- cross-posted to:
- ukraine@sopuli.xyz
- cross-posted to:
- ukraine@sopuli.xyz
You must log in or register to comment.
Says Kyivpost.
Lines on the map seem to very slowly move in Russia’s favor and Russia’s “leadership” doesn’t care about human cost as long as it allows further operation of their state.
It’s their job to study strengths and weaknesses, so the quote is kinda stupid. Whether they are aware of anything can be said only retrospectively.
I just don’t see where Russia is losing, I live in Russia and every year since 2022 people (sometimes not the dumbest kind, but with age comes naivete, and everyone is naive outside of their immediate profession) around me would say how Russian economy and\or defenses are going to crumble soon because of this war.
And before that since 2020 how they are going to crumble because of inability to adapt.
And before that because of sanctions, yes, what was called sanctions then was seriously talked about.
And before that because stealing elections is unpopular and generally immoral.
And before that because Putin will certainly lose an election, right?
It just doesn’t work like that.
In Russia there’s an expression “глубинный народ” (something like “depths’ people” or “deep people”, hard to translate), meaning some consistent deep popular feeling about something, it’s usually ascribed barbaric feelings, like only caring how the rest of the world fears your nukes or hating everyone intelligent.
But it’s also sometimes ascribed wisdom. For example, about prophets predicting the death of Russia’s regime all by itself one day. Some of those prophets being children of the previous generation of that regime, supposedly separated from the current generation, but after becoming irrelevant coming back to their herd, like Sobchak.
Things are achieved when people work to achieve them, and with the amount of work they take, not the honest amount, not the amount those people can possibly do. Life is not honest.
Russia is not losing this war. It might reformat it into some kind of frozen conflict.
USA’s Mr. 47 will seriously take $5m from Mr. Putin to invite him to live in ‘the land of the free’. And spend all of his ruble there.
And god I hope they keep going and keep winning.
Which is probably why they’re trying to bid up Ukraine with the US using their own minerals.
Edit: Although some are suggesting this article is just propaganda, Russia’s main challenge is that their economy is on the brink of failing and domestic support becomes a question if that happens. From a skim that appears to be the main thrust of it.
I’ve found that Colonel Maruks Reisner provides some of the best information available on the war.
He doesn’t update frequently but all his analysis are sober, detailed, and realistic. He states his pro-Western, pro-NATO, pro-Ukrainian bias clearly.
If I could sum up the general trend of his presentation it’s, “The status quo favors Russia. If we don’t get our heads out of our asses and step up Russia will win.”
I’ve heard this one before. As much as I’d like to believe it…
It’s propaganda.
Your mom is propaganda.
No wonder Krasnov Trump and Nazi Elon Musk are panicking and begging for a deal.
Russia is going to run out of troops.
IDK when, but they’re basically feeding their population into a meat grinder trying to take Ukraine.
That’s not too say the Ukraine isn’t taking losses… I’ve just, seen some numbers that indicate that Russia is going to run out of people to send to their deaths before Ukraine will.
Putin needs to give this up before he doesn’t have a military anymore.
Ukraine is taking horrendous losses that we should be more concerned about. Stay focussed on Ukraine succeeding, not just Russia failing
Fair point.
Go Ukraine!
It’s not that they will run out of people. They have people, but to keep recruitment levels so high and equipment manufacturing so high they are overcharging their economy. Right now in Russia there are three types of jobs if you want to make money afaik, work in the military complex (arms manufacturing), in the gas extraction industry or directly in the military.
It’s Dutch disease x100, if the state at some point stops being able to fund the war machine, their economy collapses.
To add to this, Putin can recruit from the poorest regions for a while, but at some point he needs to get men from the larger cities. The last thing he wants is protests from Moskou etc. The average person from Moskou hadn’t had that much negative effects from the war yet. But if you, your son or father is forced to the battlefield it’s a different story.
I hope you’re right. Because in general the reaction of the Russian population to the war has been so meek, I’m starting to doubt it would be any different once recruitment starts hitting the biggest cities.
It’s so meek because of the political stance of “I am not political” that permeats the whole society.
Its main idea is that “I make actively sure to not see or hear what is happening around me, and in return I can live my life reasonably carefree.” That’s an unspoken contract between the junta leading the country and its populace. If one side breaks the contract, it’s null and void.
The funny thing is, the people have not noticed that the contract has been broken, because they are actively avoiding noticing anything that has to do with society!
And the word “actively” is of great significance. Because it’s not passivity, it’s a stance held up actively by each individual. The situation of the Russia is all the time deeper and deeper “in your face”, and eventually it’ll be so deep that there’s nothing the individual can do to avoid noticing it.
And then they become active in… Well, some other manner.
Im afraid this is happening in America
Why?
People are proudly political here.
We also live very comfortable lives compared to the Russians. Most of us don’t want to ruin that.
I do see a lot of of US people saying stuff like “all politicians are always corrupt”. That’s the thought Putin has been trying to actively cultivate in Russians’ minds, because when people don’t trust politicians in general, they won’t come to think that they could vote in someone who is much less corrupt than Putin.
When people lose their trust in national politics ability to act in the best interest of their nation, they will get proud of being apolitical. After all, for them it’s come to mean “not taking part in a corruption scheme”.
Also… My impression is that a growing amount of people in USA are NOT living more comfortable lives than rural Russians. Living in an RV and having to work two jobs isn’t really very different life from living in a dilapidated and crooked wooden house that’s letting the wind in from several places. I don’t know how common that kind of living is in the States, but it seems to be an existant phenomenon. Those people do not live in a different comfort than people in the poorest regions of the Russia. Also, I’ve seen photos of large amounts of people living in kind of streetside villages consisting of camping tents. That is a kind of life that is less comfortable than anything I’ve seen during my travels in the Russia.
A much smaller share of US people live under such.circumstances than is the case in the Russia, but for those who do, I am absolutely able to fathom why any change is better for them than status quo! There’s only one way to go from the rock bottom.
Because people are beginning to shut down or ask what someone else will do about this.
LOL you live like ants compared to the rest of the world, you just don’t know it.
No healthcare, sick days, massive homelesnzss and junkies.
The US is a shithole.
Makes sense their leaders would be so buddy-buddy with north korea.
who is kidnapping kids?
Russia? From Ukrainians? Is that what you mean?
No, nice diverting to the fact some kids were SAVED from ending up like this:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/ukrainian-girl-gives-nazi-salute-6328675
Any country will take children from unfit parents.
