There’s no one big thematic development to cover today so we’ll just keep abreast of some side developments in preparation for the larger storms to come—so this will be a scattershot assemblage of interesting updates.
Far East is very cold too. Not exactly the easiest place to develop. Southernmost Pacific coastline and China/DPRK border areas are doing quite well in terms of development, but because of history (Russia being focused on Europe), it was never a big priority. It's getting better very fast however.
With the Earth's economic center of gravity shifting Eastwards quickly, Russian investment center of gravity is being pulled with it.
"(although others disagree)" - yeah, people think it will miraculously become some great fertile plain. But that's not what is going to happen.
It will all turn into a very, very deep and soft swamp of unbelievable proportions. All releasing huge quantities of gases (mostly methane) into atmosphere, with some places with potentially lethal amounts of CO at ground level (in depressions and holes).
Too much water in summer, 300 billions of mosquitos per capita. And all of it freezing during winter.
Not to mention regular Bible-esque great flooding every spring/early summer.
It will take decades to stop the regular flooding, which will be a must before it dries enough to allow for any reasonable level of agriculture or infrastructure building.
Thawing permafrost is just about the most civilization unfriendly thing on dry land and it makes the so-called "rasputitsa" look like German autobahns.
Chinese immigration is a bit unlikely. A Russian website posted a map of China's regions last year. All of Manchuria was in net population decline, around -11% over some 10 year period in this century. So even the Chinese want a better climate.
Yes, there's still good chance that Umerov may merely be reading Russia's total reserve strength and assuming Russia intends to use it in the war while Russia may in fact be choosing to keep it back for NATO deterrence. It's hard to know whether he's just guessing or going on actual intelligence--slight as it may be--that Russia intends to commit those forces.
Not sure what form this scary NATO "intervention" would take given they have limited air power to be used over Ukraine, very limited artillery capability (lack of shells and even delivery systems), unusable tanks, clearly inferior air defenses and lack of infantry numbers against a foe like Russia. Of course, they DO have extensive ISR so they can easily observe their troops getting demolished in the field.
Someone needs to get real here.
Of course things might get so desperate that the USA has to bring out its huge numbers of anti-gravity UFO vehicles it built from stolen alien tech - perhaps even talk their alien allies at the South Pole to join them. Desperate times call for desperate measures!
Almost certainly you are right. The problem is - deployment of NATO troops in Ukraine is WW3, which might turn into nuclear conflict at any moment. I guess that Russia is regulating its military pressure at Ukraine so that SMO be finished this autumn, when the US hands are more or less tied by the elections, and they would not deploy troops in Ukraine. If the war is finished now, the probability of deployment is very high - we can clearly see it from all kinds of statements by different Western politicians. If the war would finish after the elections, and Biden is re-elected - the escalation seems almost imminent. If Trump is elected - I don't know how he will act.
Even Trump doesn't know what he would do. That's why Trump is dangerous. If the Democrat candidate were to be Biden, then the US and the West generally, would continue to circle down the drain. But I seriously do not expect Biden to be the nominee. In September - after the Dem. convention, not before - the Deep State will find some pretext for removing Biden. That will not be difficult. Doing the switcheroo after the convention means the Deep State gets tight control over naming the candidate. The DNC will be in on this game because they don't want all their candidates and projects to get wiped out in the November elections.
I expect a steadily increasing swarm of black signets as the BIG DAY approaches and the lines between the red.blue uniparty fall away into the chasm of chaos. So yeah, all the ingredients are in the pot and the intent to stir is overriding any logic and reason that might remain. Whatever pony gets selected we can be sure that escalation will continue. Kinda makes ya wonder just how bloody Uncle Sam's nose would have to get though.....
You should not be thinking about "wasting" these reserve units, just employing them. In no way I see attrition ratio to be more than 10% (wounded included). I see no point of having a strategic reserve at this stage. If you have people - use them, and get this SMO over sooner rather than later. I think more troops translates to less casualties in the long run, and everyone gets combat experience. If NATO intervenes, it is easy to pull back significant quantity of troops and redeploy them. Russia always have the luxury of pulling back.
On top, if NATO enters the war in official capacity, I think that will automatically pull in Belarus. There is your reserve (until Russia mobilizes/redeploys). Maybe (although it is a big maybe) even some other CSTO members come into the fight in one way or another...
Your 10% "attrition ratio" is some majick number. Did you read it off the ceiling?
Not having a strategic reserve means betting everything on one play.
“The general who still retains a reserve [army] is not defeated.” – Mikhail Kutuzov, Field Marshall of the Russian Empire 1745-1813
Russia feeds troops in slowly so they can get combat experience under the supervision of combat veterans. Feeding them in all at once is a prescription for disaster.
Redeploying armies during wartime is always risky and especially now when both sides have nearly perfect ISR.
Belarus only has a relatively small army and they need to be ready for the Polish and Lithuanian armies.
I trust that the Russian Army leadership is very wise and understands the security problem of the Russian state better than I ever could. They will make apropos decisions. They are professionals.
I also think that the Russians will soon commit the required number of reserves to the battle. No one will hesitate. NATO will not interfere. And if enemies rise, there is always a big club
One has to consider the ongoing Western shitshow in geopolitics. BRICS+ is near 38% of global prduction as opposed to the collective Wests 26%. Russia is well served by the Tortoise approach as Yankeeland is falling to pieces with uncontrolled invasion at the Southern border, a dollar that is artificially propped up verging on collapse,(I am waiting for BRICS+ to finally pull the plug on the Petrodollar),it is US$34.78 Trillion in debt and has a debt to GDP ratio of
135.47% - Historically most countries default at 120% to 130% - failing infrastructure with no money to invest in new building. Basically it is slowly imploding and its sphere of influance,(intimidation),is waning rapidly.
Most of the actual European peoples do not want war.
I'm always amused by the need of you insecure Internet trolls to insult other people in the comments. Does it help to heal your insecurity? If so, insult away. I don't mind really...
Maybe you should open a Substack page to explain military strategy to us with zero understanding of military strategy?
"a substantial reserve capable of taking on a NATO intervention."
The question is where such a Russian force would fight NATO. It can't just jump over Poland and fight in Germany, for example. It's also not going to fight NATO on the border with Kazakhstan or fight off a NATO amphibious landing in Russia's far east.
I think there are really only three candidates: on the border with Finland to defend Russian Karelia and, the two really hot venues, to defend Kaliningrad and St. Pete from NATO attacks launched from Poland and the Baltics. Presumably Belarus would chip in to help defend Kaliningrad.
There's no doubt in my mind Russia would go nuclear in a heartbeat to defend St. Pete, erasing all NATO military assets in Finland, Sweden, Denmark, and the Baltics. Same with Kaliningrad.
So maybe Russia doesn't really need so many men held in reserve for an infantry war with NATO. Given that situation is going to go at least tactically nuclear because Kaliningrad and St. Pete are so exposed on the far edge of Russia, those men will just be targets long before they engage in combat with NATO infantry forces. On the other hand, they could be very useful well before then in Ukraine.
Russia doesn't want to go nuclear. This speaks to having adequate conventional force to avoid this.
The purported invasion is not going to happen. They'll threaten as much as they feel they have to. But it won't happen. There is no force structure in Europe or the US sufficient to fight a continental war.
I agree Russia doesn't want to go nuclear. But then Russia also didn't want to invade Ukraine, either. It spent eight long years, despite many thousands of Russian people dying in Donbass, trying to make a non-war Minsk process work. You can't always get what you want.
I also agree that Russia feels having adequate conventional forces will help avoid going nuclear. There is no doubt in my mind that Russia will answer conventional force used against Russia with conventional force. But Russia knows that only goes so far, the main reason being that no practical increase in Russia's conventional forces can protect the two key regions of Russia that Russia must protect in a war with NATO and the US: Kaliningrad and St. Pete. The US and NATO know that as well, which is why NATO's chihuahuas like to taunt Russia about Kaliningrad.
Those two regions highlight the asymmetry between Russia and the US/NATO in the border regions between Russia and NATO states (excepting the very long northern border with Finland, where the local balance is more even). That asymmetry is about the power of conventional forces and also about an asymmetry of risk. Those asymmetries cut both ways.
Yes, Russia has far more conventional force to apply in some border regions next to NATO. The US's expeditionary forces in the Baltic states are tiny compared to even just 100,000 of Russia's newly built "extra 500,000" army.
But Poland can bring much more conventional force to bear against Kaliningrad, and in addition a collective effort by the US/NATO in Lithuania could easily add 40K to 50K men. There would be little point in Russia building up 200K troops in a Kaliningrad region surrounded by land and sea by the US and NATO, as those troops could not defend the city of Kaliningrad without it being destroyed by remote attacks. A conventional defense of Kaliningrad would ensure that Kaliningrad would be transformed into Gaza City, Raqqa, or Bakhmut.
A similar asymmetry of attack capabilities applies to St. Pete, where the US/NATO has successfully converted the Baltic Sea into a NATO lake: attack assets can flow down the funnel of the Baltic Sea into St. Pete, defended along the way by the many NATO assets which surround the Baltic Sea. Except for launches from Kaliningrad (which rapidly would be degraded because they are so localized to Kaliningrad) Russia can only strike those attacks en route using surface naval assets, which will be eliminated by NATO as both sides rapidly clean the Baltic of surface ships.
That's the other asymmetry, of risk, whereby despite Russia's vast range of conventional forces it has two pressure points that must be defended but which cannot be defended by conventional forces: Kaliningrad and St. Pete. [I use the English term "St. Pete" to convey the Russian habit of referring to St. Petersburg as "Peter" for short.]
Kaliningrad is a smallish island of territory surrounded by NATO. St. Pete is at the head of a gulf of the Baltic Sea at the extreme, isolated, northwest corner of Russia with significantly more NATO/US offensive power adjacent than defensive Russian power. A conventional defense of St. Pete would also ensure its destruction.
There is no way Russia will allow either Kaliningrad or its "Northern Capital," the second largest city in Russia with a population of over nine million, to be bombarded by the West, the way Donetsk City has been bombarded for ten years, and there is no way Russia can prevent that with conventional forces. It has to use tactical nukes to stop attacks on St. Pete.
There's no need for NATO to physically invade St. Pete to generate intolerable pressure on Russia. Striking it with long range precision weapons would be more than enough. In the case of Kaliningrad, NATO could more successfully invade than Russia could defend without using nukes. It's a reverse of the classic cold war scenario where the USSR could have invaded Germany through the Fulda Gap and the only way NATO could have stopped such an invasion, as everybody knew, was by using tactical nukes.
Even without an invasion of Kaliningrad a NATO bombardment and blockade of Kaliningrad would cause immense pressure that Russia likely could not break without using tactical nukes. Russia would have to invade and seize most of Lithuania on the one side and much of Poland on the other side, right up to Warsaw almost, to ensure continuity between Kaliningrad and mainland Russia. I don't see how conventional war on that scale could proceed without it going nuclear.
I think that's one of the main reasons that Russia and Belarus have been conducting tactical nuclear weapons drills in Belarus. Everybody knows the only way Russia can defend Kaliningrad is through the use of tactical nukes. What's gone unnoticed is that the same applies to a highly exposed St. Pete as well, which Russia also cannot protect without using nuclear weapons.
As for fighting a continental war, neither the US nor Russia have the force structure for that, nor do they need it given that the continental war will be a Ukrainian war on a larger scale, point attacks against vulnerable pressure points using precision, long range weapons. Strikes on essential pressure points like Norway's oil networks, oil ports, LNG terminals and gas storage facilities could rapidly build intolerable pressure for the EU. As Putin remarked, those are small countries with very dense populations, so dense and so totally dependent on a handful of pressure points that even conventional weapons can apply intolerable pressure in a way that can only be relieved by recourse to nuclear weapons.
So no, you can't always get what you want, and no matter how much Russia wants to avoid the use of nukes the West is taking step after step that will make the use of nukes inevitable.
While I respect your reasoning, I tend to doubt a lot that NATO be able to seriously threaten Kaliningrad oblast. Neither Kaliningrad, much less St. Petersburg, are Mossul or Raqqa, there is no chance to run 24/7 air raids unresponded. Rather, NATO planes would fall down like flies.
Mind the US/NATO or "coalition of the willing" needed months over months to build up a considerable force against the third class army of the third world country of Iraq. Further on mind the months long buildup of the force for the Ukrainian counter-oink, and its outcome.
