The Invasion of Ukraine

[Martin Y]

*I'm sure everyone here knows George Orwell worked for the Ministry of Information.

<belated nitpick> He worked at the BBC. His scripts had to be passed by the Ministry censor, whose office in Broadcasting House was room 101.

[TopBadger]

‘It’s a Sh*tshow’: Russian Troops Are Now Turning on each other'

https://www.thedailybeast.com/russian-t ... es&via=rss

Lots of news stories today indicating the wheels are really coming off...

[Bird on a Fire]

I split an interesting but irrelevant discussion of Room 101 to here.

[Woodchopper]

An uncanny youtube monologue from Russian MP Alexander Nevzorov from 2021 on the (then) future invasion of the Ukraine. He thinks it will destroy the Russian Federation, he rips into the Russian military and government, highlighting their long established corruption and their incompetence. He says it will end with Putin calling Biden "asking to send the US Marines to protect Moscow".

How kosher is that? I can't see anything before Feb24th on that.

I do however see that it is inline with his previous assessments.

I've also seen this reported on Reddit - supposedly this is the original video https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=165&v=Ia8 ... e=youtu.be with the Feb 24 version just having the translation added.

I guess a side-by-side playback would confirm. Plus a verification of the translation.

Nevzorov is currently under a criminal investigation for spreading ‘fake news’:

The Investigative Committee law enforcement agency said it had opened a case against Nevzorov for posting on Instagram and YouTube that Russia's armed forces had deliberately shelled a maternity hospital in the Ukrainian city of Mariupol.

Nevzorov said the case against him was meant as a signal to journalists in Russia that "the regime is not going to spare anyone, and that any attempts to comprehend the criminal war will end in prison".

The maximum penalty is 15 years.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukra ... SKCN2LK1CG

(He’s a former MP, currently a journalist, I believe).

[EACLucifer]

While I am an advocate of sending anti-shipping missiles to Ukraine, footage coming out from Berdyansk today suggests that the Ukrainians have found a way to make do with ballistic missiles against ships in port

[Woodchopper]

While I am an advocate of sending anti-shipping missiles to Ukraine, footage coming out from Berdyansk today suggests that the Ukrainians have found a way to make do with ballistic missiles against ships in port

That's possible, but there could also have been an accidental explosion (made more likely by poor training and shoddy maintenance).

[EACLucifer]

While I am an advocate of sending anti-shipping missiles to Ukraine, footage coming out from Berdyansk today suggests that the Ukrainians have found a way to make do with ballistic missiles against ships in port

That's possible, but there could also have been an accidental explosion (made more likely by poor training and shoddy maintenance).

Initially reported as a Tochka-U strike, but yes, could have been an accident too, or even sabotage. Also worth noting that a near miss by something like a Tochka-U could set fires, without footage of the start of the incident, hard to tell. Given how many Russian ships were clustered together, though, and the range of the missile in question, it is certainly possible that the Ukrainians lobbed an SRBM at them in the hope of hitting something.

[Woodchopper]

Article covers things we've discussed earlier. There are lots of scenarios short of a nuclear attack on NATO which could possibly lead to escalation. But no one really knows where the threshold lies.

The Tiger Team, as the group is known, is also examining responses if Mr. Putin reaches into NATO territory to attack convoys bringing weapons and aid to Ukraine, according to several officials involved in the process. Meeting three times a week, in classified sessions, the team is also looking at responses if Russia seeks to extend the war to neighboring nations, including Moldova and Georgia, and how to prepare European countries for the refugees flowing in on a scale not seen in decades.

[…]

NATO’s secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg, underscored the urgency of the preparation effort on Wednesday, telling reporters for the first time that even if the Russians employ weapons of mass destruction only inside Ukraine, they may have “dire consequences” for people in NATO nations. He appeared to be discussing the fear that chemical or radioactive clouds could drift over the border. One issue under examination is whether such collateral damage would be considered an “attack” on NATO under its charter, which might require a joint military response.

[…]

One major issue the Tiger Team is looking at is the threshold that could prompt the alliance to use military force in Ukraine. Mr. Biden has made clear that he is enormously reluctant to to do so, fearing that direct confrontation with Russia could escalate the conflict beyond control. “That’s World War III,” he noted recently.

[…]

A senior administration official said any use of a “small” tactical nuclear bomb by Russia — even inside Ukraine and not directed at a NATO member — would mean that “all bets are off” on the United States and NATO staying out of the war. But when pushed, the official declined to lay out the responses under discussion.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/23/us/p ... apons.html

[TimW]

Given how many Russian ships were clustered together, though, and the range of the missile in question, it is certainly possible that the Ukrainians lobbed an SRBM at them in the hope of hitting something.

