Senior Member
Originally Posted by Landrith
Shouldn't be that shocking. Even at the height of our Iraq/Afghanistan adventuring, our burn rate for arty rounds wasn't multiple 10s of thousands per month.
Since we've pretty much exeunted there, the burn rate is down to whatever gets shot in training. And all we needed was replacement rate to make sure the stockpiles in the armories didn't get drawn down.
That's all gone out the window now.
You would not enjoy Nietzsche, sir. He is fundamentally unsound. — P.G. Wodehouse (Carry On, Jeeves)
Senior Member
Re: Ukraine
Yes, but our central planners since 2016 (Victoria Nuland I'm looking at you) were taking us here all along. Sort of short sighted to fight Russia to the last Ukranian and not have even geared up artillery shell production.
I am switching conspiracy theories. This is really modeled on US war fighting with complex multi sided ground conflict in Syria. Ukraine just thinks they are our ally, this is actually a war by Uncle Sam against Western Europe that started in 2019 with Wall Street kneecapping the LIBOR rate and the London Metals market. Now the Fed has joined in with heightened interest rates destroying Europe's economic future. The US tanks will arrive a year after they are needed by Ukraine and instead will be given to soon to be Greater Poland/Swedish empire. USA's new vassal super state.
Last edited by Landrith; 01-30-2023 at 11:58 PM.
Senior Member
Re: Ukraine
No mystery there, I explained the problem a few times before. Everybody exited the cold war with huge stocks, and downsized its military forces at the same time. Technology progress means that existing production lines are converted since private factories can't afford to simply mothball them.
In the case of artillery shells, the focus switched to intelligent munitions and even less dumb stuff was manufactured then required to maintain cold war era stocks.
Just take a look at how many tanks the US can produce per year, the factory is only open because of political concerns, in 2016 they had about 100 workers on site.
Chateratist
Re: Ukraine
Hmmm
There was a response to a post i made that had precisely that written. I didn't respond at the time but I did make a mental note. It appears to no longer exist...
I retract that statement with apologies in light of not being able to provide the quote.
You say you didn't say or write that, but you don't deny believing it.
If you don't believe it, how do you think the war can end quickly?the war would end if Zelensky agrees to Russia's terms. .
If you do believe it, how do you think it will play out?
You've been dancing around those two questions since you joined this thread.
Running with the hare and hunting with the hound.
I'm still very curious, what does your response mean?
It's all fun and games until Darth Vader comes.
Chateratist
Re: Ukraine
Maybe he doesn't realise it was Russia who invaded Ukraine. I mean - its all over the news....?Empires in terminal decline leap from one military fiasco to the next. The war in Ukraine, another bungled attempt to reassert U.S. global hegemony, fits this pattern.
You take this guy seriously? He sounds like our resident equivocists - all hyperbole and insult, no substance.
They are pimps of war, puppets of the Pentagon, a state within a state, and the defense contractors who lavishly fund their think tanks — Project for the New American Century, American Enterprise Institute, Foreign Policy Initiative, Institute for the Study of War, the Atlantic Council and the Brookings Institution. Like some mutant strain of an antibiotic-resistant bacteria, they cannot be vanquished. It does not matter how wrong they are, how absurd their theories, how many times they lie or denigrate other cultures and societies as uncivilized or how many murderous military interventions go bad. They are immovable props, the parasitic mandarins of power vomited up in the dying days of any empire, including ours, leaping from one self-defeating catastrophe to the next.
Yep - I made up a word.
It's all fun and games until Darth Vader comes.
Senior Member
Re: Ukraine
Those claims are an integral part of Russian propaganda. With no sources outside the Russcist propaganda factories and Russian government to support them.
Obvious blatant lies is what I call it.
And I am sure you know it is lies. Though money talks and you are paid to tell lies.
Amateur living on the western coast of Finland
Chateratist
Re: Ukraine
^ regarding Johan's quote, Russia is struggling to keep its army professional and disciplined.
It gave away the fact that phones brought a rain of death, but underplayed the figures - though kept them high enough for impact.
Its the Bunnings add approach to training your staff. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_2wis9yKSg
When you have too many staff to get into a training room - you teach them how to behave with a popular add campaign.
The statement is not proof of honesty, its proof of incompetence.
It's all fun and games until Darth Vader comes.
Senior Member
Re: Ukraine
Can we not just ignore this dingle berry and move on with out distraction?
