Let’s start with the biggest news of the last few days, the murder of Maxim Fomin, aka Vladlen Tatarsky in a St. Petersburg, Russia café bomb blast. Though it is a self-evidently tragic event, I will not spend much time on covering it for the simple fact that, to be quite frank, it has no real military relevance, and its significance is already being wildly overblown and used by the infamous 2D Bloggers, Doomers, 5th and 6th Columnists, etc., as another in a long series of ‘signs’ that Russia is collapsing, that Putin has lost the plot, etc—which was, quite frankly, the intended effect of the perpetrators of the crime.
the usaf and usn tactical aviation is "on the ropes" per gao.
older f-16, f-18 and a-10 are flying far longer than planned because f-35 is in trouble!
gao studied this problem: GAO-23-106375 Tactical Aircraft Investments
see table 1 the f-16 average age is 31 years, and f-35 is not listed as replacing it (more later)
per table 1 GAO-23-106217 Weapon System Sustainment for fiscal years 2011 to 2021 f16 never met its mission capability "goals".
why send an airplane that cannot deliver sorties?
the issue with usaf/usn tactical aviation is aging, harder and more expensive to operate aircraft kept in service longer because f-35 needs a new engine that does not overheat trying to do assigned missions.
i doubt elensky's advisors read gao, much less understand logistics, logistics is why nato tanks cannot go to the front, too many diverse needs!
and the nato tanks are deficient in reactive armor per a article linksed by naked capital yesterday.
The USA/NATO is restricting weapons to Ukraine because they know the Russians will destroy them in volume and the USA will be utterly humilated (even moreso than it already is!) on the world stage. The Russians have been holding back most of their destruction force capacity waiting to see when/if NATO esclates by entering the conflict very directly. Contrary to what some simpleton posters with English user names may think, the Russians have been clear what the objectives of the SMO are from Day 1. Russians are playing it smart with the current war of artrition and they will likely move more dynamically with the mobilized and unused reserves once Ukraine commits itself to its "offensives" . The Ukrainaians will shoot their wad, after which they will be road graded into oblivion, or when their masters come to thir senses. You can ignore the truth, but you will not be able to ignore the consequences of the truth . Reality becomes a real bitch when it stares you in the face -ask the Ukrainaians in Bahkmut.
Excellent as always Simplicius. I honestly don't understand how there is enough time in a day for you to gather so much information and write so eloquently about it. What a treasure trove.
I know the western press loves the idea of Wagner recruiting convicted criminals but the fact is this is a very narrow segment of prisoners currently serving time in Russia. It excludes murderers and rapists for example, any connection with organised crime, it requires at least military service and a degree of tertiary education- since they must be retrained for the latest equipment and – inevitably - attendant software. Most of the prisoners accepted were first-offenders, convicted of pretty theft, delinquency, public disturbance or assault. So the numbers never amounted to more than a few thousand at most. (‘up to 30k...’ of course allows zero as a lower limit... thanks General Milley). It does indicate that Wagner needs to replenish its troops and is really part of a widening of recruitment options – now taking in Afghani (US-trained) troops in exile in Iran, various middle-east and North African veterans – and significantly, English-speaking veterans drawn from the UK and its commonwealth satellites – these apparently in their own battalion, commanded by an ex-US Marine... So Wagner numbers have for the time being, been able to keep pace with battlefield losses, but Prigozhin’s recent remarks, concerning the possible demise of Wagner as a viable unit following the capture of Artemovsk also concede that the losses have been very high.
Concerning the defensive posture adopted by Russia it is also worth noting that attacks upon Ukrainian forces right along the front line have not lessened – have in recent months been averaging 4-500 a day! What ammunition they may be storing, obviously does not include artillery and air strikes from Kopiansk all the way to Kherson. But the broader point is that as a duel between conflicting strategies – the west intent upon taking territory at the cost of troop numbers – Russia intent upon preserving troop numbers at the cost of gaining territory – eventually turns in Russia’s favour, since The West continues to lose troop numbers even when unable to take further territory, continues to lose troop numbers even when unable even to hold territories (Soledar, Bakmut etc). It just looks a thoroughly reckless strategy – entirely consistent with West Point thinking of course (The Schwartzkopf doctrine of monstering an opponent) but here with a drastically diminishing return against an opponent expert in the terrain and climate.