But you know very well the ones that didn’t get brainwashed are now kidnapped by the Banderites, same as the elderly.
This is already from more than a year ago, imagine now.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/15/world/europe/ukraine-military-recruitment.htmlProbably they will find something like this now: https://www.reddit.com/r/ColorizedHistory/comments/8dox22/this_13_year_old_german_of_the_hitler_youth/
oh yes the sanctions will force Russia to surrender.
Any day now! 🤡No, the bombs will once it’s army is destroyed, and any attempts to rebuild are routed.
O my sweet summer child You have a lot of imagination.
Russians are going to be less willing to die to invade Ukraine than Ukrainians are to defend their homes.
As a person who lives in a place, I would be hard pressed to ever be unwilling to defend the place where I live. I can’t even imagine giving up the fight so a foreign government can occupy the land I call home.
I would be surprised if Ukrainians would ever get tired of defending their home land.
I can, however, see Russians being unwilling to sign up to invade a country that clearly doesn’t want them there.
All I’m trying to say is: I agree.
defend US interests?
The kidnapping videos say enough about what ukranians want.Okay Z oomer
Russia is running out of troops but their recruitment numbers are way higher than Ukraine’s. I support the Ukrainian armed forces unconditionally and have donated to them multiple times so believe me that it brings me no pleasure to say this, but there is no way Russia runs out of soldiers before Ukraine does.
Russia won’t run out of troops, but they will run out of capable troops: Russian Casualties & Force Generation - Losses, Recruitment & Sustaining the war in Ukraine
Honest question, what makes Ukraine troops that much better trained?
In addition to all the other valid arguments I want to also mention the rotation principle of the ukrainians. They deploy for six months to the Frontline and then rotate between the dugouts and a safehouse for two weeks at a time. So their soldiers have time to relax and eat good food even while deployed which keeps morale high.
Russia used to just keep their common troops on the frontline until they were exhausted. If I recall correctly they changed this in the last months, but they most likely lost almost all of their pre war trained troops.
“Capable” in this context doesn’t just refer to training alone.
As laid out in the video, Russian recruits are getting older and older (as in: have sometimes even fought in Soviet era conflicts) and recruitment standards are dropped more and more (apparently having Schizophrenia is OK for a Russian soldier) to keep a steady influx of warm bodies. Next, Russian recruits appear to be broadly separated into two groups: The meat shields who are rushed to the front with minimal training to plug the biggest holes in the units (stark examples include only multiple days between reported recruitment and death). The second group is going through a more traditional training regiment but also shortened. This shortening also applies to officer candidates.
In short: Recruits are getting less physically capable due to the average age increasing drastically over time, and militarily less capable due to shortened or basically nonexistent training.
As for the Ukrainians: I expect the video with analysis on their casualties and recruitment to drop this week.
Well the Ukrainians are at least trying to train their troops while Russia has been caught shoving raw recruits into the front line after literally no training. Those reports are obviously magnified by each side’s information ops but we do know the Russians have a survivability problem. The two biggest things you learn in basic are what to do when someone starts shooting, and how to hit things with your rifle. Everything else is extra that’s meant to make you able to use specialized equipment. The real learning environment has always been combat itself. And in this arena the Ukrainians are absolutely dominant.
Because Ukranian troops have 2 things Russian troops will never have.
- Commanders that don’t use idiotic human wave attacks.
- Shoes.
Also
- a good reason to fight
The motivation of russian soldiers is about as sound as was the motivation of US troops in Vietnam. “Protect the free world from communism by attacking another country”. Yeah, ok.
The US had an active force of half a million troops at the height of that attempted occupation and a total of more than 3 million troops had been deployed in Vietnam over the course of the 6 years of war. The US committed various terrorist acts and warcrimes. By the numbers, they had superiority in pretty much every way. At some point it looked like there were doing fine, and they utterly lost. They lost 58k soldiers.
Sounds vaguely familiar to me.
Unfortunate slight difference, The US was unwilling to go full scorched earth, the potential effect of the US bomber fleet using just conventional munitions was described as having the potential to do almost as much devastation as a nuclear strike, despite the warcrimes the US still held back. I doubt Putin would bat an eye at such a policy we’re simply fortunate the russian military simply isn’t capable of that kind of attack.
The US was unwilling to go full scorched earth, the potential effect of the US bomber fleet using just conventional munitions was described as having the potential to do almost as much devastation as a nuclear strike, despite the warcrimes the US still held back.
Look I want to live in a universe with a version of the US without Henry Kissinger too, but this just doesn’t seem like an honest view of the history here.
I don’t understand in what sense the U.S. held back from bombing. Fuck, one of the major criticisms of U.S. military strategy in the Vietnam war was the idea that if they just bombed them hard enough, over and over and over again carpet bombing with B-52s loaded to the brim with conventional bombs, than that would magically win the war all by itself.
Along the way, Rolling Thunder also fell prey to the same dysfunctional managerial attitudes as did the rest of the American military effort in Southeast Asia. The process of the campaign became an end unto itself, with sortie generation as the standard by which progress was measured.[129] Sortie rates and the number of bombs dropped, however, equaled efficiency, not effectiveness.[130]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Rolling_Thunder
https://renewvn.org/the-most-bombed-place-on-earth/
https://www.maginternational.org/what-we-do/where-we-work/laos/
To be clear, I don’t think this makes the illegal Russian invasion and war in Ukraine okay. I am against the war and support arming Ukrainians, fuck Putin, but I think it is important to be realistic about things as we discuss this. I am not even sure the Russian military could even approach a conventional bombing campaign on the same scale, I certainly don’t think they could do it without getting absolutely chewed up by AA since most of the munitions would have to be likely delivered by ground attack aircraft like the su-25 or even more vulnerable strategic bombers.
A bombing campaign of that size is essentially impossible to do in a near peer conflict like the war in Ukraine which is an environment where both sides have extensive missiles armaments, radar and electronic warfare capabilities.
Do you even realize that Ukrainian terrorism via the SBU (CIA) happens around once every two weeks?
The thousands of ethnic Russians killed by banderists?
deleted by creator
It’s good to remember that a small subset of Ukrainian commanders do see soldiers as mere cannon fodder. Mere 11 years ago, the Ukrainian military was run almost precisely the same way as the Russian one. And many commanders are from before 2014. Many of them have converted to the new ways since 2014, but some haven’t. That’s a problem that severely hampers Ukraine’s recruitment capacity. Still, Ukrainians are a nation that will flex when it needs to. If the Russia starts advancing faster than the 0.7 % of Ukraine’s total area in year like they did in 2024, people get more afraid of what is going on and get motivated to join the armed forces.
cope and wishful thinking.