NATO may of course start aerial war bombing Kaliningrad and St.Petersburg. That would immediately summon bombing of all NATO airfields from which such raids originate, and cause the loss of a lot of warplanes to Russian AD. I may or may not cause tactical nuke counter attack, sure. But first venues of escalation for Russia and Byelorussia would be cutting off the Suwalki gap, and disabling all Baltic port infrastructure - no need to flatten all, mining would do the job. The pathetic NATO brigades there would simply be cut off.
NATO forces would have to rely on far off airfields not immune to Russian strikes though. And the US would have to weigh whether or not inflicting their carrier battle groups. My bet is rather not, the US military does not seem overly motivated to risk this resource.
If both sides would strive to keep the fighting below the all out nuklear level, NATO would be worse off. Russia would not need to conquer much, just starve the Chihuahuas. NATO could not field the forces to conquer any serious part of Kaliningrad oblast while Russia may or may not conquer the tiny Suwalki corridor, under all circumstances make it unviable for NATO.
I do not say that use of tactical nukes would be impossible, but do not see it inevitable. As german journalist Dagmar Henn wrote in the wake of the war, NATO is "rattling with no saber".
I agree often with your reasoning and recognise your knowledge of Russia - but it is a great stretch to argue from VVP and the RF government classes reluctance to go to war in the Ukraine, to going nuclear
(if one is not reluctant to go to war one is a fool)
You appear to believe that the US gvmt has the capability to make plans and to execute them - this is contrary to recent experience, recent history, and above all current practice - that is to say that almost every action and initiative is nothing other than than reactive to/according to perceived threats and their own ignorance
And that the US is capable of 'forcing' the RF to nuclear, or go there itself
What has changed for RF since 2022- the success of the war campaigns, re-armament, the economy, social cohesion, etc has made for a great deal of organisation, and confidence perhaps somewhat lacking prior
The greater change has been the alliance with China - the China ruling class is even more patient, level headed and violence averse than VVP
It is necessary to view this alliance as substantial and indeed dominant
The US gvmt is peppered with people with few notions of adequate self control, but they are not 'sociopaths' etc, contrary to those who do not wish to take the trouble to understand them or the structure of their society and ruling class, nor are they the decision makers
To the US establishment all those ex Nazis and East Europeans in the governing sections they used initially to plan this war have got everything wrong so far, plus they are little better than hired hands, and have no real sway in high places, make some tactical but not strategic decisions
RF was just an easy resource grab
The real enemy, the real threat to their livelihoods, long term and definitive, is China
The US will happily use Tawian as hostage proxy, 'kick up a fuss', make their point: perhaps burn down a few TSMC plants, beyond that they will reach an understanding, insofar as they can, with the China ruling class
Under cover of new and long term cold war competition
While I 100% agree with HBI about Russia wanting to avoid nukes I also believe that in the event of phsycopaths such as Nuland, Marcron, Blinken et al managing to get a nuclear strike on Russia made to ''show strength'' Russia has a whole lot of nuclear armed submarine patrolling no-body but Russia knows and I am certain that alongside ICBM's nearly all major cities in the NATO
You are very wrong about Russia's goals. The first strike will be on Poland, Germany, Romania and the Baltic States. And then we'll look at the result.
Yep, when real shit will start, Russia will nuke firstly those NATO countries which don't have their own strategic nuclear weapon because they can't respond and then Russian leadership will ask USA do they want to be next?
The only place where Russia can possibly fight against NATO is Ukraine or border between Poland and Belarus. This is the only direction where NATO can possibly deploy some more or less significant number of ground forces to attack Russia. Attacking from Finland will be very hard or impossible at all because of the worst possible type of terrain for moving of ground forces. There are only swamps, lakes and forests with few roads and infrastructure for logistics and supplying the army. NATO tanks are already experiencing problems on Ukrainian territory due to their large mass. The landscape near the northwestern border of Russia may become completely impassable for them. Deploying forces in the Baltic countries is a very stupid idea, because if a direct conflict with Russia begins, they will be surrounded from the start. Deployment directly into a pre-formed cauldron is a guaranteed suicidal mission.
"It's also not going to fight NATO on the border with Kazakhstan or fight off a NATO amphibious landing in Russia's far east."
The Russian Navy will obliterate those NATO assets before they land on Russia's Far East. And even if western forces could mount an amphibious landing count on China and North Korea to send their own forces to reinforce the Russians.
Umerov does not know the exact number of Russian reserves. 200 or 300 thousand is a big difference. Umerov simply relies on an approximate calculation from open sources.
30 May 2024 NATO incapability, The Baltic boots and arms, Industrial Armaments Production, the Czech shells, and more
Please note- a continuation of the discussion in S’s last post about the role the Baltics/Nordics play in spreading EUNATO propoganda about ‘going to war’, ‘saving our democracy’ ‘saving our Europe’’ ‘Help ! the Russians are coming’
This propoganda is incoherent and sporadic, betrays no strategic thought, nor presents any proposals about how to organise an EU or a NATO plan, either in Ukraine, or in Europe
The EU and NATO have no plans either, except to try and get more money ‘for defence’ in case one day they might think of something to do, apart from sending a trickle of arms to their fence in Ukraine
Some comments lifted from twitter posters who seem competent if erratic a little - these comments flesh out S’s discussions of these matters and give some additional details
There’s a lot of discussion as to whether the Baltics will or are able to contribute more than propoganda chitchat – the conclusion is obvious, but again good evidence is provided as to why
A discussion of problems with EU industrial production of arms, including a description of Rheinmetall’s Business Plan-
-the EU’s answer to Raytheon etc- stock price up over 500% since Feb 2022, and 1,400% since current CEO Papperberger joined, giving him a fortune of approx €83B, no wonder he’s talking up a European arms consortium
So that his job is the same as the Baltics gvmts etc – talk up NATO intervention, talk up RF invasion & is the devil, dedicate to helping Ukraine, while doing close to nothing except to sell stock by shouting ‘fire’ in the Bourse
Most interesting of all are the comments on RF industrial arms production, and how this is only now gaining very significantly in output, and is capable of being considerably increased, factories not working 24/7 yet
Plus details on very considerable possible arms transfers from Iran and NK+-
Plus raising more clearly the proposition that China could be fighting a proxy war with the US, which may strike some as ridiculous or as an unfair description of a ‘partnership of equals’, but which makes some underhand sense
There are also details on those shells the fabulating Czechs claimed to have found – they have not quite disappeared, but almost, and for this they blame……the dastardly Russians !
Plus their President has gone from NATO hound dog to fierce peacenik
But first, for all you doomers, here’s yet another post from Aurelien, who long has been patiently explaining the incapacities and incapabilities of NATO with regard to any type of military intervention in Ukraine beyond the trivial and anecdotal –
In a word- NATO = chihuahua
» any deployment is going to be mostly theatre, aimed as much at domestic public opinion as at the Russians »
Next month would be the delivery of the first 180,000 shells for Ukraine from the so-called Czech initiative. But despite all good intentions, this delivery isn't going to happen due to a simple reason: there aren't 180,000 shells available in the western market to be delivered, even at a cost of $5,000 per unit (which is five times what the Russians are paying).
The industrial bases for this proposal weren't adequately prepared, probably because it's more profitable to sell a guided shell for $70,000-$250,000 than to produce 50-100 conventional projectiles that demand significant investment. What if the war ends tomorrow and the orders just disappear?
The western military complex lacks an industrial command capable of organizing and dealing with the government.
Recently, Rheinmetall proposed a European arms consortium. Sincerely, it would be the worst idea, just adding more organization to an already existing cartel.
Nobody has made so much money in this war delivering so little as Rheinmetall has.
But recently, finally, some good news came when Ursula Von der Leyen announced plans to create a European strategy for its arms industry, focusing on organizing the sector. This is key for any success. When we look at the Russian arms industry, it's impressive how they rebuilt it in just two years with the organization and planning from ROSTEC.
With a different approach, Rostec ensures that the industrial park is focused on national interest. Sometimes this almost bankrupts factories, as they are forced to produce and sell weapons to the Russian MoD with discounts of 25%-50%, and other times almost for free, under the promise that they will earn future export deals.
This is how the Russians keep producing at a low cost during this war and still increase production. Europe, on the other hand, sells some AMV/IFV military vehicles at the cost of $25-30 million, which is more than some tanks. The Russians produce equivalent vehicles at 6-8 times less cost.
It's impossible to sustain a war with all the planning, development, and market prices in the hands of private companies, as the Europeans are doing.
The Russians have invested around $25 billion in industrial capacity since 2022, including semiconductors, metallurgy, aerospace, and mainly direct investment in the main Armored Repair Plants, hiring more than 8,000 workers, and opening and expanding existing installations like engine factories and electronics. Everything is planned and executed by Rostec and the Russian MoD.
A European strategy, centering its industrial complex, could change things significantly for the West. But until that happens, the Russians have an enormous advantage because they control their production and supply chains, which allows them to set the best strategies and timing for war.
When I see a German company selling a simple 4x4 military vehicle without any armor for $600,000 or a single 30mm cartridge for $1 million, I perceive that the West has no long-term chances in this war if they don’t completely reform their arms sector. The Russian advantage is not in missiles or land gains; it's in how they have set the basis for a long war at low cost and by controlling the supply chains.
For example, last year they planned to deliver 180 T-80BVM tanks but only delivered fewer than 140 due to engine and track shortages. A few weeks ago, they built an engine factory and a workshop to produce tracks, with an increase in metallurgy. We can now estimate a considerable increase in T-80BVM tanks being deployed.
They created a plan to resolve every bottleneck, and this is the part that Ukraine and some allies don't understand. But the US does understand and knows exactly where they stand at this moment. Why? The Pentagon. This has become a part of US military culture: study, planning, and controlling the arms industry.
But sometimes even the Pentagon cannot control the arms companies. Imagine Europe without any structure for this purpose.
The West is completely entangled by the Russian initiative in this war, like a football team reactively trying to take the ball.
« Who are the French instructors going to train in Ukraine?
Why send instructors after 2 years of war when the Ukrainians lack manpower?
If they didn't send these instructors when Ukraine was training tens of thousands of volunteers and conscripts, why they should do now?
It seems like another step of escalation, and again, the allies are trying to move the Overton window.
An international intervention in Ukraine is completely insane and could drag Europe into a prolonged war, but above all, make the situation even more dangerous.
When the US does not allow their weapons to be used inside Russia, they know exactly what they are talking about.
The Russians are fighting this war without a national mobilization that could put more than 2 million soldiers on the ground in a short time. But we can go deeper and mention that none of the Russian military factories is working 24/7 yet. They operate 12/5 and in a few sectors 24/5. Yes, they can escalate significantly from boots on the ground to industrial production.
Will Europe do the same? If Europe is ready to fight a real war, okay.
In an escalatory scenario, the Russians would be exchanging nuclear technology for weapons and personal equipment with countries like Iran and North Korea. And yes, both countries can offer much more to Russia in this case. These highly militarized countries can help the Russians train and equip 2 million men in less than 2 months. And possibly we can also include Belarus there.
I'm talking about tanks, IFVs, anti-air systems, artillery, missiles, and personal equipment.
And I have no doubts that the Russians are ready for this kind of negotiation in case of a massive international intervention in Ukraine.
The West is trying to avoid a humiliation caused by themselves, who were unable to predict the Russian industry's response, and letting the war be handled by private hands. Not to mention all the logistical mistakes with western repair centers working 2000km from the frontlines.
Yes, this defeat is necessary for the West to rethink its defense sector and political decisions.
But above all, it's not a complete defeat. There are many things on the table for negotiations:
Occupied territories
Frozen assets
Sanctions
Visas
And other important points to be discussed as part of a regional peace plan.
The other way will be long and bloody. The Russians are not going to accept a defeat due to NATO intervention. They are ready for a long war with a very solid domestic narrative.
Many people in Europe have forgotten what a war is like, and especially for Ukraine, a Russian mobilization would be devastating.
Nobody wins at this situation.
Some low-level statesmen in Europe are seeking a war without any industrial military background, committing the same mistakes that led them into this imminent defeat.
It's not about support an invasion or the self-defense right. It's about sanity to avoid something bigger.
I don't think the US will allow this escalation, but in an electoral year everything is possible.
