Is Ukraine about to have a war?
Western fighter planes for Ukraine
I think this over thinks it, as if the US and NSTO had agency here.
The aim is to aid UKR defend itself. What they need, when they need it and how to support are questions for UKR to answer.
For NATO the answer is give them what they want, when they ask for it - and let them decide what is, or isn’t, victory.
https://breakingdefense.com/2022/07/...aine-strategy/
4 Questions the US and NATO need to ask, and answer, about their Ukraine strategy
The aim is to aid UKR defend itself. What they need, when they need it and how to support are questions for UKR to answer.
For NATO the answer is give them what they want, when they ask for it - and let them decide what is, or isn’t, victory.
https://breakingdefense.com/2022/07/...aine-strategy/
4 Questions the US and NATO need to ask, and answer, about their Ukraine strategy
As I understand it, NATO has thus far operated under a strict self-restriction vis a vis tanks, APCs etc and aircraft. Soviet-era stock may be donated by former Eastern Bloc nations and backfilled with more modern, Western kit.
There does seem to be a change in this regard:
Secretary of the U.S. Air Force Frank Kendall did not outright reject the idea of transferring A-10 Warthog ground attack jets to Ukraine when asked about that possibility earlier today. His comments came after Chief of Staff of the Air Force Gen. Charles Q. Brown said separately that the Ukrainian Air Force will eventually have to start moving away from their Soviet-era combat jets and that whatever comes next will "be something non-Russian."
/.../
"What is it that the Air Force ... needs to let go of?" The Washington Post's David Ignatius, who served as the moderator Kendall's talk at Aspen, asked the Air Force Secretary.
"The venerable A-10 ... is not a system that we are going to need against the kinds of adversaries we're concerned about most now," Kendall responded, in part.
In its most recent budget request for the 2023 Fiscal Year, the Air Force asked for authority to retire 21 Warthogs during that period. These aircraft have certainly proven to be useful in the past two decades or so when supporting low-intensity combat operations in permissive environments, but there are increasing questions about their utility in any future higher-end conflicts in contested airspace.
"A parenthetical thought. Why don't we give those A-10s to Ukraine?" Ignatius then asked after Kendall finished with his full answer to the initial question.
"General Brown addressed that question this morning about what fighters Ukraine might be interested in. That's largely up to Ukraine. ... Older U.S. systems are a possibility," Kendall said in response. "We will be open to discussions with them on what their requirements are and how we might be able to satisfy them."
/.../
"What is it that the Air Force ... needs to let go of?" The Washington Post's David Ignatius, who served as the moderator Kendall's talk at Aspen, asked the Air Force Secretary.
"The venerable A-10 ... is not a system that we are going to need against the kinds of adversaries we're concerned about most now," Kendall responded, in part.
In its most recent budget request for the 2023 Fiscal Year, the Air Force asked for authority to retire 21 Warthogs during that period. These aircraft have certainly proven to be useful in the past two decades or so when supporting low-intensity combat operations in permissive environments, but there are increasing questions about their utility in any future higher-end conflicts in contested airspace.
"A parenthetical thought. Why don't we give those A-10s to Ukraine?" Ignatius then asked after Kendall finished with his full answer to the initial question.
"General Brown addressed that question this morning about what fighters Ukraine might be interested in. That's largely up to Ukraine. ... Older U.S. systems are a possibility," Kendall said in response. "We will be open to discussions with them on what their requirements are and how we might be able to satisfy them."
I have no quibble with the change in thinking. It is both welcome and curious.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,072
Received 2,940 Likes
on
1,252 Posts
They need anti aircraft missiles of sufficient range to take down the aircraft over the Black Sea that are launching those missiles, The supply of anti shipping missiles resulted in parts of the black fleet legging it back to Russian territory.
Re the nukes and reasons why not.
https://empr.media/opinion/interview...-risk-using-it
Russia has one weapon left against NATO – nuclear: why Moscow will not risk using it
Professor and military expert Yuriy Fedorov explained why Vladimir Putin had failed to prevent the strengthening of NATO and why using nuclear weapons is suicidal for Russia. In addition, the expert elaborated on the American military exercises Dynamic Front 2022, which started on July 20.
How do you assess the drills currently conducted to defend NATO’s eastern flank?
During the preparation of the NATO summit in Madrid, pivotal decisions were made, according to which NATO cannot act from a position of weakness in relation to Russia and to what is happening in the east of the territory protected by the Alliance. Therefore, decisions were made aimed at strengthening the armed forces and military capabilities of the North Atlantic Alliance. Eight multinational groups were also created: four are in the Baltic zone, and the other four are in the Black Sea basin. They will be transformed into brigades. The number of personnel of combat groups and weapons will be tripled. It was also decided that NATO’s rapid reaction force will be expanded from 40,000 to 300,000 troops. This is a radical strengthening of military capabilities. The North Atlantic bloc realized the danger from Russia and took measures that will be implemented within one year. By the middle of 2023, NATO will have forces that significantly exceed the capabilities of the Russian Federation. For comparison, before the war in Ukraine, the Russian ground forces totaled 280,000 people.
