|
Ukraine
Nov 21, 2023 11:39:23 GMT -5
Post by pacific on Nov 21, 2023 11:39:23 GMT -5
From what I have read Russia is repurposing much of its industry towards tanks, aircraft and artillery - really putting the country onto a total-war footing, and diverting a large proportion of their GBP towards this end. I have read of factory and business magnates being given these targets to hit with big rewards but also very dramatic punishments (I have read, potentially execution) if targets for production are not met.
Russia knows the longer this conflict extends the more it favours them. As the Western powers lose appetite (and like you say Haighus other conflicts take attention away - we know already that Russia had some involvement in Hamas' attacks on Israel, and I would not be at all surprised to find out that they were very significant) and the funding and weaponry transfers dry up, things will fall militarily in Russia's favour. We have the prospect of a Trump presidency in 2024, and if that happens then really you have to think that Ukraine is doomed; expect Russia to break out the election interference to hitherto unseen levels.
The only question is how much death, how much economic disruption the Russian people can endure. How many sons and daughters fail to return from the front. I have read that there are discursive groups within Russia and you have to hope that they can have some success (and really, CIA, if you are not supporting this then what the hell are you there for?) - Ukraine may live or die based on that in fact.
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Nov 21, 2023 12:06:37 GMT -5
Seems like the 'depose Putin' moment has mostly passed though. It feels very unlikely that domestic Russian opposition will seriously affect the outcome of the war at this point.
|
|
|
Post by easye on Nov 21, 2023 12:09:37 GMT -5
On top of that, Ukraine's biggest source of military aid may stop supplying much or all of its current commitment due to internal politics and in favour of helping Israel bomb Palestinian kids. .... and because of an internal political party that is funded by Russia in order to prevent that supplier from sending aid.
|
|
Haighus
Ye Olde King of OT
Posts: 902
|
Ukraine
Nov 22, 2023 11:38:49 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Haighus on Nov 22, 2023 11:38:49 GMT -5
From what I have read Russia is repurposing much of its industry towards tanks, aircraft and artillery - really putting the country onto a total-war footing, and diverting a large proportion of their GBP towards this end. I have read of factory and business magnates being given these targets to hit with big rewards but also very dramatic punishments (I have read, potentially execution) if targets for production are not met. Well, I think there are big questions over what Russia can produce in required numbers domestically. One thing the Ukraine war has shown is that old military vehicles die super easily against man-portable weaponry. So unless Russia is willing to suffer huge casualties of low-tech gear, they need to be able to produce the high-end stuff to make a difference. Ukraine, for their part, are quite deliberately targeting the high-end gear in their interdiction campaign. So there is a big question mark over whether Russia can produce what it needs to sustain its current combat efficacy without casualties increasing and capabilities dropping. IIRC that is particularly in regards to things like computer chips. I don't think Ukraine is doomed by a Trump presidency. For a start, they have shown great ability to adapt and learn from the war. However, their job gets much harder and their ability to maintain pressure on Russia drops significantly. Currently, Ukraine is exhibiting superiority in some areas, like artillery (particularly counterbattery artillery and long-range precision artillery). That would almost certainly be lost.
|
|
|
Ukraine
Nov 22, 2023 18:00:21 GMT -5
Post by A Town Called Malus on Nov 22, 2023 18:00:21 GMT -5
I have read of factory and business magnates being given these targets to hit with big rewards but also very dramatic punishments (I have read, potentially execution) if targets for production are not met. That worked out great under the 5 year plans of Stalin. It totally doesn't result in a lot of things existing on paper which you have a hard time finding in reality.