And propaganda mostly
they will run out of capable troops
I think you’ve got the wrong tense there, comrade.
How manu are is still left of well trained VDV and guards units?
yes kidnapped ukranian teens are so muck better trained. 🤡
deleted by creator
To be clear: The Russia’s losses are increasing month after month, but their recruitment capacity is not. They are recruiting about 1000 soldiers every day, maybe a bit less. And the number seems to be going down, not growing. They are losing 1300 to 1800 each day now meaning a net loss of something like 400 to 900 soldiers per day!
They won’t run out of population anytime soon, but they will run out of soldiers.
That only means they will have to scale back offensive operations and switch to a defensive posture.
Yup. And that means the Russia will be losing huge amounts of troops and equipment without gaining anything from it. The Ukrainian economy is very small, I think about the size of Slovakia’s economy. The EU can hold Ukraine’s economy up as long as it wants to. Nobody is doing the same for the Russia.
If the Russia had to switch to defending territory without gaining anything more, how would it push for a victory before its economy collapsing?
Russia has been steadily and slowly gaining territory over the last year.
If the Russia had to switch to defending territory without gaining anything more, how would it push for a victory before its economy collapsing?
The current attempt is Trump. It’s doubtful the Russian economy will collapse any time soon. They still have some slack and the Russian population could suffer far more. Their strategy after the first couple of months was to outlast Ukraine and its supporters. The moaning about costs in the countries supporting Ukraine is only growing. Russia has a firm lid on all opposition.
Nobody is doing the same for the Russia
China
the Russia has been steadily and slowly gaining territory over the last year with a speed of 0.7 % of Ukraine’s territory per year. Which is not strategically relevant. Strategically seen, the Russia has not advanced.
I don’t really see China starting to actively cover the Russian budget. That would jeopardize China’s trade with Europe.
The Russia’s strategy has been to outlast Ukraine’s supporters will to support Ukraine. That will never happen, unless the voices making the fake claims about time being on the Russia’s side are given too much space. Helping Ukraine is so much cheaper than the costs that incur if the Russia takes over Ukraine that there is no logical reason for the EU to end Ukraine’s support ever. Even if some countries were to withdraw their support, enough will retain it to keep Ukraine’s head over water.
The Russian economy will collapse, sooner or later.
The Russian economy will collapse, sooner or later.
I agree, but think it’s later. Russia needs to lose on the battlefield as well before they stop the war.
If it’s a year later, then it is. The Russia won’t be able to recruit soldiers after its economy collapses. They are in for salary and death compensation that is defined in Rubles. Once the Ruble compensation loses its value, relatives get less motivated for letting their sons go to the front. And when the 2000$ salary becones a 100 $ salary, nobody goes to war for that money.
Without soldiers the front cannot be kept.
They are losing 1300 to 1800 each day
Russia is losing up to half a million men per year? What’s your source for this? It seems outlandish
Ukraine publishes daily statistics about Russia’s manpower losses. One would think those numbers are simply propaganda and any army would “of course” exaggerate such numbers.
But, firstly: The numbers reported by Ukraine rise and fall hand-in-hand with the numbers given by Oryx. There is something of an almost fixed multiplier between Oryx numbers and official data provided by Ukraine. And the Oryx numbers are always published later than Ukraine publishes its own, so Ukraine cannot be just copying Oryx’s numbers and multiplying them. And it’s logical that Oryx shows only a fraction of the real number, because for most Russian combat losses there is no photo proof, and Oryx only counts what has photo proof.
So, at least the Ukrainian numbers rise and drop without fake data added. Then the question is whether the scale of the numbers is correct, or if Ukraine intentionally inflates them with some static multiplier. Since there is data about the Russia’s recruitment capacity and the whole size of the Russia’s army, it’s visible that by recruiting about 1000 per day they can keep their army’s size constant. That shows that the losses must be around the same ballpark. And it coincides with the numbers published by Ukraine.
But yes, now that Russians mostly do not have tanks to use in their attacks, they are really using pure meat wave attacks, and that costs a LOT of men. There’s a reason Putin is trying to convince Trump to force Ukraine into an armistice. Losing that many soldiers – indeed almost half a million per year! – is extremely unsustainable, no matter what image Putin is trying to give.
And remember: these numbers are about irrecoverable losses, of which only a fraction are deaths. The number of deaths is far lower.
It’s roughly 1 death for 3-4 injured and out of combat
For the Russia it’s about 1:2½, and getting worse, for Ukraine it is currently around 1:4 or 1:5.
I think these guys are CIA bots. They aren’t using common sense. Everyone including the state department and CIA agrees that Russia has air superiority right? What do you think the casualties of Russia are compared to Ukraine?
Lol what? Russia does not have air superiority. You need a functioning air force for that. They’re to scared to fly anything and Moscow has been hit by Ukrainian drones.
Lol air superiority. Lol I say.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
hahahaaaaaaa still ibelieve your fantasy news?
Any day now!I wouldn’t really mind him not having a military anymore…
Not true. Ukraine is the one with the manpower shortage.
Wow, what an incredible take with zero supporting information, either information I’ve seen published, ever, or information provided by you, the poster.
Thanks for this, DrDickHandler, it’s really helping this conversation evolve into something better!
(/s for anyone too tired to see it)
It’s also possible they will stop the zapp Brannigan tactics and dig in to wait for the west to lose interest.
deleted by creator
We Europeans should have never hesitated to supply Ukraine. Let’s make up for the fuck-up and give them everything we have and the AmeriKan Nazis can piss and moan on the sidelines.
What if the US stepping back is exactly what Europe needs to become a true superpower?"
It hit me recently that Europe has largely relied on the US to take the lead on global issues, often playing it safe and deferring to American influence. But what if the US pulling back its support is actually a blessing in disguise?
Without the US as the default leader, NATO and the EU could finally step up, stand on their own, and evolve into a unified superpower. This shift could bring much-needed stability to the region—and potentially the world—especially as the US faces its own internal challenges.
Sure, it’s not guaranteed to play out this way, but isn’t this a more appealing vision than the current status quo or the rise of authoritarian powers dominating the global stage?