« Can a consortium of few countries stop the Russians in Ukraine?
"If Russia achieves a strategic breakthrough in eastern Ukraine, the Baltics and Poland will send troops into Ukrainian territory," reports Der Spiegel.
The first thing to note is that Poland is at the beginning of a military build-up that will need at least 6-10 years to establish national factories and local supply chains.
The Polish aren't going to do anything before that time. So, why is Der Spiegel alarming readers? Exactly because they are moving an "Overton window" there. It's not about the Baltics and Poland, but about the acceptance of international intervention in Ukraine.
Days ago, the Italian newspaper La Repubblica wrote something similar. More countries are interested in intervening in Ukraine, not to fight, but to occupy some cities and zones to prevent a Russian advance. Nobody want more war.
The Russians can't win a conventional war against NATO, and they know that very well. But if this force is not large enough and does not consist of several countries, I have my doubts if it will dissuade the Russians from advancing.
As I wrote in my previous text, the Russians are fighting a different kind of war and can sustain this for 2-3 more years at the current rate of production and fire.
From Omsktransmash, Uraltransmash, Kurganmashzavod, and Uralvagonzavod, the Russians keep producing more vehicles than the entire Europe, even without a significant jump in numbers.
For example, during this war, Uralvagonzavod has never produced more than 200 new tanks, such as the T-72B3M or T-90MS.
This number is similar to what they produced before the war. Is this good news? No, exactly because it's four times the number of tanks produced in Europe, and even considering the upgrades, which take longtime, the numbers are behind of Uralvagonzavod.
Omsktransmash raised its production by 2.5 times this year. We can expect 170-200 new T-80BVM.
The Boxer and Patria are the main military vehicles produced in high numbers in Europe, with around 400-450 units annually.
The Russian Kurganmashzavod produced around 600-650 IFVs last year. Even if we add the production of the German Puma, Lynx, or the Swedish CV90, the numbers are still smaller than the Russian production, not to mention the cost.
This year, the Russians are putting out something like 4,000 vehicles, including new ones, refurbished and repaired coming back to the front.
This is insane, and the allies lost the war when they decided to accept an attrition war against someone with a vast Soviet heritage. Will this Soviet heritage dry up? Surely, but don't count on it within the next 2 or 3 years.
In summary, even a European taskforce, if not robust with a high number of countries and vast US equipment, can't dissuade the Russians, who are prepared for a long war, even against a small group of EU countries. »
The Russians can't win a conventional war against NATO, and they know that very well.”
You seem very young, and your entire arguments, over the last many months, are based on incomplete understandings, or outright false premises as demonstrated by your statement above. These sequential false premises undermine almost every argument you present, day after day.
It’s very possibly true that “the Russians can’t win a conventional war against NATO”, provided that war is fought in the UK, Germany, France, Australia, the US, or Africa. But, any conventional war between NATO and Russia would be fought completely on Russia territory, any 6th grader would, I’d think, understand that at this point. In which case, the opposite would be true: NATO can’t win a conventional war against Russia. Not the one which would actually be fought. You can war game this a hundred times, and NATO could never once win that war, horrible as it would be. That war gaming has been done.
And, out of kindness, I’m leaving out the possibility of Chinese intervention, something which is more likely than not in that scenario, since China understands full well that the West only wants to destroy Russia as an appetizer, and China would be next up were Russia to fall. I am also leaving out the question of level of motivations of those who would be fighting for their homeland vs. the relative lack of motivation of those soldiers who would be fighting a losing battle in a foreign land for reasons they won’t understand, since jingoistic propaganda is not as effective as it once was. Not to put too fine a point on it, but the U.S. has the best fighting force in NATO, by a huge margin, and it was not good enough to defeat the Taliban, and that was not because “they didn’t really try.” And, the German and French and British armies are a joke compared to the U.S. military, even as castrati as the U.S. military now is, relative to how it once was.
You seem like a reasonably intelligent person, but you do not seem to have a complete grasp of the subjects you address, and rattling off production numbers completely misses the larger points. (And with regard to those you noted, it’s also not realistic to claim, as you seem to do, that Russia can only sustain this war for 2 to 3 years. Russia can sustain, or increase this, indefinitely.)
The misleading of people, which you do every day, only serves to get people killed, for no reason at all, at this point. Ukraine is not ever going to be “in NATO” in any shape or form. It is going to be a neutral territory, under any government it chooses which desire and will implement that. That is basically all that needs to happen and the war will end. Short of that it will continue until, that is achieve
"The Russians can't win a conventional war against NATO, and they know that very well. "
Respectfully disagree. NATO is a paper tiger. NATO countries, outside the US, have been neglecting their investments in their militaries for decades. The entire EU is bankrupt. I'm surprised that they haven't had a major financial collapse already. The US is headed that way as well... Chip
NATO needs years of unmolested construction to build the infrastructure that could support US' unreliable aircraft to try and establish air superiority (none of the such was provided to Ukraine in 2023).
Once infrastructure is built the US "build up" would tax world-wide US assets and take a year or two to deploy!
Logistics in a distant land war is a huge, unplanned burden!
Europe and the USA are constrained by the Modern Monetary Fiction. Printing Debt backed money for a generation, creating stock buy-backs, inflating existing assets (mostly paper), while disinvesting in hard industrial assets is the Iron Spike in the Military Coffin of the West.
This is precisely the point: that reality consists of concrete items ad processes, and that "financialization" is a (relatively) short term grift. The USA has reached the end of the line on that script and just about everyone knows it. All ov er but the cryin, which there will be alot of.
UK army can't get new recruits because why would people fight for a government which has turned their backs on the actual indigenous Brits ignoring them at every corner.
"The Russians can't win a conventional war against NATO, and they know that very well."
This is why you don't post while drunk, or were you sucking on that meth pipe again. The reality is that nato doesn't have the industrial capacity to defeat Russia.
Read the rest of the posts by that same twitter account
They are full of interesting information
And - in my introduction - I did underline that some of the tweets were erratic in content - and that this particular comment was picked up and very efficiently replied to by Larry Cloetta - you should read this
When you take the time carefully to read the ensemble you will understand the information given is of a very powerful build up in RF armaments production
Do not trash talk when you have not taken the time to read
Let's hope he's right. I expect that the Russian reaction will be to a) strengthen AD around the radar sites, b) increase attacks on foreign "mercenaries" in Ukraine, and b) continue the slow grind.
I agree there are more important things than him but still imagine?
Stranger things have happened and if that was the way out he agreed on with Putin then who am I to disagree.
That said, what he did (if not agreed on before which i don’t think) was a betrayal so IF he’s alive he should count himself fortunate and forever in Putin’s debt.
No seriously, I hope he's alive, kicking ass and taking names in Africa. Maybe Putin can show him off and credit his miraculous recovery to the necromancers which seem to have made liars of the Western media.
It's obvious that the West, which controls Ukraine is getting desperate. They are looking at a strategic defeat that is far worse than the Suez Canal Crisis.
I think that we should look at the NATO escalation with skepticism, with the understanding that the Western elite are a greedy, but craven bunch.
The problem is that the Western elite have also dismantled their nation's economic system and industrial base. Greed destroyed the West. They outsourced their industrial base to China out of greed. Now they don't have the industrial base to challenge Russia.
I don't think that Putin is in a rush. His tactic of gradually grinding the Western world and its Ukrainian puppet down is working, even if there are occasionally alarming attacks as Ukraine tries a desperate bid to get the Russians to retaliate in a way they hope will draw the West in, unable to understand the West doesn't have the military power to defeat the Russians in a conventional war.
Would've been nice, though, to learn more about Sweden's big plan to send in a ton of equipment to Ukraine, including some AWACS planes that apparently will be flown by Swedish pilots(!)
Thx, I will probably cover the Swedish planes next time as the report was already getting lengthy and the AWACs thing needs a little more room for some explanation.
Either the Swedish (Ericsson) AWACS will fly over NATO territory (but why then give them to Ukraine ? ) or they better be very very good at countermeasures against Russian long range AA or SAMs.
Or, I may be overanalyzing it, and the Western decision makers and their selected military cronies really think this will beat the orcs.
If they stay in NATO airspace then they add very little to the already extensive AWACS operations taking place. If they enter Ukrainian airspace then they will have a pretty short life expectancy. Putin has made clear that if they are flying in Ukrainian airspace from a NATO base then the Nato base becomes a legitimate target.
A quick Google look suggests that the Swedish AWACs are rather small planes - 1/10 the empty weight of an American E-3 with only 1/2 the tracking range - so I'd say that to be of any additional use at all they'd have to operate well inside Ukrainian airspace.
Swedish AWACS over the Ukraine would be a super easy shoot-down. So easy that it's one way for Sweden to enter the war. "Look at what they did to our poor airmen - who weren't even carrying any weapons!" AWACS works by sending out a very powerful beacon, a/k/a radar beam. Anti-aircraft missiles just follow the beacon to the point of origin. That's simpler and more decisive than playing EW games with the Swedes. When a true "red line" is decisively crossed, the better response is also very decisive.
I had a look at the militaries of Finland and Sweden, both non-NATO in the cold war. In summary both adopted a "porcupine strategy" against possible aggression from the USSR ie you can attack us but the cost of your victory will not be worth it. Both had large citizen based reserve armies and extensive territory covered in bad terrain. At the end of the Cold War Finland kept its military pretty well intact. Sweden on the other had abolished conscription and now has an army only about big enough to post guard on its equipment depots. It had and has extensive stocks of old kit which it could send to Ukraine, and has already done so. See say wiki for the lists of weapons it has/had in stock. Not game changer but helpful if you think prolonging the agony is a good thing.
I (former Swedish reserve officer in the infantry) have never seen the army move as fast as when it came to destroying old equipment as it did in the 2010 period. Little consideration was given to future usefulness, the new model was to keep some battalions that can be sent to Afghanistan etc.
The entire system to equip, train and arm a mass conscription army of ~700 000 was erased. I wonder if one intent was to remove weapons for the coming civil war in the 2040s era between muslims and swedes.
I am surprised the PBV302 were kept around.
As vehicles they are OK, better than the M113 since they are made of quality steel. The 20mm former aircraft auto cannon is useful against light targets, but we all understand it's a Cold War era battle taxi.
Pilots would not be a problem. There are Ukrainian pilots with Saab 340 type rating. Quite a lot of them actually. There's an entire airline in Ukraine which operates them as its primary type in service.
Operators on the other end... In no way, shape or form they're gonna be Ukrainian.
Interesting thing: Swedes only have 2 of them and no replacement until 2027, so they're sending their entire fleet.
In 2025, when the Ukraine has virtually no artillery left, it will be time for whole divisions to surrender or flee to the West...Some reportedly are refusing to fight now against hopeless odds..There is no point to any of these so-called peace conferences, since Russia has no reason to even bother with them...
Russia will - when it is in a position to lay down an agenda. Putin's problem is this: how do you deal with a declining Empire - a 'mad dog'? Those who believe that the USA is finished and has nothing left are stupid. It may not be able to 'win' -BUT it can inflict major damage AND will. We should all be grateful that in Putin you have someone who is rational. Who - in the west - can you think of who even begin to look like a statesman? You always have to allow a mad dog a way out. This is the art of war. Then diplomacy and politics takes over. And in doing this I can't help shedding a tear for Ukraine - which is why I find Zelenskyy so loathsome. Even the most pea-brained politician should have seen this coming.
My basic concern about all this is that western leaders and advisors (a) seem to live in their own infomation bubble and echo chamber, (b) are not listening and (c) are in a state of panic and taking decisions based on emotions like fear. Arguably we have arrived at this point precisely because they are such second rate people, and it is now a stretch to see them developing sense.
Elensky, is the 1 single person I loathe even more than my corrupt Govt. My mother's parents came to US from Ukraine and even though I have no real connection left with anyone living there now, it disturbs me that a Ukrainian would willingly and eagerly destroy his people and the country. The worst thing about him? He actively campaigned and promised the people of Ukraine peace! They believed him and now look
All part of the Chabad project of "Heavenly Jerusalem". Isreaeli media has somewhat covered this. Depopulating the Ukraine is the only part that the Israelis care about. The details of men dying painfully in trenches, well, many books of the Talmud say those are just cattle.