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Nov 22, 2023 18:24:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by pacific on Nov 23, 2023 6:27:51 GMT -5
I think they can also get some of the tech/chips from China and India? Who frustratingly seem to have no hesitation in continuing to trade with Russia. Was reading an article not long ago that stated China's air tech is now believed to have surpassed Russia's, and with there being so much crossover from their aeronautical industries that might be a way that they keep up production. They don't need 6th generation fighters capable of going toe-to-toe with an F22, just a basic capability to launch missiles or throw guided bombs from a distance. Haighus - on the issue of a Trump presidency, if you look at just how much money and materials support is coming into Ukraine the US is by far the biggest donor in that area. We have to assume that this will stop almost immediately if Trump became President again, and worst of all it will usher in a new wave of popularist/demagogue leaders in Europe and elsewhere, as well as others that are emboldened to not support Ukraine - so I think we would see support from Europe and elsewhere drop too. This would certainly stop any of Ukraine's advances (they are already struggling for artillery munitions) and I think it's very possible, coupled with Russia's change to a war-footing, that the tide of war will start to reverse. Knowing this, at best Ukraine might try to push for some sort of negotiation or cease fire that will no doubt involve ceding more areas of their territory.
|
|
Haighus
Ye Olde King of OT
Posts: 902
|
Post by Haighus on Nov 23, 2023 6:55:35 GMT -5
I'm not convinced that Russia is unaffected in the way they state. Firstly, the articles are understandably light on detail- this is all based on reports from intelligence services that will be carefully crafted to achieve a particular aim. For example, they talk about microchips like they are homogenous. However, I doubt a microchip suited to a washing machine has the capability needed for an SU-57. It probably is fine for a suicide drone though. Secondly, I thought this line was relevant: "Manufacturing costs are also much lower in Russia than in the West as the country churns out low-quality equipment." Russia is producing more than prior to the escalation of the invasion, but that is hardly surprising. However I very much get the impression they are focusing on cheap, lower tech gear and are not keeping up with equipment losses of high-end stuff. This does make a difference- for example, the quantities of inaccurate artillery required to achieve the same fire-effect as accurate artillery is increasing logistic strain and reducing Russian artillery efficacy. Russian commanders have been complaining about this. Russia is deploying modernised T62s rather than rolling out T90s and T14s. I don't think they would do that if they didn't have to. Russia does have significant manufacturing capacity, but I don't get the impression a long war favours them in this regard either. As it stands, they are still producing much less than they need for high-intensity operations. One of the articles mentions 2 million shells being produced when 10 million are being fired.
|
|
Haighus
Ye Olde King of OT
Posts: 902
|
Post by Haighus on Nov 23, 2023 6:58:10 GMT -5
I think they can also get some of the tech/chips from China and India? Who frustratingly seem to have no hesitation in continuing to trade with Russia. Was reading an article not long ago that stated China's air tech is now believed to have surpassed Russia's, and with there being so much crossover from their aeronautical industries that might be a way that they keep up production. They don't need 6th generation fighters capable of going toe-to-toe with an F22, just a basic capability to launch missiles or throw guided bombs from a distance. Haighus - on the issue of a Trump presidency, if you look at just how much money and materials support is coming into Ukraine the US is by far the biggest donor in that area. We have to assume that this will stop almost immediately if Trump became President again, and worst of all it will usher in a new wave of popularist/demagogue leaders in Europe and elsewhere, as well as others that are emboldened to not support Ukraine - so I think we would see support from Europe and elsewhere drop too. This would certainly stop any of Ukraine's advances (they are already struggling for artillery munitions) and I think it's very possible, coupled with Russia's change to a war-footing, that the tide of war will start to reverse. Knowing this, at best Ukraine might try to push for some sort of negotiation or cease fire that will no doubt involve ceding more areas of their territory. Yes, a Trump presidency would be terrible for Ukraine, no disagreement there. However, I don't think it would be catastrophic for Ukraine's survival. It would probably scupper their chances of reclaiming lost territory though. Even without much of the Western support, I can't envisage Russia having enough strength to cross the Dniepr again, for example. Not without a prolonged ceasefire to rebuild capacity.