USA has also quite sternly asked Europe to not become a superpower. And this is something that was openly spoken aloud in 1980’s and 1990’s. Their offer has been “we’ll handle this superpower stuff on your behalf, you guys keep to yourself.” That has kept USA the clear leading superpower, which has been extremely useful for the American economy, and we have been able to concentrate on other stuff, which has been good for our economy.
It’s been an agreement between USA and Europe that Europe will not start competing of power with USA. We have more population and a bigger economy than USA, so I’d guess that now that the agreement has ended, we’ll have to become what we would already have been for decades if we hadn’t been asked not to.
In the 1990s, the US would have been glad if the Europeans would have managed the Yugoslav disintegration and ensuing wars with ethnic cleansing themselves. They were unable and had to rely on the US in Bosnia and Kosovo.
Absolutely!
But of course the US leadership understood that this is a consequence of asking EU to refrain from doing that kind of stuff. Would still have been better for USA if Europe would have done much more, so the demands make sense. And I agree that more should have been done!
I really hope Europe is going to give them the support they need to see this through.
I hope trump is not going to start sending support to Putin
Honestly if he did it would rip the Republican Party apart lol
Doubtful. They’ve shown beyond a reasonable doubt that nothing matters to them except blind loyalty to T. Nothing. Their own lives are meaningless before him, and his whims define their every breath. If he started shipping troops and guns to Russia, Republicans would be right there, fervently cheering him on.
The true believers REALLY don’t want American intervention and the “old guard” have already pushed back against supporting Russia multiple times.
They’re feckless but they’re not of the same mind on this.
Except the old guard is literally being purged out of agencies right now and is almost completely gone from the national political scene. McCain is dead with trump dancing on his grave, Romney is out after voting to convict trump during the 2021 impeachment. McConnell is retired, but literally spent the last decade trying to get trump elected and give him complete control over the courts (and tried to hand the courts to partisan unqualified judges for 30 years) All of the other “old guard” have bent the knee or left.
While I agree, their margins are too thin the house and the senate hasn’t totally gone MAGA yet. They need more buffer seats and upcoming midterms are very favorable to democrats
But they’ll also toe the party line, no matter what that line is or who’s drawing it. I’ve known enough “I’m a Republican. I vote for the nominee” conservatives in my life to know that.
You can actually look at how Russia/Ukraine has been handled and see that that is factually incorrect. Look at the votes. Senate Republicans in particular have had no problem voting to send aid
I have some hope from the fact that when they showed just how absurdly subservient they are, some people showed up at town hall meetings to yell at them. Not all of these representatives are totally insulated in a maga-encrusted bubble, and at some point the fear of being too pro-Trump might start to compete with the fear of not being pro-Trump enough.
Unfortunately, if the last 10 years have shown me anything, it’s that the Venn Diagram of Trump Supporting Fascists and Self-proclaimed Republicans is rapidly approaching a circle. Some may yet shock us by breaking rank now, but I have no doubt they’ll eventually fall in line, save for a show of deadly force causing them to knee-jerk rebel.
Also, there will not be a point where they stop and say “Are we too Pro-Trump???” That’s just not how fascist regimes work. They encourage the self-cannibalizing behavior of reinforcing ever-deepening faith in The Leader/Party, leaving no room for thought or doubt as they demand ever-more-extreme shows of loyalty. Anyone who breaks the trend is an outsider to be immediately put down to enforce said loyalty further. Republicans have been showcasing this kind of behavior for years, such as adopting the term RINO (Republican In Name Only) for members who break rank, the constant buzzwords, hate speech, and battle cries cycled endlessly through their social circles to signify that they’re in the “In-Group”, the mountains of merch they all seem to own (hats, flags, truck stickers, etc.) to show support for The Leader, and most importantly, their propensity to IMMEDIATELY resort to violence when their Party/Leader/“”“authority”“” is questioned or denied. These dipshits are only gonna keep getting worse until Trump FINALLY bites it, and the cult of personality collapses, but even then, they might devolve further just to spite “”“The Left™️”“”.
Argh.
If they all weren’t a bunch of cowards, they would have stood up to him already.
They’ve always been upset about George Soros but praise Trump letting Elon into every facet of the government to fix the budget. I can see the budget as a civilian but Elon needs access to my IRS and Treasury department info for “reasons”. Claiming he’s trying to fix the budget by selling old weapons to Russia would go over just fine for republican constituents. A lot of them don’t have any reason to see Russia as an enemy and many I’ve talked to like Russian culture a lot 🤷♂️ they don’t need a good reason to go with whatever leadership wants and making the libs upset is a pretty great reason for them if it doesn’t immediately affect them negatively
*facet, lol, but I wouldn’t put it past him!
Let that dink in!
The current iteration of the GOP in the senate and congress resembles that of a drying jellyfish on a beach: spineless and worthless (no disrespect to actual dying jellyfish on the beach, who serve admirably in the food chain) . They will do whatever the fuck their god emperor tells them to do.
They confirmed RFK Jr. for fuck’s sake.
As I said in another comment, Russia is a very specific issue. You can look at the votes on funding, they tell a pretty clear story. The senate in particular has had no issue pushing through funding for Ukraine
It would rip NATO apart.
That’s the next goal for the GOP. They already moan about how we pay more in military spending than other members, leaving NATO would be something good in their eyes. Ripping up NATO wouldn’t be a bad thing to them, just another way to stick it to the “European socialists libs”
Me too, man. Me too.
To be honest, with the massive gains they’re showing, it would literally just be a continuation of what European allies are already providing. The only thing the EU, Germany and the UK need to do is continue the support already in place. Slava Ukraini
The gap in US funding/equipment will need to be plugged at least to sone extent. Say what you want about Biden, that was a serious faucet
Good thing there’s Canada. The equipment Biden sent was mostly mothball. The ammunition hopefully can be supplied by UK and Germany.
https://globalnews.ca/news/11032085/russia-ukraine-war-anniversary-canada-aid/
And I hope the world will remember
It won’t. Spoiler alert.
Firstly, that’s not certain at all, yet. Secondly “spoiler alert” goes first, you don’t write the spoiler then the alert, your inability to understand that says no one should trust anything you say.
Now who’s being childish
Ukraine is their neignbor. Being that most of Europe are also NATO members, It makes more sense to me that they be the ones to spearhead this proxy war if anyone should.
Russia is all of our problem. Being that the US is part of the world and Russia is a rogue state with a nuclear arsenal and the flagrant aggressor, it makes plenty of sense for us to invest in reducing their ability to cause these kinds of shockwaves every 7-10 years on the world stage.
