This might be a little tougher than Putin thought...
- Thread starter Nole Lou
- Start date
SIAP
1. The United States intelligence community penetrated multiple points of Russia’s political leadership, spying apparatus and military, and found Vladimir Putin preparing for a full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
2. Every decision on arming Ukraine was predicated on not giving Russia a reason to attack the United States and NATO.
3. Biden dispatched his top intelligence official to confront Putin with evidence of Russia’s war planning.
4. Kyiv complained U.S. intelligence wasn’t specific enough to prepare for an invasion.
5. Zelensky suspected that some Western officials wanted him to flee.
Details on each in linked article...
1. The United States intelligence community penetrated multiple points of Russia’s political leadership, spying apparatus and military, and found Vladimir Putin preparing for a full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
2. Every decision on arming Ukraine was predicated on not giving Russia a reason to attack the United States and NATO.
3. Biden dispatched his top intelligence official to confront Putin with evidence of Russia’s war planning.
4. Kyiv complained U.S. intelligence wasn’t specific enough to prepare for an invasion.
5. Zelensky suspected that some Western officials wanted him to flee.
Details on each in linked article...
Seriously, learning from a mistake is only half of the equation. In order for lessons to be implemented there first must be the ability to translate a plan into corrective action. If I had my way I'd take every single Russia "expert" that said we should all be afraid of Russia's future actions because of their history of learning from their mistakes and make them write "Will without a Way does not equal Success" about 1000 times on a chalkboard.
The Russian logistics mess is hobbling its ability to wage war more than any other factor (and there are plenty of other factors). This is not something that can be fixed with minor adjustments. They need a completely new system that breaks with 200 years or so of tradition. And this in turn requires new equipment they don't have. I'm not even talking about complicated things, I'm talking about basics; forklifts, frontend loaders, computers, software, trained personnel, procedures, accountability, etc. It's like taking a 1800s general store and trying to turn it into Walmart.
Compare and contrast...
This is how the US (and other Western countries) does logistics:
This is how Russia does it:
https://content.invisioncic.com/r25....ru_.mp4.4192bb3533ca8dfcd693ca0c7c8513a4.mp4
And how storage looks in the field,. See if you can guess which is which:
Also note that the US image was from a frontline area, the Russian image is from peacetime.
Here's another example of why Russia can't suddenly get to US/NATO standards in terms of logistics... shipping containers!
Shipping containers require a lot of specialized equipment and transportation infrastructure that Russia simply doesn't have. And why doesn't Russia have it? Because it is f'n expensive to acquire and maintain. It's a long term investment and that's something else Russia sucks at (besides war, I mean).
Now, one might be wondering if Ukraine is any better than Russia. Probably, but I suspect far below NATO standards. However, Ukraine has much shorter supply lines and they are all in solidly friendly territory. This minimizes some of the major problems that go along with poor logistics.
The other thing is that Russia's only successful military strategy requires massive amounts of ammo, which in turn requires a supply system that's capable of keeping up with demand. The relatively static lines have helped Russia overcome some of those challenges, however it required making huge dumps close to the front. Now that Ukraine is showing this to be a bad idea, Russia's really in a bind. They can not keep their current artillery centric strategy going without the dumps, yet if it keeps the dumps it will eventually lose them. Ukraine does not have this sort of problem in reverse.
The Russian logistics mess is hobbling its ability to wage war more than any other factor (and there are plenty of other factors). This is not something that can be fixed with minor adjustments. They need a completely new system that breaks with 200 years or so of tradition. And this in turn requires new equipment they don't have. I'm not even talking about complicated things, I'm talking about basics; forklifts, frontend loaders, computers, software, trained personnel, procedures, accountability, etc. It's like taking a 1800s general store and trying to turn it into Walmart.
Compare and contrast...
This is how the US (and other Western countries) does logistics:
This is how Russia does it:
https://content.invisioncic.com/r25....ru_.mp4.4192bb3533ca8dfcd693ca0c7c8513a4.mp4
And how storage looks in the field,. See if you can guess which is which:
Also note that the US image was from a frontline area, the Russian image is from peacetime.
