The Russian Invasion of Ukraine Part 4

[Hellbound]

Ukraine is a lot different than Afghanistan, I'm not expecting a similar outcome there. But arming and training locals isn't a new concept, we've done it before plenty of times.

Just to add a bit, this is the primary stated mission of the Army’s Green Berets: find, liaise with, supply, and train indigenous forces.


Sent from my volcanic island lair using carrier pigeon.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

We did that in Afghanistan, in the '80's. And it was cheap. But it still didn't work out so well in the end. We also did that in Nicaragua, also in the 80's. Remember the whole Contras thing? Also cheap, but not especially effective.

Ukraine is a lot different than Afghanistan, I'm not expecting a similar outcome there. But arming and training locals isn't a new concept, we've done it before plenty of times.

I think an even more obvious example is Iraq. The US spent billions training and equipping the Iraqi army, and when ISIS appeared, the Iraqis literally dropped all their weapons and ran away. This windfall of modern, high-tech munitions was a godsend for Islamic State, and a disaster for Iraq, Syria and, arguably, for the US too.

 

[Mike!]

At what point does Putin attempting to extort concessions by disrupting the world's food supply, like some kind of Bond villain*, become enough of an issue that more sensible minds decide it's gone on long enough, and that it is time to demand he take what's of his army and go home, or sit back and watch your war machine be utterly destroyed before breakfast tomorrow. And if he wants to rattle the atomic sabre, remind him that while he may have more on paper, ours are more powerful, more accurate, and most of all, well maintained. Then state in plain terms, use nukes and we'll hit Russia so hard it may tilt the Earth itself on its axis, making what's left of them the new North Pole.
Sure, it's a long winded fantasy that'll never happen, but it felt good it get it out.






*Been a while since anyone evoked such a claim, but dang, what else would you call him at this point?

 

[dudalb]

They aren't supermen, a lot of them are volunteers going through hell. Morale is suffering and desertions are happening.

RUssian morale is not so great either.
But it;s clear you want to basically give Putin what he wants. Appeasement alway works so well...

 

[lobosrul5]

At what point does Putin attempting to extort concessions by disrupting the world's food supply, like some kind of Bond villain*, become enough of an issue that more sensible minds decide it's gone on long enough, and that it is time to demand he take what's of his army and go home, or sit back and watch your war machine be utterly destroyed before breakfast tomorrow. And if he wants to rattle the atomic sabre, remind him that while he may have more on paper, ours are more powerful, more accurate, and most of all, well maintained. Then state in plain terms, use nukes and we'll hit Russia so hard it may tilt the Earth itself on its axis, making what's left of them the new North Pole.
Sure, it's a long winded fantasy that'll never happen, but it felt good it get it out.






*Been a while since anyone evoked such a claim, but dang, what else would you call him at this point?

My plan would be to take about 200 A-10's, and 100 B-52's out of storage and train some Ukrainian pilots on them, that is after they have air supremacy, which should be forthcoming with all the missiles we've sent. Utterly and completely annihilate Russian forces in Ukraine. Also, something with good anti-shipping capability, not sure either of those planes do.

And yeah he is basically a bond villain in charge of a large country with nukes.

 

[theprestige]

There are way better planes than the A-10, for this kind of work.

 

[lobosrul5]

There are way better planes than the A-10, for this kind of work.

Oh yeah stealth's would totally be better. There's too much risk of them getting into enemy hands and reverse engineered though. Doubt Russia could do it, but they might send one to China.

Besides which the Air Force really really seems to want to get rid of them. Better in Ukrainian hands than rotting away in a boneyard.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Oh yeah stealth's would totally be better. There's too much risk of them getting into enemy hands and reverse engineered though. Doubt Russia could do it, but they might send one to China.

Besides which the Air Force really really seems to want to get rid of them. Better in Ukrainian hands than rotting away in a boneyard.

What is the obsession with A-10s?

 

[crescent]

There was a report today mentioning that since fighting started, there has been a dramatic upsurge in cargo flights moving between Russia and Iran.

My half-assed semi-conspiracy theory is that Russia is buying back precision weaponry/ammunition from some of its clients. They may not be as low on precision or semi-precision weaponry as they are thought to be. They may have access to all of Belarus's stocks, all of Syria's, a good hunk of Hezbolla's, a bunch of other nations as well.

