Started By
Message

re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Posted on 7/10/24 at 6:01 pm to
Posted by AU86
Member since Aug 2009
26257 posts
Posted on 7/10/24 at 6:01 pm to
quote:

The US taxpayer does not pay anything on this commitment by other countries.


I know that. Every member is suppose to pay 2% of it's GDP towards their military. How many do it? How many over then last 30 years have met this? My point is who do they expect to protect them if their military is almost non-existent? It's not the EU, UK or anyone.else over there. The majority of their militaries are depleted and are a joke Just look at the UK for example.. Guess what it is the US. I guess all of those US bases, equipment and troops in Europe are there for show. Who pays for all of those bases, equipment and or troops? The US pulls its weight.

Most of those countries are a bunch of damn welchers that spend their money on social welfare while living under the protection.of the US.
This post was edited on 7/10/24 at 6:11 pm
Posted by Lima Whiskey
Member since Apr 2013
22594 posts
Posted on 7/10/24 at 6:06 pm to
They surrendered their independence, that's the trade off, and it's why Washington has been okay with it. The Germans for example, will always do what we tell them to.
Posted by AU86
Member since Aug 2009
26257 posts
Posted on 7/10/24 at 6:08 pm to
You are right. They are basically welfare wards of the US when it comes to military spending, readiness.

Poland and the Baltic States are just about the only one's getting it's shite together.
This post was edited on 7/10/24 at 6:11 pm
Posted by CitizenK
BR
Member since Aug 2019
15735 posts
Posted on 7/10/24 at 6:38 pm to
quote:

One thing people forget is that Turkey has between 2 and 5 million Tatars who were "cleansed" from Crimea by Stalin.


Turkish business has significant investment already in Ukraine and Russia, mostly in oil seed processing plants
Posted by Auburn1968
NYC
Member since Mar 2019
26490 posts
Posted on 7/10/24 at 6:50 pm to
Size of the UK military. Ukraine's military on this score was bigger prior to Russia's invasion.

quote:

It counts members of all three forces, including: UK Regular Forces, Gurkhas, Military Provost Guard Service, Locally Engaged Personnel, Volunteer Reserve, Serving Regular Reserve, Sponsored Reserve and elements of the Full-Time Reserve Service.

By this measure, the strength of the UK Forces was 183,230 personnel as of 1 April 2024, according to the latest figures. This is a decrease of 3.0% since 1 April 2023.

Broken down by force type, there were 37,780 personnel in the Royal Navy (including the Royal Marines), 110,300 in the Army and 35,140 in the RAF (these figures, and those cited below, have been rounded, so don’t always add up to the precise total).
Posted by Auburn1968
NYC
Member since Mar 2019
26490 posts
Posted on 7/10/24 at 6:53 pm to
quote:

Poland and the Baltic States are just about the only one's getting it's shite together.


The tasted life under Russian (Soviet) occupation.
Posted by Lee B
Member since Dec 2018
3947 posts
Posted on 7/10/24 at 7:20 pm to
quote:

The tasted life under Russian (Soviet) occupation.


They've been "in the shite" since the late 800s when the Rus kicked it off... we're talking some deep, deep, deep, deep, deep shite going way, way, way back here...
This post was edited on 7/10/24 at 7:22 pm
Posted by Lee B
Member since Dec 2018
3947 posts
Posted on 7/10/24 at 7:52 pm to
quote:

Size of the UK military. Ukraine's military on this score was bigger prior to Russia's invasion.


Does "size" really matter in modern military terms?

The WWI trench warfare in Ukraine at the moment would not be the case if it was say, Estonia, instead...

The US military was developed post-WWII with the approach that wherever we went we would be greatly outnumbered, so tech and tactics and quality of arms gave us the upper hand. We put that approach into NATO. Not that it's how we should engage a mobile street gang like Al Qaeda (or the Viet Cong in a lot of ways), really, but as far as dealing with an actual opposing military, it makes a big difference.
Posted by StormyMcMan
USA
Member since Oct 2016
4669 posts
Posted on 7/10/24 at 8:03 pm to
ISW Update

quote:

Key Takeaways:

Ukrainian First Deputy Defense Minister Lieutenant General Ivan Havrylyuk stressed that robust Western security assistance will be crucial for Ukraine's ability to contest and seize the battlefield initiative. Havrylyuk also challenged the notion that Russian forces will be able to indefinitely sustain the consistent gradual creeping advances that support Russian President Vladimir Putin's theory of victory for winning a war of attrition in Ukraine.