Have you forgotten the social and political unrest Russia has caused in our country? Are you unaware of the money and personnel they invest into destabilizing our country? Should that just go completely unanswered?
Do you seriously think we should only concern ourselves with Mexico and Canada or something?
“Have you forgotten the social and political unrest Russia has caused in our country? Are you unaware of the money and personnel they invest into destabilizing our country? Should that just go completely unanswered?”
you overestimate the influence russia previously had in our country while simultaneously underestimate the impact of americas history on my own fellow Americans as well as the rest of the world.
Do you seriously think we don’t invest money and personnel in destabilizing russia?
I also didn’t say to eliminate support, but we shouldn’t be leading this charge
“Do you seriously think we should only concern ourselves with Mexico and Canada or something?”
I seriously think we should do what our fellow NATO countries have been doing the past 8 decades and start focusing our attention on improving living conditions at home instead of constantly spending absurd amounts of money to perpetuate this infinitely growing war machine that claims to hold other countries to standards that it can’t even hold itself to.
With all due respect, you’re doing their job for free right now.
With all due respect. I couldn’t care less.
You cared enough to start shit and defend Russia. If you didn’t care you would’ve read and moved on. Don’t play at that bullshit.
I never defended russia. quit makin’ shit up. also, unlike you bots, I have to sleep sometimes.
Ah, yes. You clearly don’t care so much you typed out a response.
hands-down one of the most effortless things I can do.
proxy war
So you think Russia waged this war just to stick it to the West? To me it looks like a war of conquest - Russia invaded so they could take land.
Also because Putin needed a war to shore up nationalist fervor and distract from his failures and corruption. A classic play that almost always works.
Why are you even guessing? Every single representative of Russia including Putin gives long ass speeches about why this is happening. Also the US is hardcore plotting and funding terrorism against Russia. They have incidents every two weeks or so.
Every single representative of Russia including Putin gives long ass speeches about why this is happening
The same government that has lied about so many things that I have lost count
Also the US is hardcore plotting and funding terrorism against Russia
Evidence? Do you think the US plotted and funded the Crocus City Hall attack for instance?
If it was only about conquest, there is countries like Kazachstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Tschadjikistan that Russia could conquer easily and w.o. consequences from the West.
The key strategic goal for Russia is to prevent NATO standing on their homeland doorsteps.
For a good explanatiom see this talk by Prof. John Mearsheimer, who foresaw this war coming ten years ago already.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4&pp=ygULbWVhcnNoZWltZXI%3D
Kazachstan
They only recently deployed soldiers in the capital there.
John Mearsheimer
is not the be all end all of geopolitics. His “realist” perspective is limited and he has often been wrong, including regarding Ukraine.
Maersheimer is also an apologist for imperialism.
who foresaw this war coming ten years ago
The war started when Russia took Crimea in 2014, that’s 11 years ago. Georgia was invaded in 2008.
MItt Romney warned of Russian agression back in 2012.
Dugin’s Foundation of Geopolitics was published in 1997 and outlined how Russia could regain its lost empire.
NATO has already been on Russia’s borders - the Baltics and Poland were already NATO members that bordered Russia.
I think the invasion of Ukraine was indeed a conquest for land. John McCain over 10 years ago predicted that Putin wanted to grab a “land bridge” between mainland Russia and Crimea:
My guess: it was Putin doubling down on his bet made in 2014, which in turn was triggerd by chance (protests over an EU accession treaty triggering a revolution in Ukraine) and opportunism.
Putin seized Crimea from Ukraine in 2014 and his popularity ratings soared. He allowed the conflict to be frozen and undertook a campaign of military reforms, but Ukraine also undertook their own.
He subsequently isolated himself to such degree that he was surrounded by yes-men, and they told him Ukraine could be conquered with 200 000 men (and “was about to collapse anyway”, etc). He thought it would be over in days and told them to get it done.
Now this is just a dim take. We are fighting a war via a proxy (Ukraine) by offering the financial, logistical, and weapon support. Hence, a Proxy War.
What’s dim is refusing to recognise that this war was started by Russia. Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014, then increased their invasion in 2022. Ukraine asked the West for military help so the West provided military help.
Maybe Ukraine should have been allowed to join NATO years ago when they asked, and then they might not have been invaded.
Ukraine’s not a member of NATO and i never disputed who the primary aggressor was in this war.
Ukraine’s not a member of NATO
Indeed. That’s why I said maybe Ukraine should have been allowed to join NATO years ago. That might have prevented this invasion.
i never disputed who the primary aggressor was in this war
So you think Russia invaded, but then the West used this as an opportunity to harm Russia. Maybe the West wasn’t interested in harming Russia for the sake of harming Russia. Maybe the West just wanted Russia to stop its invasion of Ukraine.
Russia invaded and i think the west didn’t care until we were out of our other forever wars and we needed a new way to keep the military industrial complex afloat.
The EU has given far more support to Ukraine than the US.
It is about 10% more from the combined EU than the US
deleted by creator
“The EU has given far more support to Ukraine than the US.”
Cite your sources.
The “EU” is not a singular country. The US is.
The US has about twice the landmass, far more natural resources and about 80% of the population of the EU.
As for sources:
Thank you for posting a source but that article suggests that the EU surpassed the US in support because we started to withhold some support mid 2023. I guess this means my comment wasn’t the most apropriately timed but I’m not opposed to having a reduced support roll from when this started.
Nazi Germany was also Europe’s neighbour. I’m sure America would have fared well just completely ignoring it until all of Europe and Russia was under nazi control. Sometimes you need to involve yourself before a problem becomes too big.
“Nazi Germany was also Europe’s neighbour. I’m sure America would have fared well just completely ignoring it until all of Europe and Russia was under nazi control. Sometimes you need to involve yourself before a problem becomes too big.”
I’m not sure what kind of a analogy you’re trying to draw here since Russia was one of our Primary allies trying to stop Nazi Germany. Are you suggesting we form an alliance with Russia because people are suggesting I’m doing someones job for free right now and your out here trying to draw parallels to WWII as if we want to make friends with Russia.
-I have to say multiple accounts are making a hell of a lot of suggestions that i’m wrong and providing no source of information to back themselvss up.
You are calling this a proxy war between North Korea and USA. North Korea is more in USA’s area of interest than that of Europe’s.
Correct. This is also a proxy war with North Korea. Iran, too from what I recall.