Senior Member
Re: Ukraine
If you knew a bit about what is actually going on in reality on the ground in Europe you would be better at telling propaganda apart from truth.
Those scums of the earth mentioned in the link do indeed exist. We have seen American warmongers creating wars to benefit their own interrests.
However this time things are different. From the wiewpoint of an American who has never before cared for nor known anything about Europe it may look confusingly similar but there is a significant difference.
This time we are dealing with an expansive empire. Built upon personal loyalties and distribution of wealth and power. If the emperror runs out of newly aquired wealth and power to share out to his loyal followers the empire will collapse. He knows it. His followers know it. We all know it in all the independent states bordering the empire.
The empire must expand. The czar and his followers wiew it as their birthright and the destiny of the empire. A very convenient birthright and destiny since they use it to enrich themselves massively. The people in the empire is there only to serve the mythical body of the empire. Through extrication of wealth or as cannon fodder on the battle field.
There are two ways of expanding such an empire. The normal way is by scaring and bullying the voters in a nearby state into electing an empire puppet to run their state in exchange for peace. Every attempt at democracy in such a state is wiewed as a direch violation of the destiny and birthright of the empire and must therefore be crushed. Over time the puppet state is integrated fully into the empire and it's people can be used by the empire for whatever need the empire has.
Any attempt by nearby states to protect themselves against this ongoing proces of integration and expansion is wieved as a violation of the rights of the empire and therefore an agression and a reason for an all out blatant invasion.
I find it illogical that Americans who claim to be pro democracy disregard the right up millions of people in states bordering Russia to vote and elect anything but Russian rule. Who are they to decide whose votes count and whose don't.
I have written about this before Sandtown and you refused to comment. Instead you just piled up new claims and new links to writers promoting the idea that any resistance against Russcist expansion in one's homeland equals warmongering. Please Sandtown read this and comment!
Amateur living on the western coast of Finland
Senior Member
Ukraine
I like this bit of claptrap:[URL]https://scheerpost.com/2023/01/29/chris-hedges-ukraine-the-war-that-went-wrong/
"The rapid upgrade of sophisticated military hardware and aid provided to Ukraine is not a good sign for the NATO alliance. It takes many months, if not years, of training to operate and coordinate these weapons systems. Tank battles - I was in the last major tank battle outside Kuwait City during the first Gulf war as a reporter - are highly choreographed and complex operations. Armor must work in close concert with air power, warships, infantry and artillery batteries. It will be many, many months, if not years, before Ukrainian forces receive adequate training to operate this equipment and coordinate the diverse components of a modern battlefield."
Apparently, this guy hasn't been paying attention:
1. The theoretical: Ukraine's armed forces have been working with various NATO member states on training and getting up to snuff with modern combined arms tactics for [at least] the past 8+ years, since Russia's invasion of Crimea in 2014.
2. The practical: over the past 11 months, Ukraine's armed forces have demonstrated themselves to be quite competent in combined arms tactics, viz. the current current stalemate in which Russia, a [nominally, and on paper] vastly superior power, finds itself bogged down.
3. Regarding the failures of Saudi armed forces, there's a number of interesting pieces analyzing just why that's so. Oddly, failure to learn combined arms tactics or hiw to drive an M1 Abrams aren't cited as a cause.
If you read many of these, for instance
https://www.meforum.org/441/why-arabs-lose-wars
You'll notice a lot of similarities to the situation of a certain fascist expeditionary force currently bogged down in Ukraine.
Last edited by Nicholas Carey; 01-31-2023 at 03:12 AM.
You would not enjoy Nietzsche, sir. He is fundamentally unsound. — P.G. Wodehouse (Carry On, Jeeves)
Senior Member
Re: Ukraine
^ Without wanting to nitpick the quoted claptrap, armour working in close concert with warships? That would be a cool trick, even with a navy. It's a non issue here, as effectively Ukraine does not. So that should simplify things enough that maybe they can cope.
Sarcasm emoji required.
Pete
The Ignore feature, lowering blood pressure since 1862. Ahhhhhhh.
Senior Member
Re: Ukraine
At least someone has had coffee today. Making an announcement is often a way to cover up for own failings. If it was a propaganda piece, why "only" 14 dead, why not 30 and most of them children, if the sole purpose was indeed propaganda?
So quick to forget Ukraines reaction for its own defence missiles killing people in Poland, was to say it was a Russian attack on NATO. Truth is the first casualty in war.