Are there any risks that the Kremlin will make attempts against NATO countries?
Russia cannot do anything about the strengthening of NATO and cannot prevent it. See how Putin reacted to the upcoming NATO accession of Sweden and Finland. He said, “We have no problems with these countries, so let them join.” Before that, Putin was spitting, stomping his feet, and saying, “If NATO advances to the borders of Russia, we will arrange Armageddon and wipe everything off the face of the earth.” But nothing works, and NATO expands to the borders of Russia. The Kremlin is aware of the weakness of its armed forcesand cannot do anything. There is only one thing left – to use nuclear weapons, but this is suicidal for Russia. The retaliatory strike will be so powerful that Moscow will not risk using nuclear weapons against Ukraine or one of the NATO countries.
Is the thesis that NATO is outdated and cannot protect Europe a manifestation of fear?
This is an attempt to calm down the nomenclature. Kremlin propaganda tries to calm down the officer corps, law enforcement agencies, and repressive organizations and convince them that nothing terrible is happening, “We are still strong and NATO is weaker.” However, the Kremlin understands that the situation is the opposite. Yesterday, July 20, “Dynamic Front 2022” drills began. They are led by the 56th US Artillery Command, which reactivated in November of 2021 when Washington concluded that Russia intended to launch a full-scale war against Ukraine. The Command was created to coordinate and direct operations in three domains: on the ground, in space, and in cyberspace. In the USA, the future concept of military operations was adopted, according to which the targets (Russian military objects) are determined by satellites together with cyber intelligence. And then artillery missile strikes, which cannot be intercepted by either Russian air defense or their anti-ship missiles, are launched at them. If one looks at the announcement of the start of the exercises, a second multifunctional battle group is mentioned there. The formation was created in the summer of 2021 to integrate the actions of new American missiles, that are currently being developed and could soon be used. There are three batteries in the battle group: HIMARS, a battery of “medium-range forces”, and a battery of “long-range hypersonic weapons”. They are designed to destroy batteries of Russian “Iskander” and anti-ship missiles in the Kaliningrad region and regions near the borders of the Baltic states. After that, NATO aviation is able to strike all Russian facilities in Kaliningrad and western regions, ignoring anti-aircraft and anti-ship defense.
Re the nukes and reasons why not.
https://empr.media/opinion/interview...-risk-using-it
Russia has one weapon left against NATO – nuclear: why Moscow will not risk using it
NATO realized the danger from the Russian Federation, the aggressor country, and took measures to increase the strength of the rapid reaction force from 40,000 to 300,000 soldiers.
Professor and military expert Yuriy Fedorov explained why Vladimir Putin had failed to prevent the strengthening of NATO and why using nuclear weapons is suicidal for Russia. In addition, the expert elaborated on the American military exercises Dynamic Front 2022, which started on July 20.How do you assess the drills currently conducted to defend NATO’s eastern flank?
During the preparation of the NATO summit in Madrid, pivotal decisions were made, according to which NATO cannot act from a position of weakness in relation to Russia and to what is happening in the east of the territory protected by the Alliance. Therefore, decisions were made aimed at strengthening the armed forces and military capabilities of the North Atlantic Alliance. Eight multinational groups were also created: four are in the Baltic zone, and the other four are in the Black Sea basin. They will be transformed into brigades. The number of personnel of combat groups and weapons will be tripled. It was also decided that NATO’s rapid reaction force will be expanded from 40,000 to 300,000 troops. This is a radical strengthening of military capabilities. The North Atlantic bloc realized the danger from Russia and took measures that will be implemented within one year. By the middle of 2023, NATO will have forces that significantly exceed the capabilities of the Russian Federation. For comparison, before the war in Ukraine, the Russian ground forces totaled 280,000 people.
Are there any risks that the Kremlin will make attempts against NATO countries?
Russia cannot do anything about the strengthening of NATO and cannot prevent it. See how Putin reacted to the upcoming NATO accession of Sweden and Finland. He said, “We have no problems with these countries, so let them join.” Before that, Putin was spitting, stomping his feet, and saying, “If NATO advances to the borders of Russia, we will arrange Armageddon and wipe everything off the face of the earth.” But nothing works, and NATO expands to the borders of Russia. The Kremlin is aware of the weakness of its armed forcesand cannot do anything. There is only one thing left – to use nuclear weapons, but this is suicidal for Russia. The retaliatory strike will be so powerful that Moscow will not risk using nuclear weapons against Ukraine or one of the NATO countries.
Is the thesis that NATO is outdated and cannot protect Europe a manifestation of fear?
This is an attempt to calm down the nomenclature. Kremlin propaganda tries to calm down the officer corps, law enforcement agencies, and repressive organizations and convince them that nothing terrible is happening, “We are still strong and NATO is weaker.” However, the Kremlin understands that the situation is the opposite. Yesterday, July 20, “Dynamic Front 2022” drills began. They are led by the 56th US Artillery Command, which reactivated in November of 2021 when Washington concluded that Russia intended to launch a full-scale war against Ukraine. The Command was created to coordinate and direct operations in three domains: on the ground, in space, and in cyberspace. In the USA, the future concept of military operations was adopted, according to which the targets (Russian military objects) are determined by satellites together with cyber intelligence. And then artillery missile strikes, which cannot be intercepted by either Russian air defense or their anti-ship missiles, are launched at them. If one looks at the announcement of the start of the exercises, a second multifunctional battle group is mentioned there. The formation was created in the summer of 2021 to integrate the actions of new American missiles, that are currently being developed and could soon be used. There are three batteries in the battle group: HIMARS, a battery of “medium-range forces”, and a battery of “long-range hypersonic weapons”. They are designed to destroy batteries of Russian “Iskander” and anti-ship missiles in the Kaliningrad region and regions near the borders of the Baltic states. After that, NATO aviation is able to strike all Russian facilities in Kaliningrad and western regions, ignoring anti-aircraft and anti-ship defense.
They need anti aircraft missiles of sufficient range to take down the aircraft over the Black Sea that are launching those missilest
t
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,072
Received 2,940 Likes
on
1,252 Posts
Good question.
Meanwhile, it looks like some good news.
Meanwhile, it looks like some good news.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,072
Received 2,940 Likes
on
1,252 Posts
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
German Welt, citing anonymous Ukrainian officials, reported that Ukraine's application for 11 IRIS-T air defense systems is being held up by Germany's Federal Security Council, headed by German Chancellor Olaf Scholz.
Welt also reported that Germany's Economy Ministry earlier approved the Ukrainian government's application for the defense systems and had passed along the decision to the Federal Security Council.
Welt also reported that Germany's Economy Ministry earlier approved the Ukrainian government's application for the defense systems and had passed along the decision to the Federal Security Council.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Within 24 hours of signing a deal to allow safe passage for Ukrainian wheat exports - Russia has committed a mass missile attack upon Odessa….
Ukraine’s ministry of foreign affairs comments on Russia’s attack on the port of Odessa following the UN and Turkey-brokered deal to export grain: “The Russian missile is Vladimir Putin's spit in the face of UN Secretary General António Guterres and President Recep Erdogan”
Ukraine’s ministry of foreign affairs comments on Russia’s attack on the port of Odessa following the UN and Turkey-brokered deal to export grain: “The Russian missile is Vladimir Putin's spit in the face of UN Secretary General António Guterres and President Recep Erdogan”
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,072
Received 2,940 Likes
on
1,252 Posts
Ukraine could retaliate and say any shipping plying between Russia and the Bosphorus Strait will be counted as a legitimate target.
It smacks of Russia simply negotiating a means to legitimately export their grain and fertiliser then attempting to cripple Ukraines ability. Turkey really needs to close the straights to Russian grain as they have been played.
It smacks of Russia simply negotiating a means to legitimately export their grain and fertiliser then attempting to cripple Ukraines ability. Turkey really needs to close the straights to Russian grain as they have been played.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,072
Received 2,940 Likes
on
1,252 Posts
Russia saying it wasn’t us…. Yeah, of course it wasn’t, lying ******
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Zelensky: 'No matter what Russia promises, it will find ways not to implement it.'
President Zelensky told a U.S. House delegation that the missile strike on Odesa's port the day after Ukraine and Russia reached an agreement for grain exports shows Moscow is not trustworthy.
President Zelensky told a U.S. House delegation that the missile strike on Odesa's port the day after Ukraine and Russia reached an agreement for grain exports shows Moscow is not trustworthy.
Just a thought, did the signed agreement begin with immediate effect or was there a specified "future" implementation date?
[QUOTE=NutLoose;11266434]Russia saying it wasn’t us…. Yeah, of course it wasn’t, lying ******
/QUOTE]
Are the NATO surveillance aircraft not able to verify what happened ?
/QUOTE]
Are the NATO surveillance aircraft not able to verify what happened ?
I've been waiting to get evidence of this for awhile and now, apparently pictured in Donbass, a convoy of Russian T62's with battle markings on their way to front. The Russians are really scraping the barrels, what next, the T34's they bought from Laos?
https://t.me/sashakots/34456
https://t.me/sashakots/34456
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
And they will do what?
German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock strongly condemned the Russian attack on the port of Odesa and questioned the credibility of Russian commitments.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
Send a strongly worded letter then drag their feet even more over providing military equipment to Ukraine?
I'm a huge advocate of the EU but more and more, as this conflict goes on, the biggest proponents of the EU (Germany, France and Italy) seem to be doing all they can to avoid supporting fellow EU member states neighbouring Ukraine, such as Poland.
Indeed, Poland (and Ukraine) are seeing far more overall support from the UK, a country that has recently left the club.
Now some may say the UK is doing what it is from its position as a NATO member, for a fellow NATO member but, given the pressure certain EU countries were trying to bring to bear for an 'EU Force' to supplement/replace NATO, they're making a poor show of potential pan-EU military solidarity...
I'm a huge advocate of the EU but more and more, as this conflict goes on, the biggest proponents of the EU (Germany, France and Italy) seem to be doing all they can to avoid supporting fellow EU member states neighbouring Ukraine, such as Poland.
Indeed, Poland (and Ukraine) are seeing far more overall support from the UK, a country that has recently left the club.
Now some may say the UK is doing what it is from its position as a NATO member, for a fellow NATO member but, given the pressure certain EU countries were trying to bring to bear for an 'EU Force' to supplement/replace NATO, they're making a poor show of potential pan-EU military solidarity...
Baerbock was virulently anti-Soviet pre-invasion ( very unusual for a Green ) and her colleague Habeck tends that way too.. Surprisingly the drag comes from Scholz ( SPD Chancellor ) and his useless Defence Minister (Lambrecht SPD ). Scholz has always had the reputation of being an uninspiring can't decide drag-ass throughout his political career.
Send a strongly worded letter then drag their feet even more over providing military equipment to Ukraine?
I'm a huge advocate of the EU but more and more, as this conflict goes on, the biggest proponents of the EU (Germany, France and Italy) seem to be doing all they can to avoid supporting fellow EU member states neighbouring Ukraine, such as Poland.
Indeed, Poland (and Ukraine) are seeing far more overall support from the UK, a country that has recently left the club.
Now some may say the UK is doing what it is from its position as a NATO member, for a fellow NATO member but, given the pressure certain EU countries were trying to bring to bear for an 'EU Force' to supplement/replace NATO, they're making a poor show of potential pan-EU military solidarity...
I'm a huge advocate of the EU but more and more, as this conflict goes on, the biggest proponents of the EU (Germany, France and Italy) seem to be doing all they can to avoid supporting fellow EU member states neighbouring Ukraine, such as Poland.
Indeed, Poland (and Ukraine) are seeing far more overall support from the UK, a country that has recently left the club.
Now some may say the UK is doing what it is from its position as a NATO member, for a fellow NATO member but, given the pressure certain EU countries were trying to bring to bear for an 'EU Force' to supplement/replace NATO, they're making a poor show of potential pan-EU military solidarity...
I have wished from the start that NATO would be free to give Ukraine what was requested. The barrier to doing that has been the fear that Putin would see this as direct NATO involvement akin to deploying ground or air personnel and that a nuclear response would ensue.
As I understand it, NATO has thus far operated under a strict self-restriction vis a vis tanks, APCs etc and aircraft. Soviet-era stock may be donated by former Eastern Bloc nations and backfilled with more modern, Western kit.
There does seem to be a change in this regard:
I do wonder what is prompting this change in thinking. Aside from the acceptance that the Ukrainian forces DO need more potent weapons, is there now a degree of assurance that Putin won't resort to nuclear attack? Or that he would be prevented from doing so?
I have no quibble with the change in thinking. It is both welcome and curious.
As I understand it, NATO has thus far operated under a strict self-restriction vis a vis tanks, APCs etc and aircraft. Soviet-era stock may be donated by former Eastern Bloc nations and backfilled with more modern, Western kit.
There does seem to be a change in this regard:
I do wonder what is prompting this change in thinking. Aside from the acceptance that the Ukrainian forces DO need more potent weapons, is there now a degree of assurance that Putin won't resort to nuclear attack? Or that he would be prevented from doing so?
I have no quibble with the change in thinking. It is both welcome and curious.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,072
Received 2,940 Likes
on
1,252 Posts
I've been waiting to get evidence of this for awhile and now, apparently pictured in Donbass, a convoy of Russian T62's with battle markings on their way to front. The Russians are really scraping the barrels, what next, the T34's they bought from Laos?
https://t.me/sashakots/34456
https://t.me/sashakots/34456
Addressing another question, there are many western APC's that have been supplied to Ukraine.