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Nov 23, 2023 12:03:56 GMT -5
I'm not convinced that Russia is unaffected in the way they state. Firstly, the articles are understandably light on detail- this is all based on reports from intelligence services that will be carefully crafted to achieve a particular aim. For example, they talk about microchips like they are homogenous. However, I doubt a microchip suited to a washing machine has the capability needed for an SU-57. It probably is fine for a suicide drone though. Secondly, I thought this line was relevant: "Manufacturing costs are also much lower in Russia than in the West as the country churns out low-quality equipment." Russia is producing more than prior to the escalation of the invasion, but that is hardly surprising. However I very much get the impression they are focusing on cheap, lower tech gear and are not keeping up with equipment losses of high-end stuff. This does make a difference- for example, the quantities of inaccurate artillery required to achieve the same fire-effect as accurate artillery is increasing logistic strain and reducing Russian artillery efficacy. Russian commanders have been complaining about this. Russia is deploying modernised T62s rather than rolling out T90s and T14s. I don't think they would do that if they didn't have to. Russia does have significant manufacturing capacity, but I don't get the impression a long war favours them in this regard either. As it stands, they are still producing much less than they need for high-intensity operations. One of the articles mentions 2 million shells being produced when 10 million are being fired. Sure, but the argument can go both ways, you can't believe that there has been a 50% increase in consumer goods (chip) demand with the current economic malaise in Russia. Those chips are ending up somewhere. They might not get everything they need for weapons production, but they're getting enough to keep up to an extent. As for the low end gear, sure, this is also all true. The problem arises when the US stops supplying Ukraine. Ukraine can't do this alone, shit equipment is still better than no equipment. Now the issue of manufacturing is not yet pressing, but US support is drying up due to Republican opposition. The West already produces less, e.g. Europe only produces about 15% of the amount of Russian shells if you exlude the US. When does quantity become a quality of its own? What happens if a significant part of that (US) production also stops reaching Ukraine? Here is another (earlier) source about chips: www.nytimes.com/2023/04/18/business/economy/us-russia-chips-sanctions.htmlwww.cnn.com/2023/09/17/europe/ukraine-shell-supplies-intl/index.html
|
|
|
Ukraine
Nov 23, 2023 12:12:51 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Disciple of Fate on Nov 23, 2023 12:12:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
Ukraine
Dec 15, 2023 2:42:58 GMT -5
Post by redchimera on Dec 15, 2023 2:42:58 GMT -5
And while the EU tries to make up the difference, Putin’s poodle in the block does as he’s told.
|
|
|
Ukraine
Jan 2, 2024 13:57:43 GMT -5
Post by easye on Jan 2, 2024 13:57:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Ukraine
Jan 15, 2024 5:22:42 GMT -5
Post by pacific on Jan 15, 2024 5:22:42 GMT -5
It's incredible how much focus from world media has moved away from Ukraine and to Israel/Gaza (was that part of the intent of Iran/Russia and their links with Hamas?)
Quite worrying to read of the Russia/North Korea links and delegation trips taking place. My understanding is that North Korea has the largest artillery force in the world - most of it aimed at Seoul, but a question of how much of that and ammunition that could get moved to Russia's western border in time. And also the implications for what Russia would need to trade for that and NK's ballistic weapon program, which could have a further destabilising effect on the Korean peninsula.
Finally (catching up on this thread as it has been a while!) Trumps comments on NATO and the role of the US in that organisation. I think it's pretty hard to argue against, should Trump get a second term, the severe weakening of that organisation if the US steps back. Which will lead to a further emboldening of Russia.
|
|
|
Post by redchimera on Jan 15, 2024 6:37:07 GMT -5
It’s pretty clear that Trump’s claim of solving Ukraine on Day One is to simply abandon them. The idea that the whole Gaza/Houthi/Iran thing is just a distraction is tempting. I only hope that moderate Republicans can get a hold of their party, but that probably relies on Donny keeling over.
|
|