I think this is what the Russians would claim is the great morale damage that is gradually inflicted.
"But as this AFU soldier in Bakhmut so eloquently put it only days ago: 'On our side the best people are dying, but from their side only prisoners and Wagner.'"
I've been saying this for a while now: Russia used the Donbass militias, the Wagner PMC, the Rosqvardia, the Chechens, and the Volunteer Battalions as THEIR "cannon fodder", thus reducing the number of regular army casualties and avoiding any electorate backlash in Russia. This was a cold, but smart, move. Russian regular army and special forces were used where and when they were needed for backup and the initial necessary long-range penetrations in the initial weeks of the SMO. But then they were reduced to backup while the other formations did the bulk of the ground fighting, with the regulars doing backup jobs like artillery, armor and air support. This is why Russia's regular army hasn't suffered too many casualties.
"In short, the U.S. likely fears that if they push too hard, cross too many red lines, they will open a pandora’s box from which Ukraine will never re-emerge."
The exact same thing is being done on the Russian side: escalation management. The Russians realize that NATO is being run by lunatics with no real grasp of the military balance and what could happen if NATO were to react irrationally to a quick Russian victory. So the Russians are keeping their reactions to NATO and Ukraine provocations to as close to tit-for-tat as they can without causing any significant losses either to their forces in the field or the home front (vis-a-vis Ukrainian terrorism inside Russia.)
This also plays into the Russian desire to conduct an attrition war rather than a "big arrow offensive" war. They can continue to "boil the Ukrainian frog" for as long as Zelensky wants to send more cannon fodder to the front. Only when Zelensky finally runs out of materiel to support the cannon fodder or runs out of cannon fodder will the Russians make more visible gains in terms of territory.
It is at that point that Russian escalation management will be most important, because once it becomes clear that Ukraine has run out of steam and its forces are about to collapse is when NATO - meaning the neocons in Washington - will have to decide whether to cut their losses or double down. And given that the only gear the neocons have is forward, the likelihood is that they will double down.
Russia is husbanding its forces and materiel not because of expected Ukrainian offensives or for future Russian offensives, but for the expected war with NATO forces, probably from an incursion from Poland. Russia is hoping it can avoid that war, but frankly I think it's unlikely that it can be avoided.
Which is not to say that NATO has a ghost of a chance. If NATO escalates to open conflict with Russia, Russia will end it within a few weeks by using precision strike weapons to eliminate NATO command and logistics centers in the immediate theater, i.e., Poland, Romania. I don't think Russia will strike Brussels or any other country's military assets unless those assets are directly deployed in theater. The one exception would be any NATO warships in the immediate vicinity which are engaged in direct support. They would likely be sunk as part of the initial Russian reaction.
Then the question devolves to: Does the US decide to escalate to full scale war? I have no answer to that - and neither does anyone else, although I'm sure people will make assertions to the contrary. But this is the real threat which must always be kept in mind.
Just my particular taste, but I do not care for the music I am hearing in the videos I watch from this particular war. It sounds like Slavic Ghetto or something. Tatar looks like a Russian Alex Jones, and that is one ugly cafe.
I still think it is shitty to blow up people in public places for an assassin style killing. I know it goes on all the time but it is sleazy and slinky. That chick reminds me of Massoud's murder of the Northern Alliance killed by a cameraman. All naive and innocent, then boom. Totally tacky. Just do a bullet in the alley.
USA cannot allow Ukraine to get ahead in this game, it would end all of their money laundering efforts. And w/it no longer being a major power in the world they have to hang on for as long as they can to get that cash.
It's incredibly fascinating seeing the extreme evolution of warfare tactics and equipment changing so quickly everyday. While most people are concerned about the specifics statistics/movements on the ground/map (rightly so) I find the evolution/responsiveness of the Russian army tactics and equipment the most interesting. Tactically NATO seems to be landing less sucker punches/opportunistic strikes as tactics change and Russia has massively leaned into drones. War really does push human evolution harder than anything due to necessity.
The Great Work continues. Your prose is sublime. As I read I am educated beyond measure. My Bestie, has pledged. He is my go to; as he is older and wiser. A decade really changes perspective, says this gal who is…headed towards 7 decades facing the sun/moon/stars. GodSpeed, Mother Russia ❤️🇷🇺💙
At some point I would like to see a political analysis of Europe's willingness to stay the course. How committed are the governments? How much economic pain will the people tolerate before voting those governments out? What countries are committed to the end? UK? Poland? And what countries are most likely to falter? France? Italy?
