If true, then this is Patriot's second confirmed success in the entire war so far after it achieved its first success against an undefended IL-76 carrying Ukrainian PoWs to the front for a prisoner exchange.
Forgot about that one. That makes a total of four confirmed hits. Two NATO fighters in 2003. Not bad for a 50 year old system. Sometime around 2075 the system should be getting around a 5% interception rate for both friend or foe.
That crew can now claim the 15m Ruble prize money Russia was offering, no? Maybe the f16 was trying to flee to Russia at the first opportunity and shot down to prevent it from getting away.
Thank you Simplicius, for fearless distribution of truth. How long before such nonsensical western talking points about wunderweapons are given up on and the media begins bragging about smuggling 5kg pyrodex shipments to terrorists in the failed state?
Pyrodex is a "propellant" designed for use in obsolete weapons and compounded solely to escape the shipping restrictions on traditional black powder in USA.
Pyrodex is:
More corrosive than black powder.
Less ignitable than BP.
Has a lower pressure exponent at fairly low chamber pressures followed by a much higher peak pressure and higher specific impulse/volume, so when users exceed the nominal pressure range of BP arms, leading to "just a little bit more" blowing up the average somewhat crappy front stuffer.
All but one of the disadvantages of BP and that disadvantage is SHIPPING/regulatory related, not physical use related.
Worse behaviors re: corrosion, ignition (useless as a "first fire" prime), useless as an ordnance expeller charge, fuse core & all the other present civil/military pyrotechnic roles of BP), nastier behavior in "traditional weapons" under relatively slight overpressure/overload conditions than BP yet marketed to a BP user demographic apt to charge by VOLUME rather than by WEIGHT.
Pyrodex is a bad solution to a regulatory imposed "problem".
I don't have an ignorant opinion here, you apparently do if you like this abortion of a compromise.
Friendly fire does happen. But a US Patriot taking out its own F-16 is about as Three Stooges comedy as it gets. You can't make these things up. My advice for NATO is to stay out of Ukraine unless it has a collective death wish.
Jimmy, Chicago DJ Steve Dahl agrees with you. Chicago hadn't seen this much excitement since the Dem convention, 1968. You may be familiar with Disco Demolition? (link)
My wife and I moved to Miami shortly after marrying in '78. 85 degree, feverish nights, Colombian drug gangs and machine gun shootouts at shopping malls. Bolivian marching powder, ambient. Disco was the soundtrack for Miami in those halcyon days. In love and with minimal responsibilities. Tooling down US 1 in a ragtop VW.
Not clearly seeing how software decades behind for missile systems decades behind would at all benefit RAF? Confirmation of incompetencey? Slightly slimmer detection profiles? Doubtful it would be emission profiles unknown in 2024. But there could well be other reasons..
Having a man on the inside could be of huge advantage, worth paying a lot for. He might start with passing on old codes and specs but once he crosses the line you've got him.
Personnel operating NATO fighters with IFF do not have access to any programming codes. Everything is hard-coded. Any mistake in the form of using the wrong code could be very costly.
There is no perfect security system. Any code can be cracked, any signal can be jammed or spoofed, any lock can be picked. 9 times out of 10 the week point will be human.
It is rumored Israel attacked Syria from Jordan-Iraq direction with F-15i using USAF IFF codes. Does that sound reasonable? Behaviorally its definitely Israeli modus but not sure about the technical feasibility?
I think there is a very important point here. Not so much that IFF codes could be sold (although it is a possibility). Rather it is that NATO personnel must be involved in operating them, and at a high level too.
Not only is training people to use such systems in combat in only a few months totally implausible, it's also that there is a huge security risk in granting foreigners, even friendly ones, total access to them.
This is one reason why you never give your allies your absolute best stuff.
There are gradations, partner, ally, friend, associate. But let's not play semantic games, there's Red team and Blue team members of various shades and some independents.
Ukraine (or the Kiev regime if you prefer) is allied with the Atlanticists not the Eurasianists.
I don't know why, but seeing "Atlanticists" and "Eurasianists" made something click in my brain about the nature of this power struggle we are living through right now.
Yep. The PATRIOT systems are loaded with gear that the US army doesn't want them there Ruskies getting ahold of. And at over a billion bucks a system there is no way in hell that the Pentagon is going to sign off on giving the corrupt, untrained Banderan army "independent" systems.
Not really true. Ukraine got F-16s after the MLU update as they were. Nobody took out anything out of them.
And... They use the same IFF system as MiG-29AS Ukraine got earlier from Slovakia (tho I'm not sure if it's not in fact an older system in those F-16s). Who integrated that system into those MiGs? RSK MiG themselves. There's nothing unknown to Russians about these systems. There isn't any magic technology inside of them, it's pretty straightforward and the hardware itself isn't really any sensitive technology.
Agreed. I wonder how many Western politicians/public know that a good chunk of all arms supplied by the West end up in the hands of nefarious arms dealers around the world. Then along come these idiotic politicians, headed by Petr Pavel, who, oh so willingly, with taxpayer funded money, buy them back at 10 x their value.
It is interesting that when Leopard tanks were first destroyed in Ukraine that Germany went out of their way to convince everyone that these were not "German" tanks, they were Ukrainian tanks and they were being used autonomously by Ukraine.
Therefore I think the fact that Ukraine still needs to ask permission to use what are effectively "their own" long range weapons supplied by NATO against Russian targets in Russia, confirms it is actually NATO that is operating these weapons systems remotely.
At best, NATO/US is supplying targeting information from their intelligence and reconnaissance systems fed directly to the computers in these weapons systems. At worst, NATO operators also pull the trigger.
Therefore what Ukraine is actually asking is for NATO to fire on Russia... and Russia of course knows this. I suppose when it happens there will be intense discussion as to how much involvement the principal needs to have in a war by their proxy to actually constitute an act of war by the principal.