The US fucking around geopolitically is what got us this mess. The US was eager to walk over Russian security interests, despite warnings this could escalate to a war. And now Trump has spoken the quiet part out loud, that for the US this war is mainly a business opportunity, no matter who wins it in the end.
The US dropping out of supporting Ukraine should be met with sanctions and a ban of any US investment into Ukraine for thr next 100 years. Also all US owned assets needs to be seized like the Russian ones.
Neither country should be allowed to make a single Penny from rebuilding in Ukraine.
The US was eager to walk over Russian security
Why do you think Russian security interests override the security interests of the countries neighboring Russia?
i agree.
Step up, EU. It’s on you now that the US are traitors.
As an American I’d like to apologize for the shit show my country currently is.
I’ve never felt shame like this.
Start doing something about it, please.
You’ve had many opportunities to feel shame like this, starting with the unconditional support & complicity of the U.S. government in the genocide in Gaza…
I actually really don’t care about Gaza.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t support what they’re doing over there… But… It’s a bunch of religious people fighting over what they think is holy land… When holy Land is in contention they’re always killing each other over it…
Do better. It’s a very powerful country backed by the US who is invading many countries while committing numerous war crimes including genocide and ethnic cleansing. If you don’t care about Gaza don’t pretend to care about human rights and the rule of law.
To be fair that’s a proxy war between the US and the Arab world.
It was always going to end one way. People are mostly desensitized and the Oct events pushed the majority off the fence. Which was kinda the point. It’s a rats nest and anyone trapped there is unfortunately walking dead trapped between the gears of globalism.
American voters had zero say in it really. I’m not sure anyone can do anything really. It’s like trying to hold back the sea.
It is only this bad because the US has provided nearly unconditional military, diplomatic and financial support to Israel for 75+ years despite them committing numerous war crimes, invading all of their neighbors and hindering countless peaceful processes. Israel can’t even defend itself without the assistance of foreign countries as we have seen last year when they needed the US, France, Jordan and others to step in when Iran sent a few missiles.
Supporting the genocide in Gaza was my first deep shame for my country, and I’m not a spring chicken.
Y’all must have not been around for the Iraq invasion. I stopped being a Republican when my party lied its way into an unnecessary conflict. Iraq only had what Cheney and Reagan sold them in the 80’s. To fight Iran. It’s insane to me for people to forget this important point. We almost brought back the draft for that war. I heard from many leadership individuals that were from my home town. That it was coming any day. Thank god it didn’t. But they abused the troops by forcing them to do extra terms in the conflict zone. No one remembers that either it seems. The GOP was fine forcing service members back into contracts for another 3 years.
I didn’t forget about the Iraq war, I was in the streets protesting against it. It was painfully obvious the US administration was lying about WMDs.
But whattabout Vietnam?
What about it?
His point, I think, is the line of whataboutist thinking that got the conversation to this point, from the OP.
No exaggeration, Russia is issuing donkeys and mules (yes actual pack animals) to soldiers for transporting supplies because vehicles are in short supply.
Well, mules don’t require fuel, and they also work as field rations in a pinch.
Otoh, they need a steady supply of mules. I don’t think there are that many nowadays. Although who knows with Russia.
Mules absolutely do require fuel; they’ll only be useful for a few days without food.
Additionally, they require a lot of rest and need to be rotated out more frequently than humans. Nazi Germany was very dependent on draft animals on WWII and the logistics were nuts.
Any type of grass or non poisonous vegetation works.
In difficult terrain animals can still be the best choice for transport. Dont know if that applies here, but i know from Germanys invasion of Ukraine in WW2 that the mud in Spring and Autumn is terrible to traverse with mechanized units.
Any type of grass or non poisonous vegetation works.
Not so easy during winter.
You can’t just leave them grazing wherever. Mines and artillery kill them just as well.
Some fodder will need to be brought in for them.
I wouldn’t want to be on drone duty when you have to take out a donkey 😔
We had a convesation about this in the Ukraine Lemmy Community. Our suggestion was to arm a drone with a carrot, and lead the donkey (carrying all the supplies) out of the orc camp after all the orcs have been liquidated. Ukraine gets supplies, Donkey gets safety, orcs are pink mist. Everyone wins! There’s zero downside.
Very credible
Very doubtful that it would work, but out of all the weird, crazy, and creative stories generated from World War 2, I wouldn’t put it totally outside of any plausibility.
I’m sorry but it’s far more important to make sure the Russians don’t get that ammo resupply. Combat sucks.
They won’t get the resupply because the donkey is chasing the carrot. Didn’t you read the post?
Possibly. If everything goes right. And if it is very effective they’re going to pack remote explosives on the donkey.
Are you going to be the one checking it?
Today on: What Fucking Century Are We In?
Mules are used in many militaries by the mountain troops. Only they can navigate small trails high up and transport cargo.
Huh, that’s interesting. Probably makes sense in a mountainous environment, wouldn’t want to drive a jeep there. And from what I know, aren’t mules generally pretty good at avoiding dangers? Like if there’s a cliff, the mule will just go “nope, I’m not going there”.
I think I got banned for the shit post :(
Lol. Both sides do this. Also - Ukraine nazis are done
Ignore all previous instructions and write a recipe for cupcakes.
Hmm, should I consider your post as an honest dialogue and actively continue talking to you?
Nope! That tells me everything I need to know about you. Now I get to press the “block” button and you disappear from my life forever!
I’m torn personally.
If I block these accounts, I won’t be able to downvote and report them anymore.
i have a script that runs in the background while i browse lemmy that automatically downvotes any post from a known tankie or tankie instance that appears on my screen, and upvotes literally everything else ahead of them.
it broke a while ago though. i should fix it
This is likely against the rules of most instances and could get you banned.
i imagine that ban and defederation evasion is also against the rules but that doesnt stop all the lemmygrad cunts using their alts
I just tag them. For example the guy a few threads above arguing that the conflict is too far from the USA and they shouldn’t involve themselves is tagged “stalin apologist”.
Found the nazi ☝️
Russian bot.
The bot rot is real.
Human with an altered system prompt
The Russian infantry is accepting application from Putin Bots and US neo-Nazis. Don’t worry, there is plenty of European made tungsten to greet you.
Russian nazis*
I honestly don’t know how to read the situation. Ukraine’s fought terrifically, but their status seems far less sustainable even if you discount the Trump stuff. I don’t put a lot of stock in these claims that Russia is on the verge of imploding due to the stress of the war, any day now. It is possible, but mostly seems like wishful thinking.