Here's another example of why Russia can't suddenly get to US/NATO standards in terms of logistics... shipping containers!
Shipping containers require a lot of specialized equipment and transportation infrastructure that Russia simply doesn't have. And why doesn't Russia have it? Because it is f'n expensive to acquire and maintain. It's a long term investment and that's something else Russia sucks at (besides war, I mean).
Now, one might be wondering if Ukraine is any better than Russia. Probably, but I suspect far below NATO standards. However, Ukraine has much shorter supply lines and they are all in solidly friendly territory. This minimizes some of the major problems that go along with poor logistics.
The other thing is that Russia's only successful military strategy requires massive amounts of ammo, which in turn requires a supply system that's capable of keeping up with demand. The relatively static lines have helped Russia overcome some of those challenges, however it required making huge dumps close to the front. Now that Ukraine is showing this to be a bad idea, Russia's really in a bind. They can not keep their current artillery centric strategy going without the dumps, yet if it keeps the dumps it will eventually lose them. Ukraine does not have this sort of problem in reverse.
And if they do need to cross the river, they have newer bridging equipment from Germany.
Zhdanov added that the Kherson region is the third part of the entire front line in Ukraine, so destroying the Russian grouping in this region is extremely important.
Zhdanov added that the Kherson region is the third part of the entire front line in Ukraine, so destroying the Russian grouping in this region is extremely important.
"Russia’s defence ministry has warned Britain against a planned spy plane flight over Russian territory, saying its air force has been given orders to prevent an intrusion.
The ministry said on Tuesday that the UK had sent a notice informing about a planned flight of an RC-135 reconnaissance plane along a route that partly passes over Russian territory.
“We regard this action as a deliberate provocation,” the ministry said, adding that the Russian air force had been “given the task to prevent the violation of the Russian border”.
It said: “All possible consequences of this deliberate provocation will lie entirely with the British side.”
It's pretty big that the Russians are admitting there was sabotage. Not only does it show shoddy security, it invites speculation that not everyone is happy that they are being de-Nazified.
Good. I hope they all died. The Wagner Group specializes in killing civilians and raping.This where a Russian journalist took a photo that included a small sign on the building telling Ukraine where they were at
I love that video, but, I do question the wisdom of the guys taking the video. Seems like a stray rocket could have hit them.
I still wonder if they believe this or don't want to admit some long range weapon is working against them.
My theory is that Ukraine now has hyper missiles
(Trying to start the rumor.)
I need help, why were they avoiding Czech airspace? I thought only Orban's Hungary wasn't allowing overflights at one time?
I thought that near the end, the guy on the left actually ducks fearing it was coming at them. Amazing stuff.
The Ukrainians simply do not have the manpower to stage offensives on a large scale at this time. They don't have the air power to project over Russian controlled space at this time.
It's clear that Russia at this time is desperately attempting to hold on long enough to stage referendums providing justification for annexation.
Yeah, I don't speak Ukrainian, but at one point the tone of what they were saying seemed to have a tinge of nervousness to it.
I couldn't find anything about it. Anybody remember? (Maybe the tweet is just wrong?)
Francis Scott Key wuddn't afraid of no "rockets red glare", yo.
Which is good, I think. If it were otherwise, Ukraine would lose the element of surprise they have because of their nimbleness tactically. Just my uninformed opinion.
Holy shit Bulgaria has developed light sabers???
Wait, that thing was real?!? I am confused now. I thought everyone had eluded to that thing being fake.
Can't imagine how complicated the war planning must be for the top Ukrainian decision makers with intel from multiple sources.
And who ultimately settles disputes on tactics.
And who ultimately settles disputes on tactics.
If China informs Japan that they will conduct a reconnaissance flight over their territory with military aircraft, can Japan legally shoot them down?
Who is the aggressor in that scenario?
In your example, has Japan invaded China? Was the entire open market world supporting China in this example? I need a couple clarifications to answer your question.
No, neither country has invaded the other. There are no sanctions beyond existing tariffs between them.
If China informs Japan that they will conduct a reconnaissance flight over their territory with military aircraft, can Japan legally shoot them down?
Who is the aggressor in that scenario?
A good sign those weapons are working well.