And if NATO does fire on Russia, Russia has essentially threatened to bring the fight to the continental USSA. "the US will not escape WW3", Lavrov... Chip
The most probable scenario, one that is about five years from now, takes shape of burning and glowing NATO forward bases around Russia's western border and an ultimatum that strategic missiles are primed and ready in case someone moves an inch towards invoking 5th article or any other type of response. Followed by disbandment of NATO as we know it.
We are in the midst of a banking collapse. The Fed has managed to delay it. Which means more banks will fail in a narrower time frame.
If you made the wild and crazy claim that Japan, Israel NATO and the EU have managed to defeat themselves militarily, economically and diplomatically I would not disagree.
I think the myth of the undefeatable armies of the West has collapsed, and now we see that they are woefully prepared for any sort of actual combat.
Where as Russia has sharpened its swords on this Ukraine conflict and is "in the mode" and China is young and hungry militarily, and both are allies.
I see a large scale disaster in the US as becoming necessary, for political and financial reasons, hence the "nuke" theory.
In the same way they moved with the 9/11 "attack" they will have to turn up the volume to get the plebs scared.
Meanwhile all the illegal military aged men that strolled across the border are taking over blocks in the US, soon towns, and if they allow them into the army then the USA's own military will become the enemy.
The Russians do not want to destroy all civilian infrastructure as it will be too costly to restore such services after the war. The Russians probably believe that they can still make progress without taking such measures. Remember - the Russians are in no hurry - they have said so many times.
As for no-fly zones, that is not yet possible as Russia does not yet control the entirety of Ukrainian skies. The F-16s are likely being used out of range of Russian anti-air forces and only utilised for defensive measures like shooting down missiles and drones.
Re the F16s. There could be another reason for only flying as a defensive measure. As pointed out by Simplicius, AND known by just about every thinking person, learning to fly modern (ish, in the F16's case) jets cannot be done in a few days, like in WWII when pilots were able to learn on-the-job in the case of the Battle of Britain. (and, for new pilots there was a high attrition rate)
To learn to fly modern aircraft takes months. THEN, additional training is required before they become competent. THEN, more training is required before being combat capable. Flying in a "defensive" role would give new pilots some on-the-job training in relative safety....
A railway "hub" would be in essence a large railway station and as such impossible to destroy with the odd missile, with which you might target at most specific items such as electric substations and the likes.
Tunnels are likewise impossible to destroy, you might collapse a small section at the entrance but that can be patched.
Bridges can be dropped but there is quite a bit of nuance in that.
Marcello, John Helmer has written extensively on this and explained that electric locomotives are required to haul the largemilitary trains so the electric war will stop rail movements but apparently civilian inconvenience would be too high at this point so softly softly slowly gently we go forward gradually and cautiously observant of the population at large being paramount.
Even then you could get some traffic going by diesel locomotives, procure some additional ones, albeit not quickly or easily and perhaps jury rig something: I remember the swiss juryrigging some steam locos to run the boilers on electricity during WW2, perhaps one might set up generator cars.
You would have air raid alarms, lookouts and at least some air defense which would allow reaching shelter at least some of the time. Besides constant missile barrages are unfeasible especially for the high end types. Not saying that would be pretty, it was not for one of my relatives, but it was done.
I doubt railheads would be particular vulnerable, probably a lot of available industrial sidings for dispersal too. The transloading at the break of gauge could take place in NATO territory or be protected from there.
Even taking air raid sirens, etc.. into account, repair work would be frustrated. And it's not as if campaigns against rail supply have not been successfully conducted in the past.
For that matter, had Russia used a relentless SEAD campaign at the outset, it wouldn't even be necessary to use standoff weapons.
As I said, not enough missiles to really do that job. German, italian, japanese and korean railways were kept working to an extent despite massive bombings.
The USAF never managed to kill chinese logistics in Korea for example and not for lack of trying.
In Normandy the allies were more succesful IIRC but that cut both ways...
Those words "to an extent" are doing a lot of work.
Keep in mind that the power and accuracy of bombing has only gone up since WWII and the Korean War. Not to mention the fact that Ukraine has a lot of rivers.
Could the us civil war, a vying for power within the same bloodline families as all wars, not ended at glendale if wars exist as what we're told? Earthly goverments have been corrupt since the beginning, look for righteous populations, not their rulers, to judge the end victors.
1. Ukraine is huge, much larger than the ranges of the missiles Russia can use to interdict air.
1b. *EVERYBODY* including visiting NATO dignitaries use the train to/from Poland, where they catch the plane... just in case Russia DOES care enough.
2. Russia is "Boiling the frog". SLOWLY degrading the infrastructure prevents NATO from finding an excuse to do the ONE thing it can do that will actually hurt Russia, which is to perform a One Time, All In airstrike against RUSSIAN infrastructure.
2b. Russia WILL, one way or another, repossess those railways; so why break something and then pay to fix it later?
Slowly destroying the infrastructure grinds down the morale and will to fight of the defenders. Many people in this age of instant gratificcation can endure suffering for a while, few can do it for extended periods. As this Russian water torture sets in, the hardcore fighters will lambaste the less dedicated for not fighting harder and putting an end to their torment, which will either result in those who are less obvious about their allegiances being forced to show their true colors, or in them being killed because the zealots cannot abide anyone who isn't struggling like them. Either way, Russia's aim is to rip any potential insurgents out by the roots, and prolonging the war also gives them more time to do it.
Electric war will stop electric locomotives necessary for big loads, diesel locos are for branch line work only, this leaves network intact for future reconstruction purposes yet it seems civilians predicament is paramount at this point anyway.
Careful asking these questions here buddy, the “trust the plan” idiots who are fed on a daily dose of Russia can do no wrong, will accuse you of working for the cia or being a ukie shill.