Well stated. The Houthi's shoot down some Reapers and some F-35s crash and suddenly Simplicius has America's entrails all over the world. America has 12 carrier groups, endless military bases, and significant diplomatic / financial reach from which to pinch Russians and its allies globally, all with intel clarity from above. Russia might - might - wind up with all the Donbass but NATO will be right on its new border. That's the current state, not some grinding victory. Again, Russia hasn't demilitarized Ukraine, it hasn't denazified Ukraine, and it has't achieved security for the breakaway regions.
The carrier groups will be all be sunk within the first day if they even dare to show up, and the F-35s are at about 50% combat readiness level at best. The US is being systematically kicked out of its military bases in Africa precisely because its diplomats are hated and no longer feared. Look at the reception Blinken got in Bejing.
Look at how easily the Houthis (for god's sake) are standing up to the mighty US Navy, which keeps its carriers at a safe distance from them.
I believe GM was talking a lot of rubbish about how Russia was weak for not instantly nuking the US when their OTH radars got damaged. It occurred to me that making a US carrier sink mysteriously would be an excellent and veiled method of escalation without going straight to the Sarmats.
The US has 12 carrier groups for all the world’s oceans and it’s having a hard time keeping with a full complement of sailors. It can’t keep the Red Sea open against an adversary that US military fanbois deride as shoeless. An adversary that’s been on the receiving end of the US military for a decade.
Zelensky was installed by NATO, and never cared about Ukraine...He will move to Israel or South Florida just before the roof caves in, with his billions in bribe money...
To supplement S's remarks on Putin's recent speeches - please find link to the Presidential Decree of May 7, the defining document for the development of the RF until 2036
As S states this is not about about developing a 'war economy' but about taking very seriously every aspect of development of the State and the country, as how the SMO is taken seriously - he coins the phrase 'the LoC is now the country'
Karl Sanchez has linked to, transcribed and translated the recent meeting at which VVP initiates one move to develop this Decree
Karl does a fantastic job delivering all the internal development of the RF. And if you read the transcripts he produces you'll see a very different Russia from the one portrayed by the west's lügenpresse, where it's clear that Russia is focused on the development and wellbeing of its people, something totally alien to the oligarchy in the west.
Have you noticed Simplicius, the Austrian colonel now started to incorporate yours and big Serge's takes on attrition warfare as opposed to territory-minded manoeuvre warfare in his videos? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gk7D_TliAuE
Thx, haven't seen but will check it out. The rest of the world is typically about 6-8 months downstream of our coverage here and usually picks up our crumbs only when it becomes painfully obvious to even the total dilettantes
Thanks for sharing Frantic. Very interesting to see a western analytical view of the current situation. As you mention, the confirming of tactics and developments is interesting.
You are right. The colonel enjoys free speech to an extent, as Austria, with Ireland, Cyprus and Malta are the only members of the European Union that are not members of NATO. That's why he can be considered a trustworthy source, even though it's better to read original takes here on Simplicius, "from the horse's mouth"
I thought Reisner's early stuff was good, then I thought he had been "got to". Maybe he is now allowed to say what he thinks? I will watch the link. Thanks.
The whole-of-Europe propaganda production in Project Ukraine assigns various roles to Players, minor & major. Reisner's /script/ tasks him with uttering permissible truths, which the PR team then whisks into the pervasive deception
Zelensky's days are numbered now. They are using him to do all the dirty work and, when the time is right, they'll throw him overboard, just like they have various other pawns. I wonder if he understands that, or perhaps he is too coked up to know or care?
I don't know how often this has to be said but here I go again: There is NO intention within NATO -old europe of escalating the conflict in any significant way (ignoring the nutty Baltics who can't do anything on their own except get annihilated, as Putin casually observed). It is risible to suggest that NATO is gagging for an excuse to get stuck in in Ukraine- much as Ukraine would love that. Western military leaders have kiboshed that. All this noise is intended now to try to press buttons amongst Russia's allies to panic them to pressure Russia into doing a deal that suits the west and soon, while there is still western Ukraine left for the west to hang onto.
As for why the Russians don't just go in all guns blazing and bring a swift end to this, because it wouldn't. The Russians are not so daft.
The Russian objective is to demilitarise Ukraine, and with China's encouragement, the wider west. There is no point in seizing territory just to sit on a permanent killing field- constant insurgency counter attacks, pockets of western supplied resistance eating up resources indefinitely into the future. The US would love that. Russia wants a Chechen resolution- peace and stability within a greater RF and what is left of Ukraine rediscovering where its loyalties really reside. And it will get it.
Thanks for this comment - I do not understand why commenters here, or anywhere, take anything of what NATO bureaucrats say to be anything like the truth or anything else than 'theatre' designed to collect cash, and to be more or less the exact opposite of the truth
These are often the same as the 'take the gloves off ' crowd
These remind one of the plebeians in the Roman circus, baying for blood
This is the measure of NATO/EUs other aim in talking up the 'war' - to control and render passive their own population, so that no resistance will be forthcoming to their failures, in this as in all aspects of governance
Macron's longer term interest is in militarising his own state against its obstreperous people. Across the west, the movement to various forms of a police state while making hysterical declarations about how undemocratic everyone else is, rolls on under this cover.
It is always worth a peak behind the tatty emerald curtain!
Do you think that Macron can push through anything like a full arms development program? or mass conscription?
He ahs talked but what has he done, I think he knows that any form of conscription is not going to be generally accepted
Besides conscription sounds like a solution, but it is a massive logistical investment and major organisational overhaul, which will demand long forgotten skills, and divert current army energy personnel and resources away from primary functions
Besides a people's army is a threat to régimes - that's the only lesson the Pentagon and the US régime learned in Vietnam
Moving to a war footing involves all sorts of oppression of the freedoms of ordinary civilians. This is not about conscription into an army that is intended to fight overseas. The French will never wear that. Macron will swing first. It is more like Sunak's wedge proposal sucking more and more people into a police state complex. Think of all those pervasive Nazi organisations like the Hitler 'youth'. Your own kids informing on you!
Macron is talking about, gingerly, introducing some form of national service carefully phrased as to be non military or mostly civil, as per the brits
Or shortly will do
No mention as afar as I know of conscription - but you suggest he wants to introduce and use conscription to create an army to police and oppress inside France but not outside?
I hope the french and the brits peoples are not quite that gullible, talk about selling them the rope to hang you with, here the people are to be conscripted into making the rope to hang themselves with, presumably unwillingly because mass suicide....?.I do not get it
If you hadn't noticed, which you have no reason to have if you're not on Britain. Since little Rishi mentioned his scheme of conscription. It hasn't been mentioned since. There's 2 main reasons for this, 1st & most important is, everyone including little Rishi knows he has no chance whatsoever of winning the election. The whole country hates his political party.. The vast majority do anyways. Secondly, the younger generation this was targeted at, have spoken in Unison. Their answer was loud, proud & very very clear. The answer was a simple 2 worded statement, the 1st word rhymed with the word Cluck, the second word of the statement rhymes with the word Cough. The young of today as well as being multicultural & having no loyalty to Britain whatsoever. Aren't as the naive younger generation of the past. They don't go & fight & die in other people's wars for fat old rich people to get richer. This was made very very clear to Rishi & his gang of fat old rich people. There's a massive reason little Rishi & his gang aren't letting the British public know what they're doing, concerning Ukraine. In fact it's unbelievable the ignorance in this country to their rulers actions.
Thanks for bringing Chechnya up. I often think that Chechenization of Ukraine is inevitable. I mean it in a sense of society and integration within a larger Russian world.
It may take 10 or 20 years but Ukrainian society will eventually have to admit that the West send them down the primrose path. We’re already heard first complaints of western betrayal, and from no other than president Zelensky.
I have also visited Chechnya, a place which remembers its history, destruction and shows a photo gallery of destroyed Grozny on the Main Street. They understand the forces behind separatism which led to war with Russia very well.
That is exactly why a negotiated peace will not bring peace to Ukraine or Russia. As it will be packaged and sold as a Russian capitulation and defeat, giving credence to the belief that is being promoted, that the Russian military is weak, backward, poorly led and equipped. In the end it is about perception and the narrative spun to promote a specific perspective. Russia would find herself embroiled in an insurgency the likes of which would drain Russian resources and man power. As though the Palestinians, as an occupied people have no right to resist the their occupiers in the eyes of the west. The Ukrainians will be lauded as it would be their legal right encouraged and promoted by their western Patreons to resist the occupation of the "Evil Russians" destroying every effort to rebuild Ukraine.
I really hope you are right. However, it just takes one mistake for this to explode in our faces. Don't underestimate the nihilistic stupidity of the collective West's war mongers. Unfortunately, they are very dangerous and actually believe the BS they spew.
Development of all provinces is a major part of VVP's program - the far East is very empty and neglected
Also is a particular area of co operation collaboration with China -
See VVP in Harbin, and VVP in Yakutia and Kamchatka - reports at karl sanchez substack
Far East is very cold too. Not exactly the easiest place to develop. Southernmost Pacific coastline and China/DPRK border areas are doing quite well in terms of development, but because of history (Russia being focused on Europe), it was never a big priority. It's getting better very fast however.
With the Earth's economic center of gravity shifting Eastwards quickly, Russian investment center of gravity is being pulled with it.
Find additional maritime rocks.....build on/in them...keep doing other cool stuff.
Easy
It's also warming up quite a lot, so that, some say, there will soon be millions of hectares available for agriculture (although others disagree)
And there is the question of Chinese immigration
"(although others disagree)" - yeah, people think it will miraculously become some great fertile plain. But that's not what is going to happen.
It will all turn into a very, very deep and soft swamp of unbelievable proportions. All releasing huge quantities of gases (mostly methane) into atmosphere, with some places with potentially lethal amounts of CO at ground level (in depressions and holes).
Too much water in summer, 300 billions of mosquitos per capita. And all of it freezing during winter.
Not to mention regular Bible-esque great flooding every spring/early summer.
It will take decades to stop the regular flooding, which will be a must before it dries enough to allow for any reasonable level of agriculture or infrastructure building.
Thawing permafrost is just about the most civilization unfriendly thing on dry land and it makes the so-called "rasputitsa" look like German autobahns.
Find rocks.....build on them....do other cool stuff.
Easy
You seem to be an american.
I recommend visiting places like Yakutsk before you continue to humiliate yourself some more
Chinese immigration is a bit unlikely. A Russian website posted a map of China's regions last year. All of Manchuria was in net population decline, around -11% over some 10 year period in this century. So even the Chinese want a better climate.
Funny. I'd call that the most hospitable climate In China.
Not too hot, real winters.
I think we should take those numbers with a grain of salt, but either way, the manpower ratio continues to deteriorate for Ukraine.
Yes, there's still good chance that Umerov may merely be reading Russia's total reserve strength and assuming Russia intends to use it in the war while Russia may in fact be choosing to keep it back for NATO deterrence. It's hard to know whether he's just guessing or going on actual intelligence--slight as it may be--that Russia intends to commit those forces.
Russia would make a big mistake in not holding back a substantial reserve capable of taking on a NATO intervention. Keep on squeezing and probing.
Not sure what form this scary NATO "intervention" would take given they have limited air power to be used over Ukraine, very limited artillery capability (lack of shells and even delivery systems), unusable tanks, clearly inferior air defenses and lack of infantry numbers against a foe like Russia. Of course, they DO have extensive ISR so they can easily observe their troops getting demolished in the field.
Someone needs to get real here.
Of course things might get so desperate that the USA has to bring out its huge numbers of anti-gravity UFO vehicles it built from stolen alien tech - perhaps even talk their alien allies at the South Pole to join them. Desperate times call for desperate measures!
Almost certainly you are right. The problem is - deployment of NATO troops in Ukraine is WW3, which might turn into nuclear conflict at any moment. I guess that Russia is regulating its military pressure at Ukraine so that SMO be finished this autumn, when the US hands are more or less tied by the elections, and they would not deploy troops in Ukraine. If the war is finished now, the probability of deployment is very high - we can clearly see it from all kinds of statements by different Western politicians. If the war would finish after the elections, and Biden is re-elected - the escalation seems almost imminent. If Trump is elected - I don't know how he will act.