Is that so tricky? The ship would have been a stationary target and might have been in a precisely known and mapped location (i.e. dock).

It just doesn't sound that hard compared to the days of battleships successfully shelling one another from miles away while steaming on the waves.

[TimW]

Seems that RT helpfully had some footage of the ship in port which might have pinpointed its location.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe ... gn=KARANGA

[Grumble]

Seems that RT helpfully had some footage of the ship in port which might have pinpointed its location.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe ... gn=KARANGA

If Ukraine can start knocking out the Black Sea fleet then all bets are off, surely?

[EACLucifer]

Given how many Russian ships were clustered together, though, and the range of the missile in question, it is certainly possible that the Ukrainians lobbed an SRBM at them in the hope of hitting something.

Is that so tricky? The ship would have been a stationary target and might have been in a precisely known and mapped location (i.e. dock).

It just doesn't sound that hard compared to the days of battleships successfully shelling one another from miles away while steaming on the waves.

Several ships in port is certainly a viable target for a Tochka-U, which is basically a smaller, shorter ranged and more modern equivalent of a Scud with a similarly powerful warhead, and though it wouldn't be guaranteed to hit, the harbour arrangement is such that they could more or less guarantee not hitting anything they needed to avoid hitting, it would either hit the ships, the Russian controlled dock infrastructure, or the sea, and a near-miss could still cause a lot of damage. The difference between an attack like this and battleship gunnery in WW1/WW2 is that it was one shot, a battleship then would be firing a number of guns, and the rate of fire could be one a minute or so - even when they hit the target, a fair few rounds would miss.

Pretty much all the reports from the area talk about missile strike. The Ukrainian side claims it was a Tochka, and Ukrainian media reports locals heard a large bang, followed by a fire and more explosions. Reportedly Russian-aligned Telegraph channels also talk about a missile. Claims it was ammunition handling gone wrong are plausible, but seem to be mostly based on the fact that the available video starts with a fire followed by explosions, but that would be the case regardless of how the fire started.

It's a big set-back for Russia no matter how it happened - they've lost a landing ship outright, and another was definitely on fire as it skidaddled, and a third might have been. They've lost ammunition and equipment they were trying to unload to support the attack on Mariupol, and they've likely lost the use of that part of the harbour for a while. It's also a big propaganda win for Ukraine. What Ukraine needs most right now is support from the west, and if they can show that the Russians are beatable, that will increase the support they get. Reportedly Ukraine's western allies are now talking about sending anti-shipping missiles; if they can do this with an old Soviet SRBM, they can use anti-shipping missiles to neutralise much of the potential threat to Odessa.

[Gfamily]

I'm sure one report I read said that the Russians were claiming that up 'til now their anti-missile defences had been successful against multiple attacks; so it's not clear that this means that no ships are safe.

[TopBadger]

In this modern age I wonder how many missile/artillery strikes might be being called in with a smartphone and the whatthreewords app...

[Woodchopper]

I'm sure one report I read said that the Russians were claiming that up 'til now their anti-missile defences had been successful against multiple attacks; so it's not clear that this means that no ships are safe.

The kind of missile EACL mentions couldn't be used to hit a moving vessel, but could be used against ships that were stationary in port for long periods. If that's what happened then the Russians would probably need to switch to using ports that are out of range. Doing so would save the ships but may add to the problems they have with transporting supplies to their troops.

[Grumble]

I'm sure one report I read said that the Russians were claiming that up 'til now their anti-missile defences had been successful against multiple attacks; so it's not clear that this means that no ships are safe.

The kind of missile EACL mentions couldn't be used to hit a moving vessel, but could be used against ships that were stationary in port for long periods. If that's what happened then the Russians would probably need to switch to using ports that are out of range. Doing so would save the ships but may add to the problems they have with transporting supplies to their troops.

By a long period, presumably that’s only as long as it takes to get a fix. If they have decent maps of their own ports that might not be long at all.

[Gfamily]

I'm sure one report I read said that the Russians were claiming that up 'til now their anti-missile defences had been successful against multiple attacks; so it's not clear that this means that no ships are safe.

The kind of missile EACL mentions couldn't be used to hit a moving vessel, but could be used against ships that were stationary in port for long periods. If that's what happened then the Russians would probably need to switch to using ports that are out of range. Doing so would save the ships but may add to the problems they have with transporting supplies to their troops.

By a long period, presumably that’s only as long as it takes to get a fix. If they have decent maps of their own ports that might not be long at all.