Ukrainian forces are already attempting to contest the battlefield initiative in limited and localized counterattacks at the tactical level — emphasizing that the current state of grinding positional warfare along the frontline is not an indefinitely stable one.

Havrylyuk assessed that Russia will face medium- to long-term economic and equipment challenges that will impede the Russian military's ability to indefinitely retain the theater-wide initiative, sustain consistent offensive pressure that results in gradual creeping advances, and win a war of attrition.

Putin's articulated theory of a slow, grinding victory in Ukraine is notably premised on accepting continuously high casualty rates, as exemplified by reported Russian losses accrued during two recent offensive efforts.

NATO allies reaffirmed their commitment to supporting Ukraine and announced new security assistance packages for the Ukrainian war effort at the NATO summit in Washington, DC on July 9 and 10.

Russian Security Council Deputy Chairperson Dmitry Medvedev reaffirmed that Russia would not accept or uphold any negotiated peace settlements with Kyiv short of Ukrainian capitulation, the destruction of the entire Ukrainian state, and the full occupation of Ukraine.

Servicemembers of a Russian motorized rifle regiment that was previously implicated in the execution of Ukrainian prisoners of war (POWs) in late May 2024 reportedly executed two Ukrainian POWs in the same area in western Zaporizhia Oblast in June 2024.

Select US military bases in Europe have instituted increased alert levels in response to intensified Russian sabotage and hybrid operations against NATO allies over the past several months.

Russian forces recently advanced in Vovchansk, near Kreminna, and near Toretsk.

The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) claimed on July 10 that the Russian military trained the first batch of Moscow Military District (MMD) counter-drone instructors at the Alabino training ground in Moscow Oblast.


Posted by Lee B
Member since Dec 2018
3947 posts
Posted on 7/10/24 at 8:04 pm to
Poland will be the great influential power in Europe going forward, with maybe France and possibly the UK (if they can fix their trajectory). Hungary kind of wanted to be but has chosen the wrong path so many times...

I'm sure the Poles will take great satisfaction in Germany becoming their subordinate in a lot of ways.

I don't know what to make of Modi/india's outright heel turn in the past few days... not that it's not on their track, really. You just don't see people tying themselves to a sinking ship that often... not that Putin can trust Modi anymore than he can trust Xi, but... at heart, Modi wants to turn India into an outright (Hindu) Theocratic state and clense India of Muslims and other religious identities, and I guess he sees that "The West" will object to that eventually... so Putin's defiance of International norms is useful to align with and promote.

I feel like WWIII is a dish served relatively cold. We're in it already and haven't noticed.
This post was edited on 7/10/24 at 8:07 pm
Posted by Lima Whiskey
Member since Apr 2013
22594 posts
Posted on 7/10/24 at 8:37 pm to
quote:

Poland will be the great influential power in Europe going forward, with maybe France and possibly the UK (if they can fix their trajectory).


The collapse and replacement of the native population in the UK and France will break both countries.

quote:

Does "size" really matter in modern military terms?


Oh sweet Jesus, yes, absolutely.

That's one of the biggest lessons of the war. We bet wrong on precision fires. It's no replacement for mass.
This post was edited on 7/10/24 at 8:38 pm
Posted by GOP_Tiger
Baton Rouge
Member since Jan 2005
20971 posts
Posted on 7/10/24 at 9:04 pm to
quote:

Every member is suppose to pay 2% of it's GDP towards their military. How many do it?


This year, 23 of NATO's 32 members will hit the 2% number. Of the remaining 9, Spain and Italy are large economies, and their lack of spending is a problem. But they, and the rest of those 9, are at least pretending that the 2% number is important, and they have official plans to raise spending to that level in upcoming years.

Except Canada. As I said earlier, they spend less than 1.3%, and they don't care. This was from a story in the Washington Post when the idiot Jack Texeira leaked all those classified docs to impress kids on Discord.

LINK

quote:

TORONTO — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has told NATO officials privately that Canada will never meet the military alliance’s defense-spending target, according to a leaked secret Pentagon assessment obtained by The Washington Post. The document’s anonymous authors say Canada’s “widespread” military deficiencies are harming ties with security partners and allies.

The document, which has not been previously reported on, says “enduring” defense shortfalls led the Canadian Armed Forces to assess in February that it “could not conduct a major operation while simultaneously maintaining its NATO battle group leadership [in Latvia] and aid to Ukraine” — and that the situation was not “likely” to change without a shift in public opinion.