Even Trump doesn't know what he would do. That's why Trump is dangerous. If the Democrat candidate were to be Biden, then the US and the West generally, would continue to circle down the drain. But I seriously do not expect Biden to be the nominee. In September - after the Dem. convention, not before - the Deep State will find some pretext for removing Biden. That will not be difficult. Doing the switcheroo after the convention means the Deep State gets tight control over naming the candidate. The DNC will be in on this game because they don't want all their candidates and projects to get wiped out in the November elections.
I expect a steadily increasing swarm of black signets as the BIG DAY approaches and the lines between the red.blue uniparty fall away into the chasm of chaos. So yeah, all the ingredients are in the pot and the intent to stir is overriding any logic and reason that might remain. Whatever pony gets selected we can be sure that escalation will continue. Kinda makes ya wonder just how bloody Uncle Sam's nose would have to get though.....
on the conrtrary the best plan would be to rotate those reserves through the Ukraine battlefields, get them up to speed and toughened up
You should not be thinking about "wasting" these reserve units, just employing them. In no way I see attrition ratio to be more than 10% (wounded included). I see no point of having a strategic reserve at this stage. If you have people - use them, and get this SMO over sooner rather than later. I think more troops translates to less casualties in the long run, and everyone gets combat experience. If NATO intervenes, it is easy to pull back significant quantity of troops and redeploy them. Russia always have the luxury of pulling back.
On top, if NATO enters the war in official capacity, I think that will automatically pull in Belarus. There is your reserve (until Russia mobilizes/redeploys). Maybe (although it is a big maybe) even some other CSTO members come into the fight in one way or another...
Your 10% "attrition ratio" is some majick number. Did you read it off the ceiling?
Not having a strategic reserve means betting everything on one play.
“The general who still retains a reserve [army] is not defeated.” – Mikhail Kutuzov, Field Marshall of the Russian Empire 1745-1813
Russia feeds troops in slowly so they can get combat experience under the supervision of combat veterans. Feeding them in all at once is a prescription for disaster.
Redeploying armies during wartime is always risky and especially now when both sides have nearly perfect ISR.
Belarus only has a relatively small army and they need to be ready for the Polish and Lithuanian armies.
Very Realistic
I trust that the Russian Army leadership is very wise and understands the security problem of the Russian state better than I ever could. They will make apropos decisions. They are professionals.
I wish I could say the same for my own country.
I liked the joke about the Lithuanian army
Not realistic.
I also think that the Russians will soon commit the required number of reserves to the battle. No one will hesitate. NATO will not interfere. And if enemies rise, there is always a big club
One has to consider the ongoing Western shitshow in geopolitics. BRICS+ is near 38% of global prduction as opposed to the collective Wests 26%. Russia is well served by the Tortoise approach as Yankeeland is falling to pieces with uncontrolled invasion at the Southern border, a dollar that is artificially propped up verging on collapse,(I am waiting for BRICS+ to finally pull the plug on the Petrodollar),it is US$34.78 Trillion in debt and has a debt to GDP ratio of
135.47% - Historically most countries default at 120% to 130% - failing infrastructure with no money to invest in new building. Basically it is slowly imploding and its sphere of influance,(intimidation),is waning rapidly.
Most of the actual European peoples do not want war.
Time is on Russias side at the moment.
"I think more troops translates to less casualties in the long run, "
Thinking is not knowing.
You clearly have zero understanding of the current situation or military strategy.
Hahahahah...
I'm always amused by the need of you insecure Internet trolls to insult other people in the comments. Does it help to heal your insecurity? If so, insult away. I don't mind really...
Maybe you should open a Substack page to explain military strategy to us with zero understanding of military strategy?
I promise to read it.
"a substantial reserve capable of taking on a NATO intervention."
The question is where such a Russian force would fight NATO. It can't just jump over Poland and fight in Germany, for example. It's also not going to fight NATO on the border with Kazakhstan or fight off a NATO amphibious landing in Russia's far east.
I think there are really only three candidates: on the border with Finland to defend Russian Karelia and, the two really hot venues, to defend Kaliningrad and St. Pete from NATO attacks launched from Poland and the Baltics. Presumably Belarus would chip in to help defend Kaliningrad.
There's no doubt in my mind Russia would go nuclear in a heartbeat to defend St. Pete, erasing all NATO military assets in Finland, Sweden, Denmark, and the Baltics. Same with Kaliningrad.
So maybe Russia doesn't really need so many men held in reserve for an infantry war with NATO. Given that situation is going to go at least tactically nuclear because Kaliningrad and St. Pete are so exposed on the far edge of Russia, those men will just be targets long before they engage in combat with NATO infantry forces. On the other hand, they could be very useful well before then in Ukraine.
Russia doesn't want to go nuclear. This speaks to having adequate conventional force to avoid this.
The purported invasion is not going to happen. They'll threaten as much as they feel they have to. But it won't happen. There is no force structure in Europe or the US sufficient to fight a continental war.
I agree Russia doesn't want to go nuclear. But then Russia also didn't want to invade Ukraine, either. It spent eight long years, despite many thousands of Russian people dying in Donbass, trying to make a non-war Minsk process work. You can't always get what you want.
I also agree that Russia feels having adequate conventional forces will help avoid going nuclear. There is no doubt in my mind that Russia will answer conventional force used against Russia with conventional force. But Russia knows that only goes so far, the main reason being that no practical increase in Russia's conventional forces can protect the two key regions of Russia that Russia must protect in a war with NATO and the US: Kaliningrad and St. Pete. The US and NATO know that as well, which is why NATO's chihuahuas like to taunt Russia about Kaliningrad.
Those two regions highlight the asymmetry between Russia and the US/NATO in the border regions between Russia and NATO states (excepting the very long northern border with Finland, where the local balance is more even). That asymmetry is about the power of conventional forces and also about an asymmetry of risk. Those asymmetries cut both ways.
Yes, Russia has far more conventional force to apply in some border regions next to NATO. The US's expeditionary forces in the Baltic states are tiny compared to even just 100,000 of Russia's newly built "extra 500,000" army.
But Poland can bring much more conventional force to bear against Kaliningrad, and in addition a collective effort by the US/NATO in Lithuania could easily add 40K to 50K men. There would be little point in Russia building up 200K troops in a Kaliningrad region surrounded by land and sea by the US and NATO, as those troops could not defend the city of Kaliningrad without it being destroyed by remote attacks. A conventional defense of Kaliningrad would ensure that Kaliningrad would be transformed into Gaza City, Raqqa, or Bakhmut.
A similar asymmetry of attack capabilities applies to St. Pete, where the US/NATO has successfully converted the Baltic Sea into a NATO lake: attack assets can flow down the funnel of the Baltic Sea into St. Pete, defended along the way by the many NATO assets which surround the Baltic Sea. Except for launches from Kaliningrad (which rapidly would be degraded because they are so localized to Kaliningrad) Russia can only strike those attacks en route using surface naval assets, which will be eliminated by NATO as both sides rapidly clean the Baltic of surface ships.
That's the other asymmetry, of risk, whereby despite Russia's vast range of conventional forces it has two pressure points that must be defended but which cannot be defended by conventional forces: Kaliningrad and St. Pete. [I use the English term "St. Pete" to convey the Russian habit of referring to St. Petersburg as "Peter" for short.]
Kaliningrad is a smallish island of territory surrounded by NATO. St. Pete is at the head of a gulf of the Baltic Sea at the extreme, isolated, northwest corner of Russia with significantly more NATO/US offensive power adjacent than defensive Russian power. A conventional defense of St. Pete would also ensure its destruction.
There is no way Russia will allow either Kaliningrad or its "Northern Capital," the second largest city in Russia with a population of over nine million, to be bombarded by the West, the way Donetsk City has been bombarded for ten years, and there is no way Russia can prevent that with conventional forces. It has to use tactical nukes to stop attacks on St. Pete.
There's no need for NATO to physically invade St. Pete to generate intolerable pressure on Russia. Striking it with long range precision weapons would be more than enough. In the case of Kaliningrad, NATO could more successfully invade than Russia could defend without using nukes. It's a reverse of the classic cold war scenario where the USSR could have invaded Germany through the Fulda Gap and the only way NATO could have stopped such an invasion, as everybody knew, was by using tactical nukes.
Even without an invasion of Kaliningrad a NATO bombardment and blockade of Kaliningrad would cause immense pressure that Russia likely could not break without using tactical nukes. Russia would have to invade and seize most of Lithuania on the one side and much of Poland on the other side, right up to Warsaw almost, to ensure continuity between Kaliningrad and mainland Russia. I don't see how conventional war on that scale could proceed without it going nuclear.
I think that's one of the main reasons that Russia and Belarus have been conducting tactical nuclear weapons drills in Belarus. Everybody knows the only way Russia can defend Kaliningrad is through the use of tactical nukes. What's gone unnoticed is that the same applies to a highly exposed St. Pete as well, which Russia also cannot protect without using nuclear weapons.
As for fighting a continental war, neither the US nor Russia have the force structure for that, nor do they need it given that the continental war will be a Ukrainian war on a larger scale, point attacks against vulnerable pressure points using precision, long range weapons. Strikes on essential pressure points like Norway's oil networks, oil ports, LNG terminals and gas storage facilities could rapidly build intolerable pressure for the EU. As Putin remarked, those are small countries with very dense populations, so dense and so totally dependent on a handful of pressure points that even conventional weapons can apply intolerable pressure in a way that can only be relieved by recourse to nuclear weapons.
So no, you can't always get what you want, and no matter how much Russia wants to avoid the use of nukes the West is taking step after step that will make the use of nukes inevitable.
While I respect your reasoning, I tend to doubt a lot that NATO be able to seriously threaten Kaliningrad oblast. Neither Kaliningrad, much less St. Petersburg, are Mossul or Raqqa, there is no chance to run 24/7 air raids unresponded. Rather, NATO planes would fall down like flies.
Mind the US/NATO or "coalition of the willing" needed months over months to build up a considerable force against the third class army of the third world country of Iraq. Further on mind the months long buildup of the force for the Ukrainian counter-oink, and its outcome.
NATO may of course start aerial war bombing Kaliningrad and St.Petersburg. That would immediately summon bombing of all NATO airfields from which such raids originate, and cause the loss of a lot of warplanes to Russian AD. I may or may not cause tactical nuke counter attack, sure. But first venues of escalation for Russia and Byelorussia would be cutting off the Suwalki gap, and disabling all Baltic port infrastructure - no need to flatten all, mining would do the job. The pathetic NATO brigades there would simply be cut off.
NATO forces would have to rely on far off airfields not immune to Russian strikes though. And the US would have to weigh whether or not inflicting their carrier battle groups. My bet is rather not, the US military does not seem overly motivated to risk this resource.
If both sides would strive to keep the fighting below the all out nuklear level, NATO would be worse off. Russia would not need to conquer much, just starve the Chihuahuas. NATO could not field the forces to conquer any serious part of Kaliningrad oblast while Russia may or may not conquer the tiny Suwalki corridor, under all circumstances make it unviable for NATO.
I do not say that use of tactical nukes would be impossible, but do not see it inevitable. As german journalist Dagmar Henn wrote in the wake of the war, NATO is "rattling with no saber".
I agree often with your reasoning and recognise your knowledge of Russia - but it is a great stretch to argue from VVP and the RF government classes reluctance to go to war in the Ukraine, to going nuclear
(if one is not reluctant to go to war one is a fool)
You appear to believe that the US gvmt has the capability to make plans and to execute them - this is contrary to recent experience, recent history, and above all current practice - that is to say that almost every action and initiative is nothing other than than reactive to/according to perceived threats and their own ignorance
And that the US is capable of 'forcing' the RF to nuclear, or go there itself
What has changed for RF since 2022- the success of the war campaigns, re-armament, the economy, social cohesion, etc has made for a great deal of organisation, and confidence perhaps somewhat lacking prior
The greater change has been the alliance with China - the China ruling class is even more patient, level headed and violence averse than VVP
It is necessary to view this alliance as substantial and indeed dominant
The US gvmt is peppered with people with few notions of adequate self control, but they are not 'sociopaths' etc, contrary to those who do not wish to take the trouble to understand them or the structure of their society and ruling class, nor are they the decision makers
To the US establishment all those ex Nazis and East Europeans in the governing sections they used initially to plan this war have got everything wrong so far, plus they are little better than hired hands, and have no real sway in high places, make some tactical but not strategic decisions
RF was just an easy resource grab
The real enemy, the real threat to their livelihoods, long term and definitive, is China
The US will happily use Tawian as hostage proxy, 'kick up a fuss', make their point: perhaps burn down a few TSMC plants, beyond that they will reach an understanding, insofar as they can, with the China ruling class
Under cover of new and long term cold war competition
While I 100% agree with HBI about Russia wanting to avoid nukes I also believe that in the event of phsycopaths such as Nuland, Marcron, Blinken et al managing to get a nuclear strike on Russia made to ''show strength'' Russia has a whole lot of nuclear armed submarine patrolling no-body but Russia knows and I am certain that alongside ICBM's nearly all major cities in the NATO
alliance would be mushroom clouds.