In short, there are a number of legitimate questions about how this war has been run by Moscow. Maybe after everything is said and done we will get a few answers. Until then I'd read between the lines of any statements made by either the official West or official Moscow.
This is an avowedly panick alert comment blazoned 'designed in house' which needs careful analysis before it will pass muster with all but the most naive of natives
'Legitimate questions' is a giveaway - as if there are illegitimate
Warnings couched friendly slang but is anything but - textbook again
This language from another zone, the careful and banal anonimity of the double christian name, the 'Moscow' slant yet last gasp pretense neutrality......mmmm.. by the letter
Simple question. Russia had almost 3 years to beef up it's border regions. How did the authorities of Kursk, not to mention the military command, mess up so that a force of 10k soldiers invaded sovereign Russian land?
Yea, another walker pretending that keeping his head in the sand will save him. And you can go back to navel gazing since you literally have zero to add to a discussion.
The constant 'Russia is weak! Putin is weak!' is tiring. Everyone makes mistakes, but answer me this, how is the West losing on all fronts, militarily, economically, diplomatically, and guys like you and others are only criticizing Russia and Putin? Putin is neither a superhero nor a supervillain. Ukraine is huge. Of course Russia could carpet bomb Ukraine, like the West did with a couple of countries like Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. But did the end result of those endeavors make those countries vassal states to the US/West? Nope, people in those countries really hate the US/West. So if the results are more positive for Russia and the US/West is losing constantly on all of those fronts, tell me why Russia should shift its efforts dramatically?
I don't know who wrote Russia is weak. Did you see me write that simple sentence? What I'm saying is that Russian red lines are not respected. The West takes Russian red lines as bluffs. And since Russia doesn't react the collective West believes Russia is weaker than it actually is. Perhaps it is Moscow's plan to no react to the West. But having a discussion about this topic doesn't make one a doomer, troll, or Ukie shill.
Simplicius reposted this X post from Chamberlain's Ghost, and should quote it in full in one of his main essays, so that EVERYONE gets it. The Russian Way.
Here it is: (h/t to Simplicius)
There's this narrative at the moment that Russia - or indeed Putin - has no red lines. Indeed, I read that one of Zelensky's reasons for the Kursk invasion is to prove that there are no such red lines and that Ukraine should be relieved of all Western constraints in carrying out strikes against Russia.
It's a very dangerous and foolish line of thinking. The evidence that Russia has red lines and will act on them is right before your eyes. It's called the Russo-Ukraine war.
Putin for years signaled to the West that interference in Ukraine was a matter of significant concern to Russia. William Burns, now the head of the CIA, referred to NATO enlargement in Ukraine as being 'the brightest of red lines'. Nobody paid attention because nobody believed Russia would do anything about it. In fact, outside of the US administration, nobody in Europe, including Zelensky himself, believed that Russia would do anything. They simply didn't believe that there was a red line or that it had been crossed. Not even on the very eve of the invasion. Nor, I remind you, did the Russians say they were going to invade. They simply did it when they decided to do it. That was when everyone discovered that, indeed, a red line had been crossed.
It's true that the Russians have raised concerns and 'red lines' about various things in this war and then done nothing out of the usual. But that's also how Putin behaved for many years after his speech at the Munich Security Conference in February 2007, when everyone sniggered at the concerns he raised. What you're seeing now is consistent with this pattern of Russian behavior - they do nothing until they decide to do something and it's only then that everyone finds out the red line has indeed finally been crossed. It's really very Russian. Be forewarned.
Non reactive adjustments short term and re conception modification of long term plans are appropriate
Not to use an overdone simily this is to do with absorbing the blows and observing how they are made
Besides one of the RF priorities is to provoke NATO not only to use up all it's armour, it is use up it's newest and best armour, precisely in order to be able to study this to overcome this
Every so called NATO escalation plays into the RF game plan
We need to defend Moscow, ok let's do that
We need to prepare for bio? ok...
Meanwhile BRICS SCO and co have the time make their plans
Meanwhile the AA and Iran degrade and divert US Navy capabilities away from China
Meanwhile the RF has a free hand developing the Arctic, and the North South trade routes
Meanwhile Africa is swinging behind RF, Sahel and Libya precisely
Well you implied it with your sentence "Careful asking these questions here buddy, the “trust the plan” idiots who are fed on a daily dose of Russia can do no wrong, will accuse you of working for the cia or being a ukie shill." I would say.
I wouldn't say Russia's red lines were all ignored, some of them for sure were tested by the West, but not all of them. But this is not a Poker game between Russia and the US alone. Even Russia and the US have multiple strategy lines within their upper echelons I would suppose. Putin is in contrast to the Western defamation not a dictator who decides on merely a whim in which direction Russia goes.
In the end this is a multifaceted strategy game, geopolitics always is, with a couple of hundred thousand players. With central figures like Putin, Lavrov, the Russian general staff, Russias security agencies, important Duma members. As is the US with Nuland, Blinken, Sullivan, countless NGOs and Think Tanks, Pentagon, CIA, important Senators and Parliament members. And of course many oligarchs in the West, in Russia I doubt they play an important role.
So there are waves of testing the waters I would suppose, testing those red lines, if Russia is only bluffing. And then there is clearly some red lines the West doesn't plan to go over, like declaring war on Russia or letting Ukraine into NATO, we will see. This is a permanent shifting operation. And I repeat, till now, Russia is beating the living crap out of the West, militarily, economically, diplomatically. Does Russia make mistakes, for sure, plenty of them, but at least they don't make those retarded shit mistakes like our corrupt overlords, thats how I see it.
What I am saying is that Nato is going to keep testing Russian red lines. And that at some point Russia has to either put up or shut up. The political West does not respect Russia. And contrary to what people here may want to think, there are still Russian elites who would love to work with the West again. Slowly but surely the tide is turning and the hawks in Russia are gaining ground. Anyway, thanks for your informed reply. It is refreshing to see someone answer a question without the typical hysterics or fanboyism that is all too common here.