The other one
Re: Ukraine
The ISW Russian offensive campaign assessment, January 30.
https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-january-30-2023
Key Takeaways
- Western, Ukrainian, and Russian sources continue to indicate that Russia is preparing for an imminent offensive, supporting ISW’s assessment that an offensive in the coming months is the most likely course of action (MLCOA).
- Iranian state media reported that Iran and Russia established direct financial communication channels between Iranian banks and more than 800 Russian banks on January 29.
- Russian forces continued ground attacks to regain lost positions west of Kreminna as Ukrainian forces conducted counteroffensive operations northwest of Svatove.
- Ukrainian forces continued to strike Russian force concentrations in rear areas in Luhansk Oblast.
- Russian forces continued to conduct ground attacks across the Donetsk Oblast front line.
- Russian forces continued to make marginal territorial gains near Bakhmut.
- Russian forces did not conduct any confirmed ground attacks in Zaporizhia Oblast.
- The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) continued measures to professionalize the Russian military as it faces continued backlash against these measures.
- Russian forces and occupation authorities continue to target Crimean Tatars in an effort to associate anti-Russia sentiment with extremist or terrorist activity.
Senior Member
Re: Ukraine
Still lying to yourself?
Senior Member
Ukraine
I would hope that the forward observers and naval gunfire liaison officers who are working in concert with armor and calling in fire missions from the Big Guns™️ have the common sense not to call in a fire mission on friendlies. Whether or not that those Big Guns™️ are located on warships or on land.
[Does Ukraine have a significant navy? Asking for a friend]
Last edited by Nicholas Carey; 01-31-2023 at 03:48 AM.
You would not enjoy Nietzsche, sir. He is fundamentally unsound. — P.G. Wodehouse (Carry On, Jeeves)
Senior Member
Re: Ukraine
^ No - Ukraine has essentially no navy at all, not even a frigate, let alone a battle wagon that anyone forward observe for.
Pete
The Ignore feature, lowering blood pressure since 1862. Ahhhhhhh.
Senior Member
Re: Ukraine
Still ensnaring yourself step by step in half truths and lies and thereby showing more and more of whom you really are. You aren't exactly trying to make yourself more reliable.
Amateur living on the western coast of Finland
Chateratist
Re: Ukraine
Ukraine also has tank battalions that are doing a pretty good job.
Learning tank craft, and integrating it into their operations, is not an issue.
sure, the indicator will be on the left....I think they'll figure it out.
It's all fun and games until Darth Vader comes.
Senior Member
Re: Ukraine
Where did Ukraine claim that the missile was Russian attack on NATO? I seem to have missed that.
The western gutter press may have jumped to that conclusion, but truth does not sell newspapers as much as outright lies.
Bottlewasher
Re: Ukraine
I trust Boris Johnson as much as I trust Trump. Whether I trust either of them more than Russia's Defense Ministry is doubtful. As far as the mobile thing - any good liar knows there has to be an occasional kernel of truth to make the lies believable.
"If it ain't broke, you're not trying." - Red Green
Chateratist
Re: Ukraine
Boris in WAPO today.
Stating the obvious, but doing it well. He is a wordsmith first.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...-nato-ukraine/
Well, we tried creative ambiguity, and see where it got us. For decades, we have used diplomatic doublespeak on the subject of NATO and Ukraine — and it has ended in total disaster.
We spent years telling Ukrainians that we have an “open door” policy in NATO, and that they have the right to “choose their own destiny,” and that Russia should not be able to exercise a veto.
And all that time we have overtly signaled to Moscow that Ukraine is never going to join the alliance — because so many NATO members will simply exercise their veto themselves.
In principle, yes; in practice, no. That has been the message.
And what is the result of all this sucking and blowing at once? What have we achieved by speaking softly out of both sides of our mouths?
The result is the worst war in Europe for 80 years. Russian President Vladimir Putin has destroyed countless lives, homes, hopes and dreams. He has also destroyed the slightest reason to sympathize with him or to humor him in his paranoia.
Along the way, he has vaporized the case against Ukrainian membership of NATO.
People used to say that the Ukrainian population was too divided on the subject of NATO membership; and before 2014 you certainly could have made that argument. Look at the numbers now. Support for NATO membership in Ukraine is now stratospheric — 83 percent, according to one recent poll.
People used to claim that Ukraine wasn’t properly militarily compatible with NATO. Today, Ukrainians are deploying a dizzying variety of equipment from NATO countries, with the utmost skill and bravery.