You are very wrong about Russia's goals. The first strike will be on Poland, Germany, Romania and the Baltic States. And then we'll look at the result.
Yep, when real shit will start, Russia will nuke firstly those NATO countries which don't have their own strategic nuclear weapon because they can't respond and then Russian leadership will ask USA do they want to be next?
The only place where Russia can possibly fight against NATO is Ukraine or border between Poland and Belarus. This is the only direction where NATO can possibly deploy some more or less significant number of ground forces to attack Russia. Attacking from Finland will be very hard or impossible at all because of the worst possible type of terrain for moving of ground forces. There are only swamps, lakes and forests with few roads and infrastructure for logistics and supplying the army. NATO tanks are already experiencing problems on Ukrainian territory due to their large mass. The landscape near the northwestern border of Russia may become completely impassable for them. Deploying forces in the Baltic countries is a very stupid idea, because if a direct conflict with Russia begins, they will be surrounded from the start. Deployment directly into a pre-formed cauldron is a guaranteed suicidal mission.
"It's also not going to fight NATO on the border with Kazakhstan or fight off a NATO amphibious landing in Russia's far east."
The Russian Navy will obliterate those NATO assets before they land on Russia's Far East. And even if western forces could mount an amphibious landing count on China and North Korea to send their own forces to reinforce the Russians.
Yes, we are in total agreement. I meant that as examples of scenarios that aren't gong to happen, for example, given reasons like you've raised.
Umerov does not know the exact number of Russian reserves. 200 or 300 thousand is a big difference. Umerov simply relies on an approximate calculation from open sources.
All this talk filed under: Metal Talks & BullShit Walks
30 May 2024 NATO incapability, The Baltic boots and arms, Industrial Armaments Production, the Czech shells, and more
Please note- a continuation of the discussion in S’s last post about the role the Baltics/Nordics play in spreading EUNATO propoganda about ‘going to war’, ‘saving our democracy’ ‘saving our Europe’’ ‘Help ! the Russians are coming’
This propoganda is incoherent and sporadic, betrays no strategic thought, nor presents any proposals about how to organise an EU or a NATO plan, either in Ukraine, or in Europe
The EU and NATO have no plans either, except to try and get more money ‘for defence’ in case one day they might think of something to do, apart from sending a trickle of arms to their fence in Ukraine
Some comments lifted from twitter posters who seem competent if erratic a little - these comments flesh out S’s discussions of these matters and give some additional details
There’s a lot of discussion as to whether the Baltics will or are able to contribute more than propoganda chitchat – the conclusion is obvious, but again good evidence is provided as to why
A discussion of problems with EU industrial production of arms, including a description of Rheinmetall’s Business Plan-
-the EU’s answer to Raytheon etc- stock price up over 500% since Feb 2022, and 1,400% since current CEO Papperberger joined, giving him a fortune of approx €83B, no wonder he’s talking up a European arms consortium
So that his job is the same as the Baltics gvmts etc – talk up NATO intervention, talk up RF invasion & is the devil, dedicate to helping Ukraine, while doing close to nothing except to sell stock by shouting ‘fire’ in the Bourse
Most interesting of all are the comments on RF industrial arms production, and how this is only now gaining very significantly in output, and is capable of being considerably increased, factories not working 24/7 yet
Plus details on very considerable possible arms transfers from Iran and NK+-
Plus raising more clearly the proposition that China could be fighting a proxy war with the US, which may strike some as ridiculous or as an unfair description of a ‘partnership of equals’, but which makes some underhand sense
There are also details on those shells the fabulating Czechs claimed to have found – they have not quite disappeared, but almost, and for this they blame……the dastardly Russians !
Plus their President has gone from NATO hound dog to fierce peacenik
https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2024/05/20/czech-ammunition-buy-for-ukraine-nears-first-delivery-faces-headwinds/
https://nitter.poast.org/elisabethmalom1/status/1792561614308233272#m
But first, for all you doomers, here’s yet another post from Aurelien, who long has been patiently explaining the incapacities and incapabilities of NATO with regard to any type of military intervention in Ukraine beyond the trivial and anecdotal –
In a word- NATO = chihuahua
» any deployment is going to be mostly theatre, aimed as much at domestic public opinion as at the Russians »
https://aurelien2022.substack.com/p/natos-phantom-armies
ANNEXE
https://nitter.poast.org/pati_marins64/status/1794841732732874899#m
« Some industrial planning lessons!
Next month would be the delivery of the first 180,000 shells for Ukraine from the so-called Czech initiative. But despite all good intentions, this delivery isn't going to happen due to a simple reason: there aren't 180,000 shells available in the western market to be delivered, even at a cost of $5,000 per unit (which is five times what the Russians are paying).
The industrial bases for this proposal weren't adequately prepared, probably because it's more profitable to sell a guided shell for $70,000-$250,000 than to produce 50-100 conventional projectiles that demand significant investment. What if the war ends tomorrow and the orders just disappear?
The western military complex lacks an industrial command capable of organizing and dealing with the government.
Recently, Rheinmetall proposed a European arms consortium. Sincerely, it would be the worst idea, just adding more organization to an already existing cartel.
Nobody has made so much money in this war delivering so little as Rheinmetall has.
But recently, finally, some good news came when Ursula Von der Leyen announced plans to create a European strategy for its arms industry, focusing on organizing the sector. This is key for any success. When we look at the Russian arms industry, it's impressive how they rebuilt it in just two years with the organization and planning from ROSTEC.
With a different approach, Rostec ensures that the industrial park is focused on national interest. Sometimes this almost bankrupts factories, as they are forced to produce and sell weapons to the Russian MoD with discounts of 25%-50%, and other times almost for free, under the promise that they will earn future export deals.
This is how the Russians keep producing at a low cost during this war and still increase production. Europe, on the other hand, sells some AMV/IFV military vehicles at the cost of $25-30 million, which is more than some tanks. The Russians produce equivalent vehicles at 6-8 times less cost.
It's impossible to sustain a war with all the planning, development, and market prices in the hands of private companies, as the Europeans are doing.
The Russians have invested around $25 billion in industrial capacity since 2022, including semiconductors, metallurgy, aerospace, and mainly direct investment in the main Armored Repair Plants, hiring more than 8,000 workers, and opening and expanding existing installations like engine factories and electronics. Everything is planned and executed by Rostec and the Russian MoD.
A European strategy, centering its industrial complex, could change things significantly for the West. But until that happens, the Russians have an enormous advantage because they control their production and supply chains, which allows them to set the best strategies and timing for war.
When I see a German company selling a simple 4x4 military vehicle without any armor for $600,000 or a single 30mm cartridge for $1 million, I perceive that the West has no long-term chances in this war if they don’t completely reform their arms sector. The Russian advantage is not in missiles or land gains; it's in how they have set the basis for a long war at low cost and by controlling the supply chains.
For example, last year they planned to deliver 180 T-80BVM tanks but only delivered fewer than 140 due to engine and track shortages. A few weeks ago, they built an engine factory and a workshop to produce tracks, with an increase in metallurgy. We can now estimate a considerable increase in T-80BVM tanks being deployed.
They created a plan to resolve every bottleneck, and this is the part that Ukraine and some allies don't understand. But the US does understand and knows exactly where they stand at this moment. Why? The Pentagon. This has become a part of US military culture: study, planning, and controlling the arms industry.
But sometimes even the Pentagon cannot control the arms companies. Imagine Europe without any structure for this purpose.
The West is completely entangled by the Russian initiative in this war, like a football team reactively trying to take the ball.
https://nitter.poast.org/pati_marins64
« Who are the French instructors going to train in Ukraine?
Why send instructors after 2 years of war when the Ukrainians lack manpower?
If they didn't send these instructors when Ukraine was training tens of thousands of volunteers and conscripts, why they should do now?
It seems like another step of escalation, and again, the allies are trying to move the Overton window.
An international intervention in Ukraine is completely insane and could drag Europe into a prolonged war, but above all, make the situation even more dangerous.
When the US does not allow their weapons to be used inside Russia, they know exactly what they are talking about.
The Russians are fighting this war without a national mobilization that could put more than 2 million soldiers on the ground in a short time. But we can go deeper and mention that none of the Russian military factories is working 24/7 yet. They operate 12/5 and in a few sectors 24/5. Yes, they can escalate significantly from boots on the ground to industrial production.
Will Europe do the same? If Europe is ready to fight a real war, okay.
In an escalatory scenario, the Russians would be exchanging nuclear technology for weapons and personal equipment with countries like Iran and North Korea. And yes, both countries can offer much more to Russia in this case. These highly militarized countries can help the Russians train and equip 2 million men in less than 2 months. And possibly we can also include Belarus there.
I'm talking about tanks, IFVs, anti-air systems, artillery, missiles, and personal equipment.
And I have no doubts that the Russians are ready for this kind of negotiation in case of a massive international intervention in Ukraine.
The West is trying to avoid a humiliation caused by themselves, who were unable to predict the Russian industry's response, and letting the war be handled by private hands. Not to mention all the logistical mistakes with western repair centers working 2000km from the frontlines.
Yes, this defeat is necessary for the West to rethink its defense sector and political decisions.
But above all, it's not a complete defeat. There are many things on the table for negotiations:
Occupied territories
Frozen assets
Sanctions
Visas
And other important points to be discussed as part of a regional peace plan.
The other way will be long and bloody. The Russians are not going to accept a defeat due to NATO intervention. They are ready for a long war with a very solid domestic narrative.
Many people in Europe have forgotten what a war is like, and especially for Ukraine, a Russian mobilization would be devastating.
Nobody wins at this situation.
Some low-level statesmen in Europe are seeking a war without any industrial military background, committing the same mistakes that led them into this imminent defeat.
It's not about support an invasion or the self-defense right. It's about sanity to avoid something bigger.
I don't think the US will allow this escalation, but in an electoral year everything is possible.
https://nitter.poast.org/pati_marins64/status/1795125859470180474#m
« Can a consortium of few countries stop the Russians in Ukraine?
"If Russia achieves a strategic breakthrough in eastern Ukraine, the Baltics and Poland will send troops into Ukrainian territory," reports Der Spiegel.
The first thing to note is that Poland is at the beginning of a military build-up that will need at least 6-10 years to establish national factories and local supply chains.
The Polish aren't going to do anything before that time. So, why is Der Spiegel alarming readers? Exactly because they are moving an "Overton window" there. It's not about the Baltics and Poland, but about the acceptance of international intervention in Ukraine.
Days ago, the Italian newspaper La Repubblica wrote something similar. More countries are interested in intervening in Ukraine, not to fight, but to occupy some cities and zones to prevent a Russian advance. Nobody want more war.
The Russians can't win a conventional war against NATO, and they know that very well. But if this force is not large enough and does not consist of several countries, I have my doubts if it will dissuade the Russians from advancing.
As I wrote in my previous text, the Russians are fighting a different kind of war and can sustain this for 2-3 more years at the current rate of production and fire.
From Omsktransmash, Uraltransmash, Kurganmashzavod, and Uralvagonzavod, the Russians keep producing more vehicles than the entire Europe, even without a significant jump in numbers.
For example, during this war, Uralvagonzavod has never produced more than 200 new tanks, such as the T-72B3M or T-90MS.
This number is similar to what they produced before the war. Is this good news? No, exactly because it's four times the number of tanks produced in Europe, and even considering the upgrades, which take longtime, the numbers are behind of Uralvagonzavod.
Omsktransmash raised its production by 2.5 times this year. We can expect 170-200 new T-80BVM.
The Boxer and Patria are the main military vehicles produced in high numbers in Europe, with around 400-450 units annually.
The Russian Kurganmashzavod produced around 600-650 IFVs last year. Even if we add the production of the German Puma, Lynx, or the Swedish CV90, the numbers are still smaller than the Russian production, not to mention the cost.
This year, the Russians are putting out something like 4,000 vehicles, including new ones, refurbished and repaired coming back to the front.
This is insane, and the allies lost the war when they decided to accept an attrition war against someone with a vast Soviet heritage. Will this Soviet heritage dry up? Surely, but don't count on it within the next 2 or 3 years.
In summary, even a European taskforce, if not robust with a high number of countries and vast US equipment, can't dissuade the Russians, who are prepared for a long war, even against a small group of EU countries. »
A response to the above
Larry Cloetta - https://nitter.poast.org/not_insayne
The Russians can't win a conventional war against NATO, and they know that very well.”
You seem very young, and your entire arguments, over the last many months, are based on incomplete understandings, or outright false premises as demonstrated by your statement above. These sequential false premises undermine almost every argument you present, day after day.
It’s very possibly true that “the Russians can’t win a conventional war against NATO”, provided that war is fought in the UK, Germany, France, Australia, the US, or Africa. But, any conventional war between NATO and Russia would be fought completely on Russia territory, any 6th grader would, I’d think, understand that at this point. In which case, the opposite would be true: NATO can’t win a conventional war against Russia. Not the one which would actually be fought. You can war game this a hundred times, and NATO could never once win that war, horrible as it would be. That war gaming has been done.
And, out of kindness, I’m leaving out the possibility of Chinese intervention, something which is more likely than not in that scenario, since China understands full well that the West only wants to destroy Russia as an appetizer, and China would be next up were Russia to fall. I am also leaving out the question of level of motivations of those who would be fighting for their homeland vs. the relative lack of motivation of those soldiers who would be fighting a losing battle in a foreign land for reasons they won’t understand, since jingoistic propaganda is not as effective as it once was. Not to put too fine a point on it, but the U.S. has the best fighting force in NATO, by a huge margin, and it was not good enough to defeat the Taliban, and that was not because “they didn’t really try.” And, the German and French and British armies are a joke compared to the U.S. military, even as castrati as the U.S. military now is, relative to how it once was.
You seem like a reasonably intelligent person, but you do not seem to have a complete grasp of the subjects you address, and rattling off production numbers completely misses the larger points. (And with regard to those you noted, it’s also not realistic to claim, as you seem to do, that Russia can only sustain this war for 2 to 3 years. Russia can sustain, or increase this, indefinitely.)
The misleading of people, which you do every day, only serves to get people killed, for no reason at all, at this point. Ukraine is not ever going to be “in NATO” in any shape or form. It is going to be a neutral territory, under any government it chooses which desire and will implement that. That is basically all that needs to happen and the war will end. Short of that it will continue until, that is achieve
"The Russians can't win a conventional war against NATO, and they know that very well. "
Respectfully disagree. NATO is a paper tiger. NATO countries, outside the US, have been neglecting their investments in their militaries for decades. The entire EU is bankrupt. I'm surprised that they haven't had a major financial collapse already. The US is headed that way as well... Chip
NATO needs years of unmolested construction to build the infrastructure that could support US' unreliable aircraft to try and establish air superiority (none of the such was provided to Ukraine in 2023).
Once infrastructure is built the US "build up" would tax world-wide US assets and take a year or two to deploy!
Logistics in a distant land war is a huge, unplanned burden!
Europe and the USA are constrained by the Modern Monetary Fiction. Printing Debt backed money for a generation, creating stock buy-backs, inflating existing assets (mostly paper), while disinvesting in hard industrial assets is the Iron Spike in the Military Coffin of the West.
Diplomacy is their last chance of survival.
This is precisely the point: that reality consists of concrete items ad processes, and that "financialization" is a (relatively) short term grift. The USA has reached the end of the line on that script and just about everyone knows it. All ov er but the cryin, which there will be alot of.
UK army can't get new recruits because why would people fight for a government which has turned their backs on the actual indigenous Brits ignoring them at every corner.
Who is this "you" misleading us that Gerrard White is talking to?
The Russians can't slaughter Nazi Germany on the Eastern Front.
BUT THEY DID.
Bold claims backed up by empty words.
"The Russians can't win a conventional war against NATO, and they know that very well."
This is why you don't post while drunk, or were you sucking on that meth pipe again. The reality is that nato doesn't have the industrial capacity to defeat Russia.
Read the rest of the posts by that same twitter account
They are full of interesting information
And - in my introduction - I did underline that some of the tweets were erratic in content - and that this particular comment was picked up and very efficiently replied to by Larry Cloetta - you should read this
When you take the time carefully to read the ensemble you will understand the information given is of a very powerful build up in RF armaments production
Do not trash talk when you have not taken the time to read
Like
Well, now I realize why Putin was so reluctant to respond to the strikes on the OTH radars. Here's hoping the slow roll flattens them all.
Let's hope he's right. I expect that the Russian reaction will be to a) strengthen AD around the radar sites, b) increase attacks on foreign "mercenaries" in Ukraine, and b) continue the slow grind.
Prigozhin is not dead.
I know I know. Crazy talk, right? 😉
Well, there were those new photos in Africa which showed a Prigozhin lookalike a few days ago
Really? Where can they be viewed?
https://x.com/Raso6691/status/1793593843650109658
He looks more like another Russian bald guy. 😁😁😁
Looks a bit too heavy set to be Prig.
Well... it's quite hard to say, since his face is blurred!
It looks very like him. The way he rests his foot on the side of the truck - dunno - it was characteristic.
If that is true then I think it is basically a given that Putin must have helped faking his death.
I mean he did "die" before
He's worse than dead, he's irrelevant. Why are we wasting so much talk about him?
So you can chime in and redirect.
Redirect to something relevant. Agreed.
I agree there are more important things than him but still imagine?
Stranger things have happened and if that was the way out he agreed on with Putin then who am I to disagree.
That said, what he did (if not agreed on before which i don’t think) was a betrayal so IF he’s alive he should count himself fortunate and forever in Putin’s debt.
Prigozhin lives!
No seriously, I hope he's alive, kicking ass and taking names in Africa. Maybe Putin can show him off and credit his miraculous recovery to the necromancers which seem to have made liars of the Western media.
We go through the same litany with every Russian setback.
He's dead. Accept it and move on.
The entire script could be a fabrication.
He took the money (US-Alphabet's) and ran. Dead see? Nobody to pursue!
It's obvious that the West, which controls Ukraine is getting desperate. They are looking at a strategic defeat that is far worse than the Suez Canal Crisis.
I think that we should look at the NATO escalation with skepticism, with the understanding that the Western elite are a greedy, but craven bunch.
The problem is that the Western elite have also dismantled their nation's economic system and industrial base. Greed destroyed the West. They outsourced their industrial base to China out of greed. Now they don't have the industrial base to challenge Russia.
I don't think that Putin is in a rush. His tactic of gradually grinding the Western world and its Ukrainian puppet down is working, even if there are occasionally alarming attacks as Ukraine tries a desperate bid to get the Russians to retaliate in a way they hope will draw the West in, unable to understand the West doesn't have the military power to defeat the Russians in a conventional war.
Like
If you like a comment just click the damn heart icon and move on given that you have sweet fuck all to say. All your comments so far are just '^'.
From a bird's eye view, things do seem to be shaping up that way....
One is growing, the other fracturing... Hard to turn that on a dime.
like
Thank you for yet another comprehensive analysis.
Would've been nice, though, to learn more about Sweden's big plan to send in a ton of equipment to Ukraine, including some AWACS planes that apparently will be flown by Swedish pilots(!)
Thx, I will probably cover the Swedish planes next time as the report was already getting lengthy and the AWACs thing needs a little more room for some explanation.
Just call in the Drone buster Huthis . Swedish AWACs no problem , from the Camel riding drone killers.
Seriously though, the sooner NATO airforce assets get whacked the better.
And no I am not gunning for the RF to overreact.
When its time, global hawks AWACS and the like need to be neutralized along with other ISR assets.
Either the Swedish (Ericsson) AWACS will fly over NATO territory (but why then give them to Ukraine ? ) or they better be very very good at countermeasures against Russian long range AA or SAMs.
Or, I may be overanalyzing it, and the Western decision makers and their selected military cronies really think this will beat the orcs.
If they stay in NATO airspace then they add very little to the already extensive AWACS operations taking place. If they enter Ukrainian airspace then they will have a pretty short life expectancy. Putin has made clear that if they are flying in Ukrainian airspace from a NATO base then the Nato base becomes a legitimate target.
A quick Google look suggests that the Swedish AWACs are rather small planes - 1/10 the empty weight of an American E-3 with only 1/2 the tracking range - so I'd say that to be of any additional use at all they'd have to operate well inside Ukrainian airspace.
Of course they will fly in Ukraine.
Swedish AWACS over the Ukraine would be a super easy shoot-down. So easy that it's one way for Sweden to enter the war. "Look at what they did to our poor airmen - who weren't even carrying any weapons!" AWACS works by sending out a very powerful beacon, a/k/a radar beam. Anti-aircraft missiles just follow the beacon to the point of origin. That's simpler and more decisive than playing EW games with the Swedes. When a true "red line" is decisively crossed, the better response is also very decisive.
https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1796223497686896757
You do understand this is all propaganda and the Russians are not the target.
This is just to keep the Ukrainians fighting past their expiration date.
The threats of NATO attack on Russia ARE targeted on Russia. The intent is to force VVP to the negotiating table. They do not understand their mark.
Filed under: Metal Talks & Bullshit Walks...again....
But yeah, they are just doing a Hail Mary and wishing for the best.
They really dont understand their mark.
I had a look at the militaries of Finland and Sweden, both non-NATO in the cold war. In summary both adopted a "porcupine strategy" against possible aggression from the USSR ie you can attack us but the cost of your victory will not be worth it. Both had large citizen based reserve armies and extensive territory covered in bad terrain. At the end of the Cold War Finland kept its military pretty well intact. Sweden on the other had abolished conscription and now has an army only about big enough to post guard on its equipment depots. It had and has extensive stocks of old kit which it could send to Ukraine, and has already done so. See say wiki for the lists of weapons it has/had in stock. Not game changer but helpful if you think prolonging the agony is a good thing.
I (former Swedish reserve officer in the infantry) have never seen the army move as fast as when it came to destroying old equipment as it did in the 2010 period. Little consideration was given to future usefulness, the new model was to keep some battalions that can be sent to Afghanistan etc.
The entire system to equip, train and arm a mass conscription army of ~700 000 was erased. I wonder if one intent was to remove weapons for the coming civil war in the 2040s era between muslims and swedes.
I am surprised the PBV302 were kept around.
As vehicles they are OK, better than the M113 since they are made of quality steel. The 20mm former aircraft auto cannon is useful against light targets, but we all understand it's a Cold War era battle taxi.
Pilots would not be a problem. There are Ukrainian pilots with Saab 340 type rating. Quite a lot of them actually. There's an entire airline in Ukraine which operates them as its primary type in service.
Operators on the other end... In no way, shape or form they're gonna be Ukrainian.
Interesting thing: Swedes only have 2 of them and no replacement until 2027, so they're sending their entire fleet.
The ASC 890 plane will not be piloted by Swedish pilots. The package include training and advice during use.
In 2025, when the Ukraine has virtually no artillery left, it will be time for whole divisions to surrender or flee to the West...Some reportedly are refusing to fight now against hopeless odds..There is no point to any of these so-called peace conferences, since Russia has no reason to even bother with them...
Russia will - when it is in a position to lay down an agenda. Putin's problem is this: how do you deal with a declining Empire - a 'mad dog'? Those who believe that the USA is finished and has nothing left are stupid. It may not be able to 'win' -BUT it can inflict major damage AND will. We should all be grateful that in Putin you have someone who is rational. Who - in the west - can you think of who even begin to look like a statesman? You always have to allow a mad dog a way out. This is the art of war. Then diplomacy and politics takes over. And in doing this I can't help shedding a tear for Ukraine - which is why I find Zelenskyy so loathsome. Even the most pea-brained politician should have seen this coming.
My basic concern about all this is that western leaders and advisors (a) seem to live in their own infomation bubble and echo chamber, (b) are not listening and (c) are in a state of panic and taking decisions based on emotions like fear. Arguably we have arrived at this point precisely because they are such second rate people, and it is now a stretch to see them developing sense.