Lot to unpack, and as usual the fog of war is thick
Re: Bakhmut. With so few troops, how would Wagner even "occupy" the city? They may fight & clear a building of AFU, but when they move on unless they garrison the position, the AFU can just walk back in with fresh troops? It sounds very difficult to create a cohesive "line" in an urban environment.
Re: red lines & escalation. Judging by the rhetoric from various western capitals, how exactly can this go the other way? Both sides now call eachother the enemy. Both sides say this is a long term conflict. Both sides say that negotiations are not possible, and that the conversation will take place on the battlefield. Yes, the west drove the conversation in that direction, but it is there. Attritting Ukraine's 20-40 year old male population is a "win" by military standards, but is a loss by any strategic and human measure. Plus, the Poles and others are just waiting to follow. So, I'm not getting it. WW1, WW2, Vietnam all showed that you never really run out of people to kill.
Re: the battlefield. What exactly is RU's objective now? "Liberation" of the 4 new Russian oblasts? Destroying the AFU? Forcing negotiations? If the Zelensky regime is so deemed a threat, a menace, and irredeemable - why not target them?
Does Putin think that behind all the bluster there are rational people? I think he underestimates the power of war then. Even Dima and Lavrov are using unusually pointed language which gives me a sense of how raw things must be in the Kremlin
Re: weapons and bombs. I've said before that F16's are the in headlines not because they want them to shoot down Russian aircraft (they are not air superiority platforms), but because they would complement the JDAM-ER very well. Plus there are lots of them, and they are relatively cheap and easy to fly as far as fighter jets go.
Re: the propaganda. I follow the public statements of the likes of Milley, Austin, and so on. They all claim RU has suffered massive casualties, has had massive amounts of equipment attrited. My question has always been - are these independently verified statements? Is the US military assessing the battlefield themselves and then "counting", or are they just relying on intel from the AFU? If its the latter... it explains a lot. I just can't accept that they have an objective reality and are just outright lying. The AFU would lie because they are fighting to survive. It also explains Zelensky's decision making - he can't allow illusions to be shattered like that.
the usaf and usn tactical aviation is "on the ropes" per gao.
older f-16, f-18 and a-10 are flying far longer than planned because f-35 is in trouble!
gao studied this problem: GAO-23-106375 Tactical Aircraft Investments
see table 1 the f-16 average age is 31 years, and f-35 is not listed as replacing it (more later)
per table 1 GAO-23-106217 Weapon System Sustainment for fiscal years 2011 to 2021 f16 never met its mission capability "goals".
why send an airplane that cannot deliver sorties?
the issue with usaf/usn tactical aviation is aging, harder and more expensive to operate aircraft kept in service longer because f-35 needs a new engine that does not overheat trying to do assigned missions.
i doubt elensky's advisors read gao, much less understand logistics, logistics is why nato tanks cannot go to the front, too many diverse needs!
and the nato tanks are deficient in reactive armor per a article linksed by naked capital yesterday.
f-35 is the end of us tactical aviation!
The USA/NATO is restricting weapons to Ukraine because they know the Russians will destroy them in volume and the USA will be utterly humilated (even moreso than it already is!) on the world stage. The Russians have been holding back most of their destruction force capacity waiting to see when/if NATO esclates by entering the conflict very directly. Contrary to what some simpleton posters with English user names may think, the Russians have been clear what the objectives of the SMO are from Day 1. Russians are playing it smart with the current war of artrition and they will likely move more dynamically with the mobilized and unused reserves once Ukraine commits itself to its "offensives" . The Ukrainaians will shoot their wad, after which they will be road graded into oblivion, or when their masters come to thir senses. You can ignore the truth, but you will not be able to ignore the consequences of the truth . Reality becomes a real bitch when it stares you in the face -ask the Ukrainaians in Bahkmut.
Excellent as always Simplicius. I honestly don't understand how there is enough time in a day for you to gather so much information and write so eloquently about it. What a treasure trove.
I know the western press loves the idea of Wagner recruiting convicted criminals but the fact is this is a very narrow segment of prisoners currently serving time in Russia. It excludes murderers and rapists for example, any connection with organised crime, it requires at least military service and a degree of tertiary education- since they must be retrained for the latest equipment and – inevitably - attendant software. Most of the prisoners accepted were first-offenders, convicted of pretty theft, delinquency, public disturbance or assault. So the numbers never amounted to more than a few thousand at most. (‘up to 30k...’ of course allows zero as a lower limit... thanks General Milley). It does indicate that Wagner needs to replenish its troops and is really part of a widening of recruitment options – now taking in Afghani (US-trained) troops in exile in Iran, various middle-east and North African veterans – and significantly, English-speaking veterans drawn from the UK and its commonwealth satellites – these apparently in their own battalion, commanded by an ex-US Marine... So Wagner numbers have for the time being, been able to keep pace with battlefield losses, but Prigozhin’s recent remarks, concerning the possible demise of Wagner as a viable unit following the capture of Artemovsk also concede that the losses have been very high.
Concerning the defensive posture adopted by Russia it is also worth noting that attacks upon Ukrainian forces right along the front line have not lessened – have in recent months been averaging 4-500 a day! What ammunition they may be storing, obviously does not include artillery and air strikes from Kopiansk all the way to Kherson. But the broader point is that as a duel between conflicting strategies – the west intent upon taking territory at the cost of troop numbers – Russia intent upon preserving troop numbers at the cost of gaining territory – eventually turns in Russia’s favour, since The West continues to lose troop numbers even when unable to take further territory, continues to lose troop numbers even when unable even to hold territories (Soledar, Bakmut etc). It just looks a thoroughly reckless strategy – entirely consistent with West Point thinking of course (The Schwartzkopf doctrine of monstering an opponent) but here with a drastically diminishing return against an opponent expert in the terrain and climate.
I think this is what the Russians would claim is the great morale damage that is gradually inflicted.
"But as this AFU soldier in Bakhmut so eloquently put it only days ago: 'On our side the best people are dying, but from their side only prisoners and Wagner.'"
I've been saying this for a while now: Russia used the Donbass militias, the Wagner PMC, the Rosqvardia, the Chechens, and the Volunteer Battalions as THEIR "cannon fodder", thus reducing the number of regular army casualties and avoiding any electorate backlash in Russia. This was a cold, but smart, move. Russian regular army and special forces were used where and when they were needed for backup and the initial necessary long-range penetrations in the initial weeks of the SMO. But then they were reduced to backup while the other formations did the bulk of the ground fighting, with the regulars doing backup jobs like artillery, armor and air support. This is why Russia's regular army hasn't suffered too many casualties.
"In short, the U.S. likely fears that if they push too hard, cross too many red lines, they will open a pandora’s box from which Ukraine will never re-emerge."
The exact same thing is being done on the Russian side: escalation management. The Russians realize that NATO is being run by lunatics with no real grasp of the military balance and what could happen if NATO were to react irrationally to a quick Russian victory. So the Russians are keeping their reactions to NATO and Ukraine provocations to as close to tit-for-tat as they can without causing any significant losses either to their forces in the field or the home front (vis-a-vis Ukrainian terrorism inside Russia.)
This also plays into the Russian desire to conduct an attrition war rather than a "big arrow offensive" war. They can continue to "boil the Ukrainian frog" for as long as Zelensky wants to send more cannon fodder to the front. Only when Zelensky finally runs out of materiel to support the cannon fodder or runs out of cannon fodder will the Russians make more visible gains in terms of territory.
It is at that point that Russian escalation management will be most important, because once it becomes clear that Ukraine has run out of steam and its forces are about to collapse is when NATO - meaning the neocons in Washington - will have to decide whether to cut their losses or double down. And given that the only gear the neocons have is forward, the likelihood is that they will double down.
Russia is husbanding its forces and materiel not because of expected Ukrainian offensives or for future Russian offensives, but for the expected war with NATO forces, probably from an incursion from Poland. Russia is hoping it can avoid that war, but frankly I think it's unlikely that it can be avoided.
Which is not to say that NATO has a ghost of a chance. If NATO escalates to open conflict with Russia, Russia will end it within a few weeks by using precision strike weapons to eliminate NATO command and logistics centers in the immediate theater, i.e., Poland, Romania. I don't think Russia will strike Brussels or any other country's military assets unless those assets are directly deployed in theater. The one exception would be any NATO warships in the immediate vicinity which are engaged in direct support. They would likely be sunk as part of the initial Russian reaction.
Then the question devolves to: Does the US decide to escalate to full scale war? I have no answer to that - and neither does anyone else, although I'm sure people will make assertions to the contrary. But this is the real threat which must always be kept in mind.
Just my particular taste, but I do not care for the music I am hearing in the videos I watch from this particular war. It sounds like Slavic Ghetto or something. Tatar looks like a Russian Alex Jones, and that is one ugly cafe.
I still think it is shitty to blow up people in public places for an assassin style killing. I know it goes on all the time but it is sleazy and slinky. That chick reminds me of Massoud's murder of the Northern Alliance killed by a cameraman. All naive and innocent, then boom. Totally tacky. Just do a bullet in the alley.
USA cannot allow Ukraine to get ahead in this game, it would end all of their money laundering efforts. And w/it no longer being a major power in the world they have to hang on for as long as they can to get that cash.
It's incredibly fascinating seeing the extreme evolution of warfare tactics and equipment changing so quickly everyday. While most people are concerned about the specifics statistics/movements on the ground/map (rightly so) I find the evolution/responsiveness of the Russian army tactics and equipment the most interesting. Tactically NATO seems to be landing less sucker punches/opportunistic strikes as tactics change and Russia has massively leaned into drones. War really does push human evolution harder than anything due to necessity.
The Great Work continues. Your prose is sublime. As I read I am educated beyond measure. My Bestie, has pledged. He is my go to; as he is older and wiser. A decade really changes perspective, says this gal who is…headed towards 7 decades facing the sun/moon/stars. GodSpeed, Mother Russia ❤️🇷🇺💙
Thank you.
I'd like to request a post.
At some point I would like to see a political analysis of Europe's willingness to stay the course. How committed are the governments? How much economic pain will the people tolerate before voting those governments out? What countries are committed to the end? UK? Poland? And what countries are most likely to falter? France? Italy?
Thanks in advance.
Lot to unpack, and as usual the fog of war is thick
Re: Bakhmut. With so few troops, how would Wagner even "occupy" the city? They may fight & clear a building of AFU, but when they move on unless they garrison the position, the AFU can just walk back in with fresh troops? It sounds very difficult to create a cohesive "line" in an urban environment.
Re: red lines & escalation. Judging by the rhetoric from various western capitals, how exactly can this go the other way? Both sides now call eachother the enemy. Both sides say this is a long term conflict. Both sides say that negotiations are not possible, and that the conversation will take place on the battlefield. Yes, the west drove the conversation in that direction, but it is there. Attritting Ukraine's 20-40 year old male population is a "win" by military standards, but is a loss by any strategic and human measure. Plus, the Poles and others are just waiting to follow. So, I'm not getting it. WW1, WW2, Vietnam all showed that you never really run out of people to kill.
Re: the battlefield. What exactly is RU's objective now? "Liberation" of the 4 new Russian oblasts? Destroying the AFU? Forcing negotiations? If the Zelensky regime is so deemed a threat, a menace, and irredeemable - why not target them?
Does Putin think that behind all the bluster there are rational people? I think he underestimates the power of war then. Even Dima and Lavrov are using unusually pointed language which gives me a sense of how raw things must be in the Kremlin
Re: weapons and bombs. I've said before that F16's are the in headlines not because they want them to shoot down Russian aircraft (they are not air superiority platforms), but because they would complement the JDAM-ER very well. Plus there are lots of them, and they are relatively cheap and easy to fly as far as fighter jets go.
Re: the propaganda. I follow the public statements of the likes of Milley, Austin, and so on. They all claim RU has suffered massive casualties, has had massive amounts of equipment attrited. My question has always been - are these independently verified statements? Is the US military assessing the battlefield themselves and then "counting", or are they just relying on intel from the AFU? If its the latter... it explains a lot. I just can't accept that they have an objective reality and are just outright lying. The AFU would lie because they are fighting to survive. It also explains Zelensky's decision making - he can't allow illusions to be shattered like that.
I would like to know what Mr. Simplicius thinks about Finland joining NATO? I find it disturbing.
And that is a cool video of the bridge repair. Get 'er done!
Cross-posted! Truly great analysis.
The US has been playing at war for decades, and the arrogance now is going to force Ukraine to pay the butcher's bill.