Get that? Trudeau says that they will "never" spend 2%. There have to be consequences for that crap, because Canada absolutely plays a critical role in our security in the Arctic, and the importance of that role will only grow as the earth continues to warm.

And if Biden or Sullivan have even mentioned anything about this, I haven't heard it.



EDIT: Here's a Politico story from Monday: LINK

quote:

Canada has been dodging its commitment to NATO for a decade. It may not be able to hold out for much longer.
quote:

“What’s happening now that everyone is spending more, the fact that the Canadians aren’t even trying has become obvious,” said Max Bergmann, a former State Department arms control official.
quote:


“They’re going to continue to be obstinate” because there is no real penalty for failing to meet the alliance goal, said one U.S. congressional staffer, who like others quoted in this story was granted anonymity to speak freely about a close ally. “Europeans are frustrated that they’re being criticized and Canada is not feeling the same pressure from Washington.”
quote:

The Canadian case is particularly frustrating, the diplomats say, because of Ottawa’s seeming lack of urgency, despite significant problems with its aging military equipment and its strong economy. Its military is so underfunded that half of its equipment is considered “unavailable and unserviceable” according to a leaked internal report.

“The Canadian public doesn’t really see the need,” said Philippe Lagassé, Barton chair at Canada’s Carleton University. “If forced to choose between defense spending, social programs or reducing taxes, defense would always come last. So there’s no political gain to meeting the pledge.”

quote:

In a brutally candid interview on Canadian television in June, Canadian Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Wayne Eyre said that underinvestment in defense means that “the military that we have right now is not ready to counter the threats that we see coming.” Asked about the lack of a plan to hit 2 percent, he added “I do not defend that, and nobody in uniform defends that.”
quote:

At the NATO Summit in Washington, it will be made clear that “2 percent is not the ceiling, it’s the floor,” for what countries are expected to contribute to their own defense budgets, the diplomat from the NATO country said. Countries such as the U.S., Poland, Norway and Estonia have already pushed past 3 percent, or have publicly shared plans to get there,

Since the Trump years, and especially since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, “there’s an expectation of sharing the burden and seriousness about defense that Canada is not meeting,” said an official from a NATO state that has pushed well beyond the 2 percent threshold.

quote:

Despite this, Canada is also failing on a second NATO metric. As part of the 2 percent pledge, nations also agreed to spend 20 percent of that on new equipment purchases. Canada and Belgium are the only countries that continue to fail to do so.

Belgium has a pathetic "plan" to get to 2% by 2035, but at least they're paying lip service to their obligations. Canada doesn't even pretend.
This post was edited on 7/10/24 at 9:28 pm
Posted by Lee B
Member since Dec 2018
3947 posts
Posted on 7/10/24 at 9:07 pm to
quote:

The collapse and replacement of the native population in the UK and France will break both countries.



I have to respectfully disagree with that xenophobic far-right talking point conclusion...

the demographic profiles of both countries are not only good, it's good for native citizens...

as far as the UK, a lot their immigration numbers come from Europeans (white people)... so if you look beyond "UK-born" and look at the ethnicity, there's not really a change going on... unless we insist the French and Germans and Belgians and Poles are incompatible in some way with Britishness (okay, your average Brit would argue that for the first two...). But the problem with assimilation from outsiders in the UK is caused by its lingering "class" obsession... a poor native citizen or a poor immigrant from a European country would be less embraced than a rich Asian immigrant... and let's not even talk about a poor Irishman...

Among the 802,000 babies born in metropolitan France in 2010, 80.1% had two French parents, 13.3% had one French parent, and 6.6% had two non-French parents.

quote:

Does "size" really matter in modern military terms?


Oh sweet Jesus, yes, absolutely.

That's one of the biggest lessons of the war. We bet wrong on precision fires. It's no replacement for mass.


I have to disagree with this, too, and one of the military-focused guys can explain the err in my assessment if there is one...

Russia's numbers did not mean anything in the opening salvo... they didn't mean much once the Western arms started pouring in... they only gave a very, very costly edge in the period where the military aid was held up and Ukraine ran out of mortar shells, ammo, missiles, etc., when meat waves could overwhelm defensive positions.