There is absolutely nothing that NATO could teach Ukrainians about fighting a war — in fact, there is a lot that they could teach us. Above all, people used to argue that the prospect of Ukrainian membership in NATO was “provocative” to Putin and to Russia. In truth, we should never have accepted this argument.
We should have insisted on the reality — that the Kremlin had nothing to fear from NATO because it is a defensive alliance. But member countries accepted this bogus point; I admit that for a time I accepted it.
So look at what happened when we went out of our way not to provoke Putin. We mollified him at the Bucharest NATO summit in 2008. Ukrainians wanted a NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP). They got some warm words about eventual NATO membership, but no MAP. Putin attended that summit and pronounced himself satisfied with the result.
What did he do next? In 2014, he invaded Donbas and Crimea, with his trademark combination of blatant lies and brutality. Instead of properly punishing him, we responded with a policy of craven appeasement.
Far from helping Ukrainians to evict him from their country, we set up the tragicomic “Normandy Format,” under which Russia and Ukraine were treated as though they were equally at fault, when Russia was plainly the aggressor and Ukraine was the victim. Ever since then, NATO membership has been theoretically on the agenda, but everyone has known that it just wasn’t going to happen, or at least not in the political lifetimes of anyone around the table.
So, Ukrainians had the worst of both worlds. NATO had spouted enough fine phrases about Ukrainian membership for Putin to use in his propaganda and to claim that Russia was being threatened with encirclement.
And yet the reality was that NATO had done nothing to protect Ukraine and nothing to advance the cause of Ukrainian membership.
The truth is, if you had asked me before Putin’s invasion when Ukraine would join NATO, I would have said, “Roughly when hell freezes over, or not for at least 10 years.”
But then, if you had asked me whether we would now be sending Challenger tanks to Ukraine, or Abrams tanks, or whether the Germans would now be sending Leopard tanks — I would have thought you were mad. Just as I would have thought you were mad if you had told me that Putin was going to invade.
Putin didn’t invade because he thought that Ukraine was going to join NATO. He always knew that was vanishingly unlikely. He attacked Ukraine because he believed — with abundant evidence — that we were not really serious about protecting Ukraine. He attacked because he wanted to rebuild the old Soviet imperium and because he believed — foolishly — that he was going to win.
If we had been brave and consistent enough to bring Ukraine into NATO — if we had actually meant what we said — then this utter catastrophe would have been averted.
I know that, in some European capitals, this outcome will seem hard to digest. But the logic is inescapable.
For the sake of stability and peace, Ukraine now needs clarity about its position in the Euro-Atlantic security architecture. All our dodging and weaving has ended in slaughter.
Ukrainians should be given everything they need to finish this war, as quickly as possible, and we should begin the process of admitting Ukraine to NATO, and begin it now.
It would be no use if Moscow complains. They had a case once, and they were heard with respect. That case has been pulverized by the bombs and missiles of Putin.
It's all fun and games until Darth Vader comes.
Senior Member
Re: Ukraine
Boris Johnson's credibility can be deduced from the fact that no one bothered to post his claim about Putin threatening him with a missile until Vadim brought it up.
Senior Member
Re: Ukraine
Ukraine's Zelenskiy blames Russian missiles for deadly Poland explosion | Reuters
US and NATO were quick to dismiss Zelensky claims, after an investigation, something Zelensky was slow to walk back.
Senior Member
Re: Ukraine
Until Boris was paid to go on TV for an interview. Boris gets a bomb threat! Or does he? - YouTube
Senior Member
Re: Ukraine
Bradleys en-route.
As of Monday, and according to USTRANSCOM's press release noting the vessel's name, data via MarineTraffic shows ARC Integrity is full steam ahead in the Atlantic Ocean and will arrive at the Port in Southampton, England, on Feb. 7.
Old Grey Inquisitive One
Re: Ukraine
If you read the Grauniad report below, you will see that Boris gave the comment no credibility.
It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.
The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.
Senior Member
Re: Ukraine
On that, my memory is in error.
I see that Joe Biden, at the G20 summit on the same day of the 'attack', stated that the missile was unlikely to have been fired by Russia. I believe NATO had tracked the missile.
It took two days for Zelensky to come round to agreeing.
Senior Member
Re: Ukraine
I am surprised he did not boast about blowing up the April peace talks with an unannounced visit to Kiev.
And if you think he was not under instructions to do so by the US Blob, you are wrong.