It does depend on the effectiveness of the Anti-missile defences, which was my main point.

[TopBadger]

It does depend on the effectiveness of the Anti-missile defences, which was my main point.

Perhaps, in line with what has been made apparent about other capabilities, Russian missile defenses may not be all that effective after all?

[Martin Y]

It does depend on the effectiveness of the Anti-missile defences, which was my main point.

Perhaps, in line with what has been made apparent about other capabilities, Russian missile defenses may not be all that effective after all?

Well, we don't know how may shots it took for one to get through.

When the Russians hit that camp near the Polish border the BBC story said 30 missiles were launched but most were intercepted. That claim rather took me aback but I haven't seen anything since about what weapons might have been used on either side of that attack.

[EACLucifer]

It does depend on the effectiveness of the Anti-missile defences, which was my main point.

Perhaps, in line with what has been made apparent about other capabilities, Russian missile defenses may not be all that effective after all?

Well, we don't know how may shots it took for one to get through.

When the Russians hit that camp near the Polish border the BBC story said 30 missiles were launched but most were intercepted. That claim rather took me aback but I haven't seen anything since about what weapons might have been used on either side of that attack.

Cruise missiles are much easier to shoot down than ballistic missiles, though. Cruise missiles are subsonic, and though often low flying, are basically the same issue to shoot down as aircraft. Ballistic missiles are fast. This is why some of the hype around hypersonic missiles is so ridiculous. Ballistic missiles are hypersonic more or less by default. The Tochka - or the Scarab for those that like NATO reporting names - goes at Mach 5, it's harder to intercept.

[dyqik]

In this modern age I wonder how many missile/artillery strikes might be being called in with a smartphone and the whatthreewords app...

It's quicker, easier and less error prone to just use a smart phone to send actual GPS coordinates.

Whatthreewords was made obsolete by SMS messaging.

[shpalman]

In this modern age I wonder how many missile/artillery strikes might be being called in with a smartphone and the whatthreewords app...

It's quicker, easier and less error prone to just use a smart phone to send actual GPS coordinates.

Whatthreewords was made obsolete by SMS messaging.

Ever done that thing where you meant to send someone a location but you accidentally shared your own live location?

[bjn]

Slightly long youtube video from a chap in Australia with a Military History background and works in capability planning, but whose youtube channel is usually devoted to video games.

His premise is that the Russians have not planned at all for this war in any way, even though its been on the cards for ages. They blow their budget on 'bling' (way too many nukes, a blue water navy, very high tech but low production run things like the SU-57), they blow money on (badly) maintaining masses of crap old kit, they blow it on corruption and they blow it on troops used for internal repression (eg: 300,000 Rosgvadiya). The resources actually allocated to the forces needed to to invade the Ukraine are a tiny fraction of the overall defence budget and they massively under invested in the capabilities need to do such a thing, such as decent training and pay to create motivated and skilled professional services, PGMs for close air support, decent supply and support capabilities and so on.

Thank f.ck for that.

[dyqik]

In this modern age I wonder how many missile/artillery strikes might be being called in with a smartphone and the whatthreewords app...

It's quicker, easier and less error prone to just use a smart phone to send actual GPS coordinates.

Whatthreewords was made obsolete by SMS messaging.

Ever done that thing where you meant to send someone a location but you accidentally shared your own live location?

No. Perhaps you need the AirSupport4U app...

[EACLucifer]

Slightly long youtube video from a chap in Australia with a Military History background and works in capability planning, but whose youtube channel is usually devoted to video games.

His premise is that the Russians have not planned at all for this war in any way, even though its been on the cards for ages. They blow their budget on 'bling' (way too many nukes, a blue water navy, very high tech but low production run things like the SU-57), they blow money on (badly) maintaining masses of crap old kit, they blow it on corruption and they blow it on troops used for internal repression (eg: 300,000 Rosgvadiya). The resources actually allocated to the forces needed to to invade the Ukraine are a tiny fraction of the overall defence budget and they massively under invested in the capabilities need to do such a thing, such as decent training and pay to create motivated and skilled professional services, PGMs for close air support, decent supply and support capabilities and so on.

Thank f.ck for that.

No meaningful body of NCOs to maintain professionalism, skills and leadership in the enlisted ranks is one that holds the Russians back, but a body of skilled professional soldiers who started out as privates is utterly incompatible with how Russia treats its troops.

Not enough cargo trucks to support operations over the distances they are trying to operate over.

A political leader that is so fearful of others holding power that there isn't even a single commander of the operation, so differing axes of attack are in competition with eachother, and not coordinated.

But above all, not enough infantry, especially after the casualties they have taken.