The Ukrainian Offensive last year was underwhelming but there were a lot of factors... US advisors not being able to adapt their thinking to Ukraine not having complete air superiority, etc., being a big part of it.
Posted by magildachunks
Member since Oct 2006
35877 posts
Posted on 7/10/24 at 9:09 pm to
quote:

That's one of the biggest lessons of the war. We bet wrong on precision fires. It's no replacement for mass.



Ukraine is not allowed to use precision attacks in Russia...yet.


They are now starting to get the go ahead to start fighting the war on Russian soil.

A lot of Russia's native logistical networks are about to be open game. That's when we'll see how effective precision is vs mass.
Posted by Lima Whiskey
Member since Apr 2013
22594 posts
Posted on 7/10/24 at 9:57 pm to
quote:

Russia's numbers did not mean anything in the opening salvo


The Ukrainians outnumbered the Russians up through sometime this past Winter.

quote:

Russia's numbers did not mean anything in the opening salvo... they didn't mean much once the Western arms started pouring in... they only gave a very, very costly edge in the period where the military aid was held up and Ukraine ran out of mortar shells, ammo, missiles, etc., when meat waves could overwhelm defensive positions.

The Ukrainian Offensive last year was underwhelming but there were a lot of factors... US advisors not being able to adapt their thinking to Ukraine not having complete air superiority, etc., being a big part of it.


The idea behind PGMs is that precision allows you to get away with having a smaller force. You don't need to fire as many rounds, if you can fire very precisely. And with the advances in surveillance platforms, finding and targeting the enemy is much easier than it used to be. So there's a logic to it.

The Russian air defense systems, and the their electronic warfare platforms are the problem.

quote:

High-Tech American Weapons Work Against Russia—Until They Don’t
Moscow is learning how to defeat Western precision munitions in Ukraine


Zaluzhnyi called them one use weapons because of the way the Russians were able to adapt to them. The problem is that if you lose precision, then you're just left with an undersized force.

LINK

quote:

have to respectfully disagree with that xenophobic far-right talking point conclusion...


I wouldn't say it if wasn't true.

quote:

the demographic profiles of both countries are not only good, it's good for native citizens...


The natives populations of both countries are being replaced by poor people from the Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. And it's the reason why crime has gotten so bad, and why there's so much social dysfunction. Robert Putnam was right. Both are going to be minorities in their own countries.

It's happening across Europe though. The problem is just as serious in Germany.

quote:

Among the 802,000 babies born in metropolitan France in 2010, 80.1% had two French parents, 13.3% had one French parent, and 6.6% had two non-French parents.


For ideological reasons, the French don't track ethnicity/race.

About 70% of the population are ethnically French, that figure is dropping fairly quickly because of the difference in birth rates.
This post was edited on 7/10/24 at 9:58 pm
Posted by Lima Whiskey
Member since Apr 2013
22594 posts
Posted on 7/10/24 at 10:03 pm to
quote:

A lot of Russia's native logistical networks are about to be open game. That's when we'll see how effective precision is vs mass.


We withdrew the Excalibur rounds because their effectiveness had dropped to more or less zero. The GLSDB was a failure. And the Russian jamming has been very effective against our JDAMs.

That's the problem
Posted by cwil1
Member since Oct 2023
907 posts
Posted on 7/10/24 at 10:17 pm to
France and the UK should both be massive millitary powers. There's 0 excuse for it.
Posted by cwil1
Member since Oct 2023
907 posts
Posted on 7/10/24 at 10:20 pm to
If mass is the answer. Why has the much larger russian millitary, not steamrolled Ukraine?
This post was edited on 7/11/24 at 2:13 am
Posted by doubleb
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2006
42619 posts
Posted on 7/10/24 at 10:24 pm to
I have to give Russia credit for the way they adapted to attacks against their navy. Hiding their ships under water was brilliant. Who could have thought of that?

Russia tried to invade their neighbor even though they were out numbered. What a surprise! They caught Ukrsine unprepared and rolled into Kiev and Odessa, right?

And after the Feb 2022 attacks it took Russia only two years or so to gear up and match Ukraine’s strength in numbers. Acting quickly was another great move.

Yes, those Russians are tough customers. Now with all those Indians, Africans and N Koreans helping; Ukraine has no chance.
Posted by WestCoastAg
Member since Oct 2012
150135 posts
Posted on 7/10/24 at 10:28 pm to
quote:

We bet wrong on precision fires. It's no replacement for mass.
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA
first pageprev pagePage 3968 of 5046Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram