensure Ukraine wins. Parts of the US administration are holding back these efforts, but Europe is now really taking the lead. They won't let Putin prevail, and I don't think they are buying into the US voices calling for ceding of territory as a way to make peace.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2023 8:22:57 GMT
I'm not aware that Kiev has conceded the East to Putin. Or Crimea for that matter but they're still very unlikely to get it back. I certainly agree with you that The Donbas will be an enormous military nut to crack. God knows what the death toll would be. Have been reading up on the problems of sustaining supply of rare metals to achieve global energy transition. Russia is sitting on strategic reserves in Eastern Ukraine. They are not just stealing Ukraines agricultural output. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2023 8:24:24 GMT
colin - this may be of interest - Germany states publicly that they are budgeting until 2032 to ensure Ukraine wins. Parts of the US administration are holding back these efforts, but Europe is now really taking the lead. They won't let Putin prevail, and I don't think they are buying into the US voices calling for ceding of territory as a way to make peace. Pleased to hear it. Its taken time but was worth waiting for. |
|
|
|
Post by johntel on Sept 11, 2023 14:09:09 GMT
I'm not aware that Kiev has conceded the East to Putin. Or Crimea for that matter but they're still very unlikely to get it back. I agree with that - my prediction for the final outcome is that Donbas will go back to the pre-2022 front line and there will be some sort of self-determination process for the remaining occupied Donbas territory and Crimea which will eventually lead to them becoming part of Russia. I suspect it will take years to get to this outcome though, if it ever gets resolved. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2023 16:03:03 GMT
Or Crimea for that matter but they're still very unlikely to get it back. I agree with that - my prediction for the final outcome is that Donbas will go back to the pre-2022 front line and there will be some sort of self-determination process for the remaining occupied Donbas territory and Crimea which will eventually lead to them becoming part of Russia. I suspect it will take years to get to this outcome though, if it ever gets resolved. Not so sure about Crimea. It has access to two seas. Tatars are 15% of the population. The new defence minister is a Tatar . Dnbas will be much less welcoming. The main counteroffensive thrust is south.Bakhmut seems like a diversion. |
|
|
|
Post by johntel on Sept 11, 2023 16:58:38 GMT
I agree with that - my prediction for the final outcome is that Donbas will go back to the pre-2022 front line and there will be some sort of self-determination process for the remaining occupied Donbas territory and Crimea which will eventually lead to them becoming part of Russia. I suspect it will take years to get to this outcome though, if it ever gets resolved. Not so sure about Crimea. It has access to two seas. Tatars are 15% of the population. The new defence minister is a Tatar . Dnbas will be much less welcoming. The main counteroffensive thrust is south.Bakhmut seems like a diversion. The potential threat to regain Crimea is Zelenskiy's best bargaining chip when it comes to negotiating a settlement, but I'm sure he understands that it's not feasible to actually occupy the area -he more or less acknowledged that at the start of the war last year. I believe he'll be content so long as the land bridge is broken and has the guaranteed security of admission to NATO. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Sept 21, 2023 18:10:58 GMT
Whilst it's obviously not for Brits to decide then just FWIW given it is polling related and might become relevant for Ukraine to decide in the hopefully not too distant future...
?
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Sept 21, 2023 18:12:07 GMT
Of perhaps more relevance given US elections next year...
|
|