Or are they so compromised due to bribery or blackmail (Epstein/Mossad) that they will do anything to keep their dirty secrets hidden?
THIS^^^
Elensky, is the 1 single person I loathe even more than my corrupt Govt. My mother's parents came to US from Ukraine and even though I have no real connection left with anyone living there now, it disturbs me that a Ukrainian would willingly and eagerly destroy his people and the country. The worst thing about him? He actively campaigned and promised the people of Ukraine peace! They believed him and now look
Precisely my view. The man is either a fool, consumed by his ego or corrupt and perhaps all three. Either way he deserves to be harshly dealt with.
His allegiance is elsewhere🇮🇱
All part of the Chabad project of "Heavenly Jerusalem". Isreaeli media has somewhat covered this. Depopulating the Ukraine is the only part that the Israelis care about. The details of men dying painfully in trenches, well, many books of the Talmud say those are just cattle.
Pretty much.....
That's why it is necessary to look to China
No one thought/knew much about the Iran-Saudi peace making : certainly no one thought of asking the US for their input
It can be said that the west asia is more torturous an area of politics religion and divisions
even than the Ukraine- and that's excluding the Israel Palestine problem
Yet it would appear that Iran SA agreements are building and bringing in other countries
The peace or cease fire or whatever process in Ukraine looks complex, but the recent China Russia agreement was the first step
Well stated. The Houthi's shoot down some Reapers and some F-35s crash and suddenly Simplicius has America's entrails all over the world. America has 12 carrier groups, endless military bases, and significant diplomatic / financial reach from which to pinch Russians and its allies globally, all with intel clarity from above. Russia might - might - wind up with all the Donbass but NATO will be right on its new border. That's the current state, not some grinding victory. Again, Russia hasn't demilitarized Ukraine, it hasn't denazified Ukraine, and it has't achieved security for the breakaway regions.
The carrier groups will be all be sunk within the first day if they even dare to show up, and the F-35s are at about 50% combat readiness level at best. The US is being systematically kicked out of its military bases in Africa precisely because its diplomats are hated and no longer feared. Look at the reception Blinken got in Bejing.
Look at how easily the Houthis (for god's sake) are standing up to the mighty US Navy, which keeps its carriers at a safe distance from them.
I believe GM was talking a lot of rubbish about how Russia was weak for not instantly nuking the US when their OTH radars got damaged. It occurred to me that making a US carrier sink mysteriously would be an excellent and veiled method of escalation without going straight to the Sarmats.
I didn't say nuking the CONUS, but by protocol a pre-emptive counterforce strike should have been launched.
You should fly ro Moscow and tell them all about it. I'll chip in on a ticket for you.
F35’s 29% combat readiness. They can’t keep them in the air.
One just crashed literally on the way out of the factory.
The US has 12 carrier groups for all the world’s oceans and it’s having a hard time keeping with a full complement of sailors. It can’t keep the Red Sea open against an adversary that US military fanbois deride as shoeless. An adversary that’s been on the receiving end of the US military for a decade.
…and what are fueling all those diesel guzzling carrier groups with…Russian oil of course.
Yea look how well those carrier groups are doing in the red sea. You are delusional. Walk away from the Crack pipe.
^^^
Zelensky was installed by NATO, and never cared about Ukraine...He will move to Israel or South Florida just before the roof caves in, with his billions in bribe money...
THIS^^^
The US is a debt-ridden empire with a quarantined budget for foreign interference.
To supplement S's remarks on Putin's recent speeches - please find link to the Presidential Decree of May 7, the defining document for the development of the RF until 2036
https://translated.turbopages.org/proxy_u/ru-en.en.30b4afab-665738d3-d12a5d33-74722d776562/www.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/73986
As S states this is not about about developing a 'war economy' but about taking very seriously every aspect of development of the State and the country, as how the SMO is taken seriously - he coins the phrase 'the LoC is now the country'
Karl Sanchez has linked to, transcribed and translated the recent meeting at which VVP initiates one move to develop this Decree
https://karlof1.substack.com/p/putin-strategic-development-and-national
Karl does a fantastic job delivering all the internal development of the RF. And if you read the transcripts he produces you'll see a very different Russia from the one portrayed by the west's lügenpresse, where it's clear that Russia is focused on the development and wellbeing of its people, something totally alien to the oligarchy in the west.
Yes he does, unique and indispensable work
Have you noticed Simplicius, the Austrian colonel now started to incorporate yours and big Serge's takes on attrition warfare as opposed to territory-minded manoeuvre warfare in his videos? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gk7D_TliAuE
Thx, haven't seen but will check it out. The rest of the world is typically about 6-8 months downstream of our coverage here and usually picks up our crumbs only when it becomes painfully obvious to even the total dilettantes
Alles heil Simplicius, der uber-reporter
^^^
It's a basic function of not wanting to be left ranting to an empty theater when Reality has coaxed the audience out....
But yeah...crumbs.
Thanks for sharing Frantic. Very interesting to see a western analytical view of the current situation. As you mention, the confirming of tactics and developments is interesting.
I think these people sometimes read and watch opposing views then just copy them after it becomes "acceptable" to do so.
You are right. The colonel enjoys free speech to an extent, as Austria, with Ireland, Cyprus and Malta are the only members of the European Union that are not members of NATO. That's why he can be considered a trustworthy source, even though it's better to read original takes here on Simplicius, "from the horse's mouth"
I thought Reisner's early stuff was good, then I thought he had been "got to". Maybe he is now allowed to say what he thinks? I will watch the link. Thanks.
Yeah, that was my take too, so I stopped bothering with his videos, so maybe I should start again.
The whole-of-Europe propaganda production in Project Ukraine assigns various roles to Players, minor & major. Reisner's /script/ tasks him with uttering permissible truths, which the PR team then whisks into the pervasive deception
Just not Ben Hodges. He got absolutely everything wrong about this conflict. Sky News level of military expertise.
Zelensky's days are numbered now. They are using him to do all the dirty work and, when the time is right, they'll throw him overboard, just like they have various other pawns. I wonder if he understands that, or perhaps he is too coked up to know or care?
I hope that he has a rat run that works better than the late Gonzo Lira's.
That would all hinge on how we define 'better'////
"Straight to Nuremberg".
Last I checked, Ghani is alive and well and living the good life on his loot.
For that matter, Saakashvili would be doing the same if he hadn't gone back to Georgia.
"The optics have never been worse—it is truly an Empire in total terminal decline, its entrails strewn across the globe for all to see.".
So true, so simple, so rarely spoken of in the west. This is what sets you apart. You're telling the hard truth.
Stay gold, S. Don't ever let them turn you!
Mille grazie for another amazing strep. I wouldn't be surprised if Zelensky found our from your writings, that they have no long range Armaments :)
The strategic slingshot forces of the Yemeni hutis scored again .
CNN is quiet , the US should follow the example of the Russians make more drones . We have to defend freedom, from those camel jockeys .
I don't know how often this has to be said but here I go again: There is NO intention within NATO -old europe of escalating the conflict in any significant way (ignoring the nutty Baltics who can't do anything on their own except get annihilated, as Putin casually observed). It is risible to suggest that NATO is gagging for an excuse to get stuck in in Ukraine- much as Ukraine would love that. Western military leaders have kiboshed that. All this noise is intended now to try to press buttons amongst Russia's allies to panic them to pressure Russia into doing a deal that suits the west and soon, while there is still western Ukraine left for the west to hang onto.
As for why the Russians don't just go in all guns blazing and bring a swift end to this, because it wouldn't. The Russians are not so daft.
The Russian objective is to demilitarise Ukraine, and with China's encouragement, the wider west. There is no point in seizing territory just to sit on a permanent killing field- constant insurgency counter attacks, pockets of western supplied resistance eating up resources indefinitely into the future. The US would love that. Russia wants a Chechen resolution- peace and stability within a greater RF and what is left of Ukraine rediscovering where its loyalties really reside. And it will get it.
Thanks for this comment - I do not understand why commenters here, or anywhere, take anything of what NATO bureaucrats say to be anything like the truth or anything else than 'theatre' designed to collect cash, and to be more or less the exact opposite of the truth
These are often the same as the 'take the gloves off ' crowd
These remind one of the plebeians in the Roman circus, baying for blood
This is the measure of NATO/EUs other aim in talking up the 'war' - to control and render passive their own population, so that no resistance will be forthcoming to their failures, in this as in all aspects of governance
Macron's longer term interest is in militarising his own state against its obstreperous people. Across the west, the movement to various forms of a police state while making hysterical declarations about how undemocratic everyone else is, rolls on under this cover.
It is always worth a peak behind the tatty emerald curtain!
Do you think that Macron can push through anything like a full arms development program? or mass conscription?
He ahs talked but what has he done, I think he knows that any form of conscription is not going to be generally accepted
Besides conscription sounds like a solution, but it is a massive logistical investment and major organisational overhaul, which will demand long forgotten skills, and divert current army energy personnel and resources away from primary functions
Besides a people's army is a threat to régimes - that's the only lesson the Pentagon and the US régime learned in Vietnam
Moving to a war footing involves all sorts of oppression of the freedoms of ordinary civilians. This is not about conscription into an army that is intended to fight overseas. The French will never wear that. Macron will swing first. It is more like Sunak's wedge proposal sucking more and more people into a police state complex. Think of all those pervasive Nazi organisations like the Hitler 'youth'. Your own kids informing on you!
I'm not sure what you are suggesting is going on
Macron is talking about, gingerly, introducing some form of national service carefully phrased as to be non military or mostly civil, as per the brits
Or shortly will do
No mention as afar as I know of conscription - but you suggest he wants to introduce and use conscription to create an army to police and oppress inside France but not outside?
I hope the french and the brits peoples are not quite that gullible, talk about selling them the rope to hang you with, here the people are to be conscripted into making the rope to hang themselves with, presumably unwillingly because mass suicide....?.I do not get it
....but .....
If you hadn't noticed, which you have no reason to have if you're not on Britain. Since little Rishi mentioned his scheme of conscription. It hasn't been mentioned since. There's 2 main reasons for this, 1st & most important is, everyone including little Rishi knows he has no chance whatsoever of winning the election. The whole country hates his political party.. The vast majority do anyways. Secondly, the younger generation this was targeted at, have spoken in Unison. Their answer was loud, proud & very very clear. The answer was a simple 2 worded statement, the 1st word rhymed with the word Cluck, the second word of the statement rhymes with the word Cough. The young of today as well as being multicultural & having no loyalty to Britain whatsoever. Aren't as the naive younger generation of the past. They don't go & fight & die in other people's wars for fat old rich people to get richer. This was made very very clear to Rishi & his gang of fat old rich people. There's a massive reason little Rishi & his gang aren't letting the British public know what they're doing, concerning Ukraine. In fact it's unbelievable the ignorance in this country to their rulers actions.
"...obstreperous..."
Yes
Thanks for bringing Chechnya up. I often think that Chechenization of Ukraine is inevitable. I mean it in a sense of society and integration within a larger Russian world.
It may take 10 or 20 years but Ukrainian society will eventually have to admit that the West send them down the primrose path. We’re already heard first complaints of western betrayal, and from no other than president Zelensky.
I have also visited Chechnya, a place which remembers its history, destruction and shows a photo gallery of destroyed Grozny on the Main Street. They understand the forces behind separatism which led to war with Russia very well.
Exactly, the natoids are dumb but not THAT dumb
"...to sit on a permanent killing field..."
Well said
That is exactly why a negotiated peace will not bring peace to Ukraine or Russia. As it will be packaged and sold as a Russian capitulation and defeat, giving credence to the belief that is being promoted, that the Russian military is weak, backward, poorly led and equipped. In the end it is about perception and the narrative spun to promote a specific perspective. Russia would find herself embroiled in an insurgency the likes of which would drain Russian resources and man power. As though the Palestinians, as an occupied people have no right to resist the their occupiers in the eyes of the west. The Ukrainians will be lauded as it would be their legal right encouraged and promoted by their western Patreons to resist the occupation of the "Evil Russians" destroying every effort to rebuild Ukraine.
Indeed. Unconditional Surrender in Kiev is priority.
Like
I really hope you are right. However, it just takes one mistake for this to explode in our faces. Don't underestimate the nihilistic stupidity of the collective West's war mongers. Unfortunately, they are very dangerous and actually believe the BS they spew.