Last edited by sandtown; 01-31-2023 at 06:50 PM.
can eat fifty eggs
Re: Ukraine
there you go again. hey, just curious, is mark milley part of the u.s. blob, or not. you know milley, our highest ranking military officer. who "agrees" with you, and "disagrees" with "everyone" else posting here.
the truth-obscuring contortions you go through to establish a position of superiority for yourself, in your own mind....
Old Grey Inquisitive One
Re: Ukraine
That is because he did not do so. Did you post any sources for that when asked after the first time you posted that terminological inexactitude?
It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.
The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.
Senior Member
Re: Ukraine
Are you saying that this did not happen ??
https://www.commondreams.org/news/20...krainian-paper
Old Grey Inquisitive One
Re: Ukraine
I have linked to the Guardian twice now. I think that I should have C&P instead.
Boris Johnson says Putin claimed he could send missile to hit UK ‘in a minute’
Former prime minister’s comments about call to Russian president just before invasion come in new BBC documentary
Boris Johnson claims Vladimir Putin threatened UK missile strike – video
Mon 30 Jan 2023 11.00 GMTFirst published on Sun 29 Jan 2023 18.06 GMT
Boris Johnson has said Vladimir Putin claimed he could have sent a missile to hit Britain “within a minute”, in a call shortly before the invasion of Ukraine.
The former prime minister’s comments came in a three-part documentary for BBC Two on the conflict and the lead-up to Russia’s invasion in February last year.
It had been in a conversation about hypothetical support for Nato on Russia’s borders if Putin decided to invade, as Johnson tried to talk Putin down.
He told the makers of Putin vs the West that he did not regard Putin’s comments as a threat. He went on to become one of the Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy’s biggest supporters and has visited Kyiv since resigning as prime minister.
Boris Johnson: Ukraine must join Nato for sake of long-term peace
“He sort of threatened me at one point and said, ‘Boris, I don’t want to hurt you, but with a missile, it would only take a minute’, or something like that,” Johnson said.
“I think from the very relaxed tone that he was taking, the sort of air of detachment that he seemed to have, he was just playing along with my attempts to get him to negotiate.”
Johnson had warned there would be tougher western sanctions if Russia invaded, and support for Nato would increase – even if Ukraine was not close to becoming a member.
“He said, ‘Boris, you say that Ukraine is not going to join Nato anytime soon … What is anytime soon?’, and I said, ‘Well it’s not going to join Nato for the foreseeable future. You know that perfectly well,’” Johnson said of the call with Putin.
Responding to the claim, Putin’s spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov, told reporters that what Johnson said was not true, or “more precisely, a lie”.
Peskov said: “There were no threats of missiles. It is either a deliberate lie – so you have to ask Mr Johnson why he chose to put it that way – or it was an unconscious lie and he did not in fact understand what Putin was talking to him about.”
Peskov said Putin had explained to Johnson how, if Ukraine joined the Nato alliance, US or Nato missiles placed near Russia’s borders would mean any missile could reach Moscow in minutes, and suggested that there may have been a misunderstanding.
“If that’s how this passage was understood, then it’s a very awkward situation,” Peskov said.
Ben Wallace, the defence secretary, also spoke in the documentary about a visit to Moscow in February in an unsuccessful attempt to negotiate and avert war. He met his Russian counterpart, Sergei Shoigu, as well as the chief of the general staff, Valery Gerasimov. “I remember saying to minister Shoigu, ‘They will fight’ and he said, ‘My mother is Ukrainian; they won’t!’ He also said he had no intention of invading,” Wallace said.
“That would be ‘vran’e’ in the Russian language. ‘Vran’e’ I think is sort of a demonstration of bullying or strength: I’m going to lie to you. You know I’m lying. I know you know I’m lying and I’m still going to lie to you. He knew I knew and I knew he knew. But I think it was about saying: I’m powerful.
“It was the fairly chilling but direct lie of what they were not going to do that I think to me confirmed they were going to do it. I remember as we were walking out General Gerasimov said, ‘Never again will we be humiliated. We used to be the fourth army in the world, we’re now number two. It’s now America and us.’ And there in that minute was that sense of potentially why [they were doing this].”
It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.
The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.
Senior Member
Re: Ukraine
That threat has always been there since the tech has been there, but Boris can easily just be self-aggrandising.
Senior Member
Re: Ukraine
Somebody or other needs a lecture on the topic of operational security.
Old Grey Inquisitive One
Re: Ukraine
Or was he letting everyone know what sort of bullying aerosol Pootin actually is?
It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.
The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