If you were educated in long range strategic planning things would make much more sense. You are so focused on the trees you fail to see the forest.
Your first mistake is believing that this is about the conquest of ukraine. It is NOT. If you'd zoom way out and examine the big picture you might figure out what's really happening right before your eyes.
I think Simplicius has answered most of these questions in the past mate.
The Russians can't enforce a no-fly zone without shooting down NATO planes. Too escalatory as it will force NATO to retaliate.
There is an agreement on both sides not to go after the enemy leadership.
Railways are easy to repair and also easy to monitor. Everything that arrives by rail can be tracked from the rail hubs.
I think the reason that the Russians are trying to avoid escalation is because they know they're winning and don't want to push the Yanks into doing something stupid
Russia also probably has back channel deals with the US to squash the allowance of deep strikes in Russia. Would the Russian troops moral be high AF with all this progress?
I disagree: there's loads of daily updates from various channels and they get a lot wrong because of haste. What I like about Simplicius is that he does a comprehensive analysis and that is worth waiting for. He already has a phenomenal work-rate and I would not like the quality to deteriorate in favour of quantity.
That’s valid point. What Simplicius does is mixture of news aggregation and analysis. The news aggregation part is nice to have and to some point fundamental to substantiate the analysis. Yet the part requiring wisdom and critical thinking, the analytical part, it’s the unique thing we obtain here and almost nowhere else. Therefore it’s better to wait a few days for great analysis and well founded prognosis than obtain data aggregation we may find elsewhere.
Three a week. IMO, it would be better for the Ukies to trade space for time since they're so weak, so the choice to continue despite all odds is clearly political. Once beyond the belt of settlements, there's little to slow the Russian advance. This could turn into something akin to the rush for the Rhine.
Reminds me of the Russian retreat from Kharkov. The difference is that Russia had a huge industrial engine backing them while the Ukrops were too busy making Crimea beach party videos.
First!
Only a determined mind gets to be first. It's getting competitive. lol
Yes, like 2 small children fighting over a toy.
They are called gamma males. The secret kings.
bawls
Ha!
Crushing out the updates! Loving it
Give the crew of that Patriot battery a medal!
Seemingly unrelated but an insight nevertheless I wish to share. "Mirroring the Past: The West’s Accelerating Descent into Tyranny"
https://trygvewighdal.substack.com/p/mirroring-the-past-the-wests-accelerating
These assholes stole the reward for the first downed F-16. Russian mortgage matter!
If true, then this is Patriot's second confirmed success in the entire war so far after it achieved its first success against an undefended IL-76 carrying Ukrainian PoWs to the front for a prisoner exchange.
They really are killing nazis!
Forgot about that one. That makes a total of four confirmed hits. Two NATO fighters in 2003. Not bad for a 50 year old system. Sometime around 2075 the system should be getting around a 5% interception rate for both friend or foe.
That crew can now claim the 15m Ruble prize money Russia was offering, no? Maybe the f16 was trying to flee to Russia at the first opportunity and shot down to prevent it from getting away.
Hahaha...
Well done, Simpliticus.
Simplicius loves you, my child. All hail Simplicius!
5th only 😢
Edit: great update, thanks Thinker. AsiatTimes also features a great breakdown..
https://asiatimes.com/2024/08/ukraine-loses-its-first-f-16/
At last a report on the F16s
Touted for years coming to a screen near you- now we can view, the results start coming in
Much like the US Navy was revealed as let's say not useful when applied against a modern enemy in the Red Sea
Thank you thank you thank you
Next Up The War in the Arctic Circle
Another much appreciated piece, Simplicius76 — full of probing detail and presented so concisely. Thank you.
So not very glorious demise. Scrambling to get in the air and poof.
I could see where ground troops would resent all the fuss afforded to pilots.
Thank you Simplicius, for fearless distribution of truth. How long before such nonsensical western talking points about wunderweapons are given up on and the media begins bragging about smuggling 5kg pyrodex shipments to terrorists in the failed state?
@Sutton
Pyrodex? That's a fairly worthless propellant. Why would a terrorist even want it?
Worthless??? That's an extremely ignorant opnion.
Pyrodex is a "propellant" designed for use in obsolete weapons and compounded solely to escape the shipping restrictions on traditional black powder in USA.
Pyrodex is:
More corrosive than black powder.
Less ignitable than BP.
Has a lower pressure exponent at fairly low chamber pressures followed by a much higher peak pressure and higher specific impulse/volume, so when users exceed the nominal pressure range of BP arms, leading to "just a little bit more" blowing up the average somewhat crappy front stuffer.
All but one of the disadvantages of BP and that disadvantage is SHIPPING/regulatory related, not physical use related.
Worse behaviors re: corrosion, ignition (useless as a "first fire" prime), useless as an ordnance expeller charge, fuse core & all the other present civil/military pyrotechnic roles of BP), nastier behavior in "traditional weapons" under relatively slight overpressure/overload conditions than BP yet marketed to a BP user demographic apt to charge by VOLUME rather than by WEIGHT.
Pyrodex is a bad solution to a regulatory imposed "problem".
I don't have an ignorant opinion here, you apparently do if you like this abortion of a compromise.
Friendly fire does happen. But a US Patriot taking out its own F-16 is about as Three Stooges comedy as it gets. You can't make these things up. My advice for NATO is to stay out of Ukraine unless it has a collective death wish.
NATO is spinning me right round, baby round round. https://youtu.be/PGNiXGX2nLU
"it had a good beat...was easy to dance to-I give it an 85"
Note to self-check prices for disco balls on Amazon this morning...
Disco was a very early sign that The Empire was slowly descending into ignorance, greed, and stupidity.
Jimmy, Chicago DJ Steve Dahl agrees with you. Chicago hadn't seen this much excitement since the Dem convention, 1968. You may be familiar with Disco Demolition? (link)
My wife and I moved to Miami shortly after marrying in '78. 85 degree, feverish nights, Colombian drug gangs and machine gun shootouts at shopping malls. Bolivian marching powder, ambient. Disco was the soundtrack for Miami in those halcyon days. In love and with minimal responsibilities. Tooling down US 1 in a ragtop VW.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWCRu-yVEFU
Christ how I miss my twenties... Netflix production, "Griselda" captures a bit of the craziness of those times. (link)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcF0A-Gy-Ng
I had a disco sucks t-shirt.
with the dsco faded out. lol
no. I still have it, actually.
Say hello to my little friend. (Scarface) I never saw "Griselda". Thanks for putting it out there.
Who could forget such timeless classics like “disco duck” and “shake shake shake your booty”. Ah, those were the days.
Better than today, in many ways.
If Simplicus and others are to be believed, Russia has shot down multiple aircraft through friendly fire.
Back to your tomb dead troll
Haha, I think I head-banged to that. Also, great analogy to what the West has become.
It was likely the Kinzal and getting hit before take off. The "glorious battle" pilot was just propaganda.
You do not understand. Ukrainians DID NOT receive IFF systems for Patriot and F-16.
It is too high risk they would sell it to Russia or China.
Not clearly seeing how software decades behind for missile systems decades behind would at all benefit RAF? Confirmation of incompetencey? Slightly slimmer detection profiles? Doubtful it would be emission profiles unknown in 2024. But there could well be other reasons..
What any RAF has to do with Ukrainian F-16?
Having a man on the inside could be of huge advantage, worth paying a lot for. He might start with passing on old codes and specs but once he crosses the line you've got him.
Personnel operating NATO fighters with IFF do not have access to any programming codes. Everything is hard-coded. Any mistake in the form of using the wrong code could be very costly.
There is no perfect security system. Any code can be cracked, any signal can be jammed or spoofed, any lock can be picked. 9 times out of 10 the week point will be human.
It is rumored Israel attacked Syria from Jordan-Iraq direction with F-15i using USAF IFF codes. Does that sound reasonable? Behaviorally its definitely Israeli modus but not sure about the technical feasibility?
I think there is a very important point here. Not so much that IFF codes could be sold (although it is a possibility). Rather it is that NATO personnel must be involved in operating them, and at a high level too.
Not only is training people to use such systems in combat in only a few months totally implausible, it's also that there is a huge security risk in granting foreigners, even friendly ones, total access to them.
This is one reason why you never give your allies your absolute best stuff.
Ukraine IS NOT is not a NATO ally.
There are gradations, partner, ally, friend, associate. But let's not play semantic games, there's Red team and Blue team members of various shades and some independents.
Ukraine (or the Kiev regime if you prefer) is allied with the Atlanticists not the Eurasianists.
"Proxy" works
Slave state, dumpster fire, the Haiti of Europe.
I don't know why, but seeing "Atlanticists" and "Eurasianists" made something click in my brain about the nature of this power struggle we are living through right now.
This is the Achaeans vs. Trojans of our time.
Yep. The PATRIOT systems are loaded with gear that the US army doesn't want them there Ruskies getting ahold of. And at over a billion bucks a system there is no way in hell that the Pentagon is going to sign off on giving the corrupt, untrained Banderan army "independent" systems.
Not really true. Ukraine got F-16s after the MLU update as they were. Nobody took out anything out of them.
And... They use the same IFF system as MiG-29AS Ukraine got earlier from Slovakia (tho I'm not sure if it's not in fact an older system in those F-16s). Who integrated that system into those MiGs? RSK MiG themselves. There's nothing unknown to Russians about these systems. There isn't any magic technology inside of them, it's pretty straightforward and the hardware itself isn't really any sensitive technology.
Agreed. I wonder how many Western politicians/public know that a good chunk of all arms supplied by the West end up in the hands of nefarious arms dealers around the world. Then along come these idiotic politicians, headed by Petr Pavel, who, oh so willingly, with taxpayer funded money, buy them back at 10 x their value.
Just fill the sky with missiles and IFF no longer matters when you have no pilots up.
It is interesting that when Leopard tanks were first destroyed in Ukraine that Germany went out of their way to convince everyone that these were not "German" tanks, they were Ukrainian tanks and they were being used autonomously by Ukraine.
Therefore I think the fact that Ukraine still needs to ask permission to use what are effectively "their own" long range weapons supplied by NATO against Russian targets in Russia, confirms it is actually NATO that is operating these weapons systems remotely.
At best, NATO/US is supplying targeting information from their intelligence and reconnaissance systems fed directly to the computers in these weapons systems. At worst, NATO operators also pull the trigger.
Therefore what Ukraine is actually asking is for NATO to fire on Russia... and Russia of course knows this. I suppose when it happens there will be intense discussion as to how much involvement the principal needs to have in a war by their proxy to actually constitute an act of war by the principal.
Good point! And the first comment on the topic with any valuable arguments.
Those ”first” comment should be shot out of the sky.
And if NATO does fire on Russia, Russia has essentially threatened to bring the fight to the continental USSA. "the US will not escape WW3", Lavrov... Chip
The most probable scenario, one that is about five years from now, takes shape of burning and glowing NATO forward bases around Russia's western border and an ultimatum that strategic missiles are primed and ready in case someone moves an inch towards invoking 5th article or any other type of response. Followed by disbandment of NATO as we know it.
New York will get smoked one way or another...
One can hope ...
Hopefully Los Angeles as well.
Which is why I posted the other day the nukes are already here in the US, or shortly away off the coast.
Something very big is coming for the USA soon, either economically, financially, or outright war.
We are in the midst of a banking collapse. The Fed has managed to delay it. Which means more banks will fail in a narrower time frame.
If you made the wild and crazy claim that Japan, Israel NATO and the EU have managed to defeat themselves militarily, economically and diplomatically I would not disagree.
I think the myth of the undefeatable armies of the West has collapsed, and now we see that they are woefully prepared for any sort of actual combat.
Where as Russia has sharpened its swords on this Ukraine conflict and is "in the mode" and China is young and hungry militarily, and both are allies.
I see a large scale disaster in the US as becoming necessary, for political and financial reasons, hence the "nuke" theory.
In the same way they moved with the 9/11 "attack" they will have to turn up the volume to get the plebs scared.
Meanwhile all the illegal military aged men that strolled across the border are taking over blocks in the US, soon towns, and if they allow them into the army then the USA's own military will become the enemy.
I live in interesting times.
What's going on in Aurora Colorado is the tell. Going to start happening all over the USSA and we will be just like Mexico... Chip
People need to roll up on those gangsters, clean up the problem them selves.
Before it gets much bigger.
Agree 100%... Chip
I don't understand how some essential measures were never taken by Russia:
1. Why is there no No-Fly Zone in place over Ukraine? Is Russia unable to enforce it?
How can Russia tolerate Zelenkstein & Cronies fly in and out to NATO countries to meet their leadership and vice versa?
2. Why not has Russia destroyed every single railway between Ukraine and its neighbors? Hubs, bridges and tunnels.
I understand the non-escalatory principle, to not lose global support and trade.
I understand the principles of war of attrition, to destroy man and material while minimizing its own losses.
But those do NOT interfere more with the above measures. And in no way more, than bombing the entire power grid and extending the war to 2½ +x year.
It's simply inconceivable!
I know! Impossible! A wonder no one else picks up this!
To think that the RF army and government does not know what it is doing!!!
When here in NATO land we are so used to efficient and capable governance that is 100% effective
Extraordinary these foreign types!
It costs millions to send one missiles to destroy some railway tracks. It costs $10k and three days work to fix the railway track.... Do the maths.mm
"Hubs, bridges and tunnels"
These are not restored within days and five figure costs.
The Russians do not want to destroy all civilian infrastructure as it will be too costly to restore such services after the war. The Russians probably believe that they can still make progress without taking such measures. Remember - the Russians are in no hurry - they have said so many times.
As for no-fly zones, that is not yet possible as Russia does not yet control the entirety of Ukrainian skies. The F-16s are likely being used out of range of Russian anti-air forces and only utilised for defensive measures like shooting down missiles and drones.
Re the F16s. There could be another reason for only flying as a defensive measure. As pointed out by Simplicius, AND known by just about every thinking person, learning to fly modern (ish, in the F16's case) jets cannot be done in a few days, like in WWII when pilots were able to learn on-the-job in the case of the Battle of Britain. (and, for new pilots there was a high attrition rate)
To learn to fly modern aircraft takes months. THEN, additional training is required before they become competent. THEN, more training is required before being combat capable. Flying in a "defensive" role would give new pilots some on-the-job training in relative safety....
The USSR had so such qualms during WWII. For that matter, they also were not overly concerned with infrastructure during the Second Chechen War.
So what
Different theatres. Different contexts.
The USSR hasn't existed for over 30 years so what exactly is your point meathead.
A railway "hub" would be in essence a large railway station and as such impossible to destroy with the odd missile, with which you might target at most specific items such as electric substations and the likes.
Tunnels are likewise impossible to destroy, you might collapse a small section at the entrance but that can be patched.
Bridges can be dropped but there is quite a bit of nuance in that.
Marcello, John Helmer has written extensively on this and explained that electric locomotives are required to haul the largemilitary trains so the electric war will stop rail movements but apparently civilian inconvenience would be too high at this point so softly softly slowly gently we go forward gradually and cautiously observant of the population at large being paramount.
Even then you could get some traffic going by diesel locomotives, procure some additional ones, albeit not quickly or easily and perhaps jury rig something: I remember the swiss juryrigging some steam locos to run the boilers on electricity during WW2, perhaps one might set up generator cars.
Double-tap the repair crews. Any survivors will continually be hearing incoming missiles.
Bridges and transloadsing facilities, of course, are not so easy to repair.
Gosh y gosh how well informed
You would have air raid alarms, lookouts and at least some air defense which would allow reaching shelter at least some of the time. Besides constant missile barrages are unfeasible especially for the high end types. Not saying that would be pretty, it was not for one of my relatives, but it was done.
I doubt railheads would be particular vulnerable, probably a lot of available industrial sidings for dispersal too. The transloading at the break of gauge could take place in NATO territory or be protected from there.
Even taking air raid sirens, etc.. into account, repair work would be frustrated. And it's not as if campaigns against rail supply have not been successfully conducted in the past.
For that matter, had Russia used a relentless SEAD campaign at the outset, it wouldn't even be necessary to use standoff weapons.
As I said, not enough missiles to really do that job. German, italian, japanese and korean railways were kept working to an extent despite massive bombings.
The USAF never managed to kill chinese logistics in Korea for example and not for lack of trying.
In Normandy the allies were more succesful IIRC but that cut both ways...
Those words "to an extent" are doing a lot of work.
Keep in mind that the power and accuracy of bombing has only gone up since WWII and the Korean War. Not to mention the fact that Ukraine has a lot of rivers.
Had your mom been pro abortion we wouldn't have to listen to your stupid ass.
You should head on over and show them dumb old russkies how's it done. I'll help pay for your plane ticket if you leave today.
Could the us civil war, a vying for power within the same bloodline families as all wars, not ended at glendale if wars exist as what we're told? Earthly goverments have been corrupt since the beginning, look for righteous populations, not their rulers, to judge the end victors.