 

[lobosrul5]

What is the obsession with A-10s?

They have a really big cool gun that goes brrrrrrrrrrrrrppppp? They're tough to shoot down? They look cool? They can carry Maverick AT missiles (I mean other planes can too)?

Besides which if they are surplus to USAF needs then whats the harm in giving them away?

 

[The Great Zaganza]

What is the obsession with A-10s?

The entire concept of "we have these leftover massive guns, let's build a plane around them" is kinda hilariously cool.

Also, they work well against Decepticons.

 

[Oystein]

I hope that the strategy of training up motivated locals and give them the weapons they need will become the norm for US military intervention going forward - it's clearly way more effective than what we did in Iraq and Afghanistan, it's cheaper and it's less likely to create an entire generation that hates us.

Uhm.
The West tried for about 85 years (or so it feels) to arm and train local military units in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The problem was they didn't find any motivated locals.

The West then did not expect that Ukrainians would be quite so spectacularly motivated to defend the home country.

The difference is not the strategy of "training up motivated locals and give them the weapons" - the difference is that Ukraine had a head-start of more than 7 years in training and (some) weapons acquisition. They started the defense motivated and already trained and armed.

 

[jimbob]

What is the obsession with A-10s?

They have a big gun*, which to be fair is probably a good thing from a morale point of view.

My understanding is that the gun wasn't that good at actually hitting stationary target tanks, which would have been pretty much under ideal conditions


*See also the periodic calls to reactivate Iowa class battleships, or some of the ideas for the Zumwalt class.

 

[Oystein]

Same here. I've long felt that the thing to do with war refugees is put them in training camps, arm and train them, and send them back to fight for their homeland.

Not offer them indefinite asylum while we stand idly by and watch their homeland burn.

In places like Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, with their tribal societies, the problem is that you just cannot organize and train them in national defense units - that's been tried, and it failed.

In Ukraine's case, the men of fighting age are largely staying, it is mainly the women and children who flee.

 

[Oystein]

And I still think NATO* could end this conflict in less than a week, just with stealth airstrikes on Russian artillery and supply lines.

Even quicker if outright magic were employed without letting the Russians know we have wizards.

 

[Oystein]

one reason has been suggested: by not declaring it a war, he might have a much easier time not getting prosecuted for war crimes - in times of war, he would be the Commander in Chief, the one ultimately responsible for the actions of his troops.
But if there is no war, he can use some general as a scapegoat.

This makes little sense.

In what jurisdiction do you figure the court is located that Putin is so afraid of that he plans around it?

And why should that court be barred from considering the actual facts? Like who did actually decide and order this illegal war of aggression? Some generals?

 

[gnome]

And I still think NATO* could end this conflict in less than a week, just with stealth airstrikes on Russian artillery and supply lines.

We may not like that ending.

It is a tricky line we're walking. Moscow clearly desires to avoid escalation, or else our existing assistance would be all the excuse they needed. I think that a direct US strike on Russian forces would risk a nuclear standoff.

 

[jimbob]

This makes little sense.

In what jurisdiction do you figure the court is located that Putin is so afraid of that he plans around it?

And why should that court be barred from considering the actual facts? Like who did actually decide and order this illegal war of aggression? Some generals?

Indeed. The only reason has to be the risk of a backlash. Putin has ambitious underlings who will be calculating whether it's more in their interest to support Putin or manoeuvre to overthrow him

 

[Ziggurat]

Oh yeah stealth's would totally be better. There's too much risk of them getting into enemy hands and reverse engineered though. Doubt Russia could do it, but they might send one to China.

Just as importantly, the logistics tail needed to support an F-35 is going to be a lot more complicated and expensive than for an A-10. And it's useless to give either plane to Ukraine without giving them the logistics tail as well. This also means it would probably take a lot longer to set up that logistics tail for an F-35 than for an A-10.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Two UK citizens and a Moroccan, who fought on the Ukrainian side in the country's eastern Donbas region, may face the death penalty.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/wor...90ffce4259031cb5a25529&pinned_post_type=share