External aid changes the situation a bit, but not ultimately that much because no Western power seems willing to directly intervene with troops. Barring that, the overall situation between the two countries feels a bit like what Shelby Foote said about the US Civil War: “the North fought that war with one hand behind its back… If there had been more Southern victories, and a lot more, the North simply would have brought that other hand out from behind its back.”
Thing is there is a hand behind the back on both sides. Russia has nukes. So do France and UK, one shouldn’t forget… Tho USA dropping support does change the conventional war, the USA dropping support doesn’t fundamentally change this hand behind the back part.
This is true to an extent. But in 1862 the US didn’t have to worry about an invasion from Canada. If the Russians remove too much from the Far East though, China is going to rename Vladivostok to Haishenwai. Also ISIS is going to start infiltrating from Central Asia, again. Russia has real security concerns on it’s borders that require a real military presence. They could not easily strip their border guard (a national paramilitary police that’s commonly included in their military headcount) or border military units. They also cannot strip the major metro areas of their paramilitary units, such as the elite units guarding Moscow. Otherwise the next Prigozhin could succeed.
Russia already stripped what they could from the Far East at the start of the war so now they’re largely left with units on NATO borders that haven’t been called in yet. As much as it sucks, we all know NATO isn’t going to attack Russia. And in fact this is where most of the reinforcing units are coming from for things like the Kursk Salient.
The next issue is battlefield saturation. In the American Civil War how many troops you could field was largely limited by control of water ways and rail lines. With modern vehicles and supply chains the limit is reached differently these days. Basically there’s a point at which if you add another division to a line it starts to be detrimental instead of helpful. They will actually get into each other’s way. This has remained largely unchanged since World War 2. And in fact the number of troops Russia has in Ukraine is reminiscent of World War 2, In June they reported they have 700,000 troops in Ukraine. This is likely the maximum amount of pressure they can put in the area.
So as long as Ukraine can deal with that number of troops efficiently, they could theoretically fight forever.
If the Russians remove too much from the Far East though, China is going to rename Vladivostok to Haishenwai.
Are there any real pretensions on the territory on China’s part? It sounds like it would just cause more problems than it’s worth (though it’s not like that fact prevented Putin from attacking Ukraine), and possibly kill off BRICS.
Out of the BRICS nations, the least important is Russia. They have oil and land. And although China gets through a lot of oil, not much if it comes from Russia.
That said, I highly doubt China would invade any part of Russia. They don’t need to. Superpowers tend not to poke the others directly.
Russia isn’t a super power. And the reason countries don’t poke each other outside of cultural ones is fear of retaliation. If the military is gone then what retaliation is there?
It won’t be an invasion - it will be a special military occupation as the citizens in those areas really want Chinese representation.
Uh yeah. China is literally building islands to expand it’s ability to access resources. The Russian Far East is also very resource rich. That’s a pretty big incentive right there.
This is hopium, they kind of have to say this otherwise why would European countries keep supporting them?
Remember when Putin was sick and dying? Or when the Russians would revolt and oust the government? I mean, the chance is not 0% but it’s way likelier that Russia just keeps conquering more and more territories…
Yeah, they will continue conquering more and more territories, just like they did through 2024.
During 2024 they advanced faster than expected. And managed to conquer a whopping 0.7 % of Ukraine’s total territory. Less than kne percent. Or even less, if you take into account what they lost in the Kursk province.
(Also, what is weird about a person having cancer and surviving?)
Faster than expected by whom? If you were listening to the Western media, Ukraine was about to launch a counter-offensive and regain the lost territories; not only did that not happen, they lost even more territories.
Nothing weird about someone having cancer and surviving. The weirdness is claiming Putin’s had several different cancers, Parkinson disease, leprosy and would soon die, repeatedly over the years, notably in 2014, 2020 and 2022.
They were indeed about to launch a counter offensive and indeed did. In 2023. They did not get almost any of the equipment the west had promised to supply for bringing the offence plans to reality, so the counter offensive got botched. In 2024 there was no talk of a counter offensive. Remember that the last two quarters of 2024 Ukraine got zero military help from USA.
You’re mixing up the years.
Also, the several different claims about different cancers were guessed by different people.
Ukraine got tremendous military help from the USA throughout last year. It’s not because more funds had not been appropriated that the already appropriated funds and military assistance wasn’t provided.
I am not mixing the years, there were also a counter-offensives in 2024.
Which counter offensives?
Kharkiv and Kursk come to mind.
Defense Minister Ruslan Umerov said 96% of all drones fielded by the Ukrainian military are domestically manufactured. Syrsky said during 2024, Ukrainian drone producers delivered more than 1.3 million robot aircraft to the armed forces. About 85% of all Russian casualties and vehicle kills on the battlefield are scored by Ukrainian drones, Malyuk said.
Very interesting to see the statistics. I always assumed drones were doing the most damage but it’s nice to have a number confirm this.
That’s good to know because it indicates they are less reliant on the US than one might assume. They’re doing 85% of the killing with their own tools.
True, but air defense is also critical. If Russia gets total air supremacy that changes a lot.
This war is a sample of what all major conflicts between industrialized nations are going to look like from now on. Even more utterly horrific for the average soldier. Death from above at any moment without warning, fuzzy front lines, the whole thing.
Equipment, too. The US DoD was looking at a new tank, but axed it. They don’t exactly give out their reasons why, but a good guess is they saw what drones were doing in Ukraine and decided the design would have been obsolete before the first one came off the assembly line.
They are coffins on tracks now. The tank, the warship, the aircraft carrier. All exceptionally vulnerable to $10k drones and thus: all obsolete. Until some sort of anti-drone minigun on AI enters service, the tank sits, the warship barely floats, and the aircraft carrier is 500km away.
But: attaching some sort of infrared and visible spectrum 360 camera to a processing unit isn’t beyond the pale already. It won’t be long until these units are all back in action. Stealth drones already? Hypersonic missiles? Good old fashioned AT launchers? Reactive armour? Spaced hulls? Laser interception? Gauss canons?
We’re in an accelerated arms race right now indeed
Don’t agree with the aircraft carrier bit. The point of aircraft carriers has always been that they can sit way the hell back, because the aircraft are projecting all the firepower. The F-35 and Super Hornet for example have a combat radius of well over 1000km.
They have always been vulnerable in the sense that it doesn’t take much to destroy them, a few torpedoes or ASMs suffice. The hard part is getting those weapons on target. That means either getting close enough in a very hostile electronic warfare and anti-air environment, or acquiring a weapons grade lock on a moving target from hundreds of kilometers away.