Viktor has an good answer.
1. Ukraine is huge, much larger than the ranges of the missiles Russia can use to interdict air.
1b. *EVERYBODY* including visiting NATO dignitaries use the train to/from Poland, where they catch the plane... just in case Russia DOES care enough.
2. Russia is "Boiling the frog". SLOWLY degrading the infrastructure prevents NATO from finding an excuse to do the ONE thing it can do that will actually hurt Russia, which is to perform a One Time, All In airstrike against RUSSIAN infrastructure.
2b. Russia WILL, one way or another, repossess those railways; so why break something and then pay to fix it later?
Slowly destroying the infrastructure grinds down the morale and will to fight of the defenders. Many people in this age of instant gratificcation can endure suffering for a while, few can do it for extended periods. As this Russian water torture sets in, the hardcore fighters will lambaste the less dedicated for not fighting harder and putting an end to their torment, which will either result in those who are less obvious about their allegiances being forced to show their true colors, or in them being killed because the zealots cannot abide anyone who isn't struggling like them. Either way, Russia's aim is to rip any potential insurgents out by the roots, and prolonging the war also gives them more time to do it.
Electric war will stop electric locomotives necessary for big loads, diesel locos are for branch line work only, this leaves network intact for future reconstruction purposes yet it seems civilians predicament is paramount at this point anyway.
You could still use diesel locomotives even on trunk lines, but with reduced number of cargo wagons
Who will supply those?
John Helmer's thoughts on this very thing were instructive. He also can not understand the reluctance.
Helmer is good on some things, but he's also a determined Idonotunderstander
Not so hard to figure out but he can not
There's such a thing as a dumb brit, even at one remove
Careful asking these questions here buddy, the “trust the plan” idiots who are fed on a daily dose of Russia can do no wrong, will accuse you of working for the cia or being a ukie shill.
In short, there are a number of legitimate questions about how this war has been run by Moscow. Maybe after everything is said and done we will get a few answers. Until then I'd read between the lines of any statements made by either the official West or official Moscow.
This is an avowedly panick alert comment blazoned 'designed in house' which needs careful analysis before it will pass muster with all but the most naive of natives
'Legitimate questions' is a giveaway - as if there are illegitimate
Warnings couched friendly slang but is anything but - textbook again
This language from another zone, the careful and banal anonimity of the double christian name, the 'Moscow' slant yet last gasp pretense neutrality......mmmm.. by the letter
...how to say nothing while trying too hard
Simple question. Russia had almost 3 years to beef up it's border regions. How did the authorities of Kursk, not to mention the military command, mess up so that a force of 10k soldiers invaded sovereign Russian land?
The simple answer is that it did-perhaps you do not know that: Geopolitics 101 must have been part of your induction
No one is going to give you a simple answer - to your fake simple question
You can try to work this out, yourself - if you can not no one will help, you'll be de inducted
Or you can read S and others and come to a partial but perhaps adequate explanation
Or perhaps not - war is like that, increases some visibles, decreases more
Now that you are through asking faux naive questions - go back to your work, if indeed pretending ignorance is not your full time occupation
Yea, another walker pretending that keeping his head in the sand will save him. And you can go back to navel gazing since you literally have zero to add to a discussion.
This is your first day on the job and you’re frustrated – they told you it’d be like shooting fish, but you’re getting nowhere
They didn’t tell you that you won’t like the answers you get, didn't they tell you that in Spooky 101, no they did not
So, it’s back to the basement for you, bongo boy, better luck next time
Free advice – try somewhere far away from here
The constant 'Russia is weak! Putin is weak!' is tiring. Everyone makes mistakes, but answer me this, how is the West losing on all fronts, militarily, economically, diplomatically, and guys like you and others are only criticizing Russia and Putin? Putin is neither a superhero nor a supervillain. Ukraine is huge. Of course Russia could carpet bomb Ukraine, like the West did with a couple of countries like Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. But did the end result of those endeavors make those countries vassal states to the US/West? Nope, people in those countries really hate the US/West. So if the results are more positive for Russia and the US/West is losing constantly on all of those fronts, tell me why Russia should shift its efforts dramatically?
I don't know who wrote Russia is weak. Did you see me write that simple sentence? What I'm saying is that Russian red lines are not respected. The West takes Russian red lines as bluffs. And since Russia doesn't react the collective West believes Russia is weaker than it actually is. Perhaps it is Moscow's plan to no react to the West. But having a discussion about this topic doesn't make one a doomer, troll, or Ukie shill.
Simplicius reposted this X post from Chamberlain's Ghost, and should quote it in full in one of his main essays, so that EVERYONE gets it. The Russian Way.
Here it is: (h/t to Simplicius)
There's this narrative at the moment that Russia - or indeed Putin - has no red lines. Indeed, I read that one of Zelensky's reasons for the Kursk invasion is to prove that there are no such red lines and that Ukraine should be relieved of all Western constraints in carrying out strikes against Russia.
It's a very dangerous and foolish line of thinking. The evidence that Russia has red lines and will act on them is right before your eyes. It's called the Russo-Ukraine war.
Putin for years signaled to the West that interference in Ukraine was a matter of significant concern to Russia. William Burns, now the head of the CIA, referred to NATO enlargement in Ukraine as being 'the brightest of red lines'. Nobody paid attention because nobody believed Russia would do anything about it. In fact, outside of the US administration, nobody in Europe, including Zelensky himself, believed that Russia would do anything. They simply didn't believe that there was a red line or that it had been crossed. Not even on the very eve of the invasion. Nor, I remind you, did the Russians say they were going to invade. They simply did it when they decided to do it. That was when everyone discovered that, indeed, a red line had been crossed.
It's true that the Russians have raised concerns and 'red lines' about various things in this war and then done nothing out of the usual. But that's also how Putin behaved for many years after his speech at the Munich Security Conference in February 2007, when everyone sniggered at the concerns he raised. What you're seeing now is consistent with this pattern of Russian behavior - they do nothing until they decide to do something and it's only then that everyone finds out the red line has indeed finally been crossed. It's really very Russian. Be forewarned.
Non reactive adjustments short term and re conception modification of long term plans are appropriate
Not to use an overdone simily this is to do with absorbing the blows and observing how they are made
Besides one of the RF priorities is to provoke NATO not only to use up all it's armour, it is use up it's newest and best armour, precisely in order to be able to study this to overcome this
Every so called NATO escalation plays into the RF game plan
We need to defend Moscow, ok let's do that
We need to prepare for bio? ok...
Meanwhile BRICS SCO and co have the time make their plans
Meanwhile the AA and Iran degrade and divert US Navy capabilities away from China
Meanwhile the RF has a free hand developing the Arctic, and the North South trade routes
Meanwhile Africa is swinging behind RF, Sahel and Libya precisely
Well you implied it with your sentence "Careful asking these questions here buddy, the “trust the plan” idiots who are fed on a daily dose of Russia can do no wrong, will accuse you of working for the cia or being a ukie shill." I would say.
I wouldn't say Russia's red lines were all ignored, some of them for sure were tested by the West, but not all of them. But this is not a Poker game between Russia and the US alone. Even Russia and the US have multiple strategy lines within their upper echelons I would suppose. Putin is in contrast to the Western defamation not a dictator who decides on merely a whim in which direction Russia goes.
In the end this is a multifaceted strategy game, geopolitics always is, with a couple of hundred thousand players. With central figures like Putin, Lavrov, the Russian general staff, Russias security agencies, important Duma members. As is the US with Nuland, Blinken, Sullivan, countless NGOs and Think Tanks, Pentagon, CIA, important Senators and Parliament members. And of course many oligarchs in the West, in Russia I doubt they play an important role.
So there are waves of testing the waters I would suppose, testing those red lines, if Russia is only bluffing. And then there is clearly some red lines the West doesn't plan to go over, like declaring war on Russia or letting Ukraine into NATO, we will see. This is a permanent shifting operation. And I repeat, till now, Russia is beating the living crap out of the West, militarily, economically, diplomatically. Does Russia make mistakes, for sure, plenty of them, but at least they don't make those retarded shit mistakes like our corrupt overlords, thats how I see it.
What I am saying is that Nato is going to keep testing Russian red lines. And that at some point Russia has to either put up or shut up. The political West does not respect Russia. And contrary to what people here may want to think, there are still Russian elites who would love to work with the West again. Slowly but surely the tide is turning and the hawks in Russia are gaining ground. Anyway, thanks for your informed reply. It is refreshing to see someone answer a question without the typical hysterics or fanboyism that is all too common here.
If you were educated in long range strategic planning things would make much more sense. You are so focused on the trees you fail to see the forest.
Your first mistake is believing that this is about the conquest of ukraine. It is NOT. If you'd zoom way out and examine the big picture you might figure out what's really happening right before your eyes.
I think Simplicius has answered most of these questions in the past mate.
The Russians can't enforce a no-fly zone without shooting down NATO planes. Too escalatory as it will force NATO to retaliate.
There is an agreement on both sides not to go after the enemy leadership.
Railways are easy to repair and also easy to monitor. Everything that arrives by rail can be tracked from the rail hubs.
I think the reason that the Russians are trying to avoid escalation is because they know they're winning and don't want to push the Yanks into doing something stupid
Ask China what it thinks, Russia has to keep them appeased.
It's pretty clear that you understand nothing. If you did understand you wouldn't need to ask those questions. Your CONCERN is noted.
Russia also probably has back channel deals with the US to squash the allowance of deep strikes in Russia. Would the Russian troops moral be high AF with all this progress?
I honestly do not think this is true. You're giving American elites way too much credit.
When the narrative shifts as it has now towards something, that means the US has either already allowed it or is on the brink of allowing it.
Tell me, when has the US every said no, particularly when the narrative shifts as it does now?
We see this song and dance at every escalation.
We can basically say that Ukraine has US assent, it just a matter of formalities. Expect missile strikes deep into Russia in the coming weeks/months.
Now that things get interesting, a daily digest would be awesome!
I disagree: there's loads of daily updates from various channels and they get a lot wrong because of haste. What I like about Simplicius is that he does a comprehensive analysis and that is worth waiting for. He already has a phenomenal work-rate and I would not like the quality to deteriorate in favour of quantity.
That’s valid point. What Simplicius does is mixture of news aggregation and analysis. The news aggregation part is nice to have and to some point fundamental to substantiate the analysis. Yet the part requiring wisdom and critical thinking, the analytical part, it’s the unique thing we obtain here and almost nowhere else. Therefore it’s better to wait a few days for great analysis and well founded prognosis than obtain data aggregation we may find elsewhere.
"Yet the part requiring wisdom and critical thinking, the analytical part, it’s the unique thing we obtain here and almost nowhere else."
The only online additional analysis that is this informative (that I, as a retired guy, has time to follow):
https://sonar21.com/
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=judging+freedom+andrew+napolitano
https://theduran.locals.com/newsfeed
Of course most of you already know of these sites but this info might have some value for new people to the Simplicius product. Cheers.
Sad, isn't it? Forty or 50 years ago, you could occasionally find it in "mainstream" press.
Three a week. IMO, it would be better for the Ukies to trade space for time since they're so weak, so the choice to continue despite all odds is clearly political. Once beyond the belt of settlements, there's little to slow the Russian advance. This could turn into something akin to the rush for the Rhine.
Reminds me of the Russian retreat from Kharkov. The difference is that Russia had a huge industrial engine backing them while the Ukrops were too busy making Crimea beach party videos.