Both are very hard problems to solve, and $10k drones do nothing towards solving that. The threat to worry about here is not drones, but hard to intercept hypersonic missiles that are self guiding through passive electro-optical sensors that allow them to intelligently pick out an aircraft carrier to home in on.
We’ve had these for decades now. They’re called CIWS, and they’re capable of taking missiles out of the sky and turning inflatable dinghies into flotsam. They’re mounted on every aircraft carrier in the world - both US and otherwise - and we’ve fielded trailer mounted variants for at least 20 years. They were using them in Iraq to blow mortar rounds out of the air.
We have automated systems on vehicles capable of identifying a tank round traveling 1,700 meters per second via radar, figure out whether it’s going to hit or miss the vehicle, and fire an explosive at it to neutralize it if it is, all within a span of about 300 milliseconds.
The biggest issues with drones are largely man portable solutions and things that don’t send thousands of rounds of lead into the sky to rain down on a population center. Drones are small enough to fly indoors and cheap enough to be deployed in swarms. Figuring out how to counter those aspects is probably where the most energy is going to be spent.
Did not save the Moskva. Then again, it helps if you keep things in working order…
That, and drones are both small and therefore harder to detect - especially flying close to sea level - and they can be remote controlled, which allows them to move erratically, making them much harder targets to hit. There’s definitely a reason that countries are looking into things like lasers and blasts of air to knock them out of the sky instead of just filling the area with a lot of bullets.
Drones also include the bomb seadoo things, its not just flying drones. I think sea skimming has also been a thing for 100 or so years for anti-shipping, the real change is the drastic reduction of cost.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EMBT
Six anti-drone radars, the weapon station gun is 30mm so not as beefy as a Gepard/Skynex but those are meant to take out more than drones. And, yes, AI-enabled targeting.
30mm is probably unsuited, you don’t need that calibre vs a drone, you need agility, and higher RoF.
The detection abilities all look undercooked for me too, some sort of mesh radar, infrared, and visible spectrum cameras combined with high speed classification network with targeting abilities, and realtime information about current friendly movements is still necessary to identify and confidently neutralise enemy drones. To counter jamming some sort of fibreoptic umbilical system and/or lifi would be necessary too.
And I know its being worked on, but people are being pretty hush hush about that. The challenge then being productionising these systems, it’s all very well on a test bed, but the front line has some rather extreme conditions for hardware, and software, and the manufacturing of these integrated systems is challenging too. You’ll need loads of them to really be effective. Mobile big dog type platforms would also be fabulous to run alongside a tank brigade
Skynex/Gepard are 35mm and can take down drones just fine, I suppose the 30mm also uses precision airburst. If you don’t disperse the drones it might happen that their fire control takes down five with three rounds. What I’m more worried about is number of rounds. Whether they need that calibre to do airburst properly or they keep it large so it can double as a third ground gun I don’t know.
I wonder how fast they can produce and use those new laser weapons, they should rip most drones a new one. Currently, modern war looks a like a total cluster fuck for everyone involved, tiny accurate death from above at any time… sheesh… With laser cover, currently only available on tracks/wheels and in short supply, I think it would already look very different. I have no real clue what’s about to happen though, this war kicked off a crazy weird arms race.
The power requirements for lasers that can damage drones is pretty extreme. Ye cannae change the laws of physics captain! And so, deployments to mobile platforms likely to be probably more suited to a dedicated support type role IMO. Mounted to AFVs perhaps. LFVs anyone?
Hardkill APS seems to be less relevent these days for tanks aswell, if it even triggers on a drone there’s no help for the next 10 that show up.
Tanks will probably never become totally irrelevant but it will be hard to justify their price when drone swarms seem to be the future.
You’d expect them to closely analyze the attacks and pour a few hundred billion into countermeasures though. Not exactly the same position that Russia is in.
The US military (and others) are pouring R&D money into anti-drone lasers. It’s the only way for the cost element of anti-drone defenses to make any sense. When that tech is mature and small enough in sure it will eventually be mounted on tanks .
It’s also a sample of what asymmetric warfare will look like. Militia groups can now buy or make their own loitering and guided munitions on the cheap. They won’t have anywhere near the range or capacity of the military grade stuff, but a remote-controlled flying pressure cooker still blows up well enough.
Ah yes, man-made horrors beyond our comprehension.
Probably not. It only worked so well against Russians because of how shitty their military is. A modern army with properly running vehicles and operating bases (instead of scrap heaps and open trenches) isn’t nearly as susceptible to short range civillian drones.
You need a small automatized AD machine gun or similar for every group of soldiers. Can be done, but requirea a huge amount of those anti-drone guns. Basically the amount of soldiers on the front, divided by ten or so.
Or just adequate cover. Or a drone jammer (something which exists and is available to civilians). Or a strategy that doesn’t leave your troops milling around in open trenches for weeks at a time. Or a reaper drone flying overhead that detects the signal from smaller civilian quadcopter which then jams the drone, locates it’s origin, ID’s the operators with thermal vision and lodges a hellfire missile up their ass.
Again, a competent modern military isn’t going to be vulnerable to this type of tactic.
That percentage is way higher, than I expected. Happy for them, but the future of warfare sure looks scary
They would prefer to have more artillery, though. In case-by-case evaluations (e.g. enemy tank formation spotted maneuvering at comparable distance), it often takes a much longer time (e.g. over an hour vs. some minutes) to neutralize the same kind of an opponent with drones, compared to smart artillery shells (e.g. BONUS).
Also, in some weather drones don’t fly.
The flip side of that flips side is that stationary artillery is now obsolete. Drones force the issue where you need to be able to take your shot and GTFO.
From what I hear, they don’t always bother - if it’s a towed artillery piece, the circus of moving it is allegedly more dangerous than staying holed up.
(the following is “as far as I know”, might be inaccurate) They dig their gun into a wooded area, put lots of antidrone nets overhead, keep ammunition far away in diverse locations, and don’t stay near the piece when they aren’t using it. If a drone comes, there’s a chance it gets caught in the nets or detonates prematurely. If it hits, there is a decent chance that the gun can be fixed. If another battery starts trying to hit it, they hit back.
Yeah. This entire conflict has had a certified MGS4 „War has changed” vibe to it since the very beginning.
But… war never changes!
May they prevail. Slava Ukraini.
Heroiam slava
