"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (7 Viewers)

[SaparotRob]

Being as unqualified as the next guy, I can strategize as badly as the next guy. All mine are quite heroic, suicidal and ridiculous enough to be made into a Michael Bey film.
NATO has been brought out of its slumber. If there is trouble in Paradise of RF Vassal States, well, perhaps some fraternal RF forces may have to be diverted to bolster flagging spirits. How long, theoretically, would it take some to gather to gather a really sum' bitchin' air re-supply mission? Sanctions got to be hurting soon. VKS is going to having re-supply issues as well. How willing would Putin be to go up against fresh, front line NATO in a few more weeks?

It will sadly, probably go down with Crimea and Donbas swallowed. Neutral Ukraine. Crackdowns in Belorussia. I don't like it.

 

[buffnut453]

The only practical No-Fly zone involves getting Ukraine still more S-300's and radars to make it too unhealthy for VVS pilots to stick their noses up in the air.

And moves may be afoot to help make that happen. This just posted by the BBC:

Pentagon spokesperson John Kirby says the US is in "ongoing discussions" with other countries to provide long-range air defence systems to Ukraine.

To date, the US has provided Stinger man-portable anti-aircraft weapons to Ukraine. These systems, however, are primarily effective against helicopters and low-flying aircraft, rather than higher altitude combat aircraft.

It has been reported a number of countries - including Slovakia - have expressed a willingness to give Ukraine S-300 anti-aircraft systems, provided they receive something to replace them.

Ukraine already uses the S-300 and has personnel trained in its use.

While Kirby does not comment directly on Slovakia or the S-300, he says the US is in "active consultations" about "the kinds of defence capabilities to include long-range air defences, that we know that they're [Ukraine] comfortable using."

 

[gumbyk]

While Kirby does not comment directly on Slovakia or the S-300, he says the US is in "active consultations" about "the kinds of defence capabilities to include long-range air defences, that we know that they're [Ukraine] comfortable using."

That will be the S-300's that the US has for evaluation.

 

[GrauGeist]

Meanwhile, across the Black Sea:
(Page link won't work, sorry)

Here's an artical from last month that is a good analysis of what Russia has been doing to reclaim lost Soviet territory.

Moldova, then Georgia, now Ukraine: How Russia built ‘bridgeheads into post-Soviet space’

Moscow’s recognition of breakaway Ukrainian territories has prompted comparisons with past Russian operations aimed at countering Western influence and bolstering its strategic depth in the former Soviet…

www.france24.com

 

[buffnut453]

That will be the S-300's that the US has for evaluation.

Not necessarily. Armenia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Greece, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Venezuela all operate S-300s and could, with varying degrees of persuasion, be convinced to gift them to Ukraine. The problem is that only Armenia and Kazakhstan operate a variant that is also used by Ukraine. The others are a smorgasbord of different S-300 variants which may present logistic and maintenance challenges.

 

[gumbyk]

Not necessarily. Armenia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Greece, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Venezuela all operate S-300s and could, with varying degrees of persuasion, be convinced to gift them to Ukraine. The problem is that only Armenia and Kazakhstan operate a variant that is also used by Ukraine. The others are a smorgasbord of different S-300 variants which may present logistic and maintenance challenges.

And any countries that are close to bordering with Russia will be pretty reluctant to hand over their protection, unless someone is willing and able to provide the goods and training in very short time.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Intermission will be an arms race: a healthy and reinvigorated NATO vs a depleted and sanctioned Russia. The areas that have a true, referendum-confirmed Russian majority will never be more than a thorn in Ukraine's side and a constant temptation to Putardsky, so let them go.
This half time break is an opportunity to prepare for the inevitable confrontation to come. All the former East Bloc NATO members need to be equipped with and trained on modern high tech DEFENSIVE weaponry, and practiced in joint operations and logistics. Hardened communications, command and control and mobile guerrilla style tactics need to become second nature. Well trained and integrated Swiss/Swedish/Israeli style civilian militias need to be the norm, with Ukrainian advisors to put an edge on them.
NATO needs to build a solid wall on its eastern flank that's impenetrable to attack, but clearly and obviously incapable of mounting an offense. If an offensive is needed, that task falls to US, UK, France, and Canada. Given formidable enough obstacles, Putardsky or his successors, deprived of their pretext, will have to back burner Humpty's resurrection.

No argument with that, and I hope you're right.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

If not 1991, but I'm referring to the territory held by Ukraine before the Feb 2022 invasion.

I get that, but then that would mean accepting the loss of the Donbas as a fait accompli.

I think I'm leaning on emotion too much for this point, so I'll read more and post less regarding it. As noted above to X XBe02Drvr , I could well be wrong about this.

 

[buffnut453]

Russian operations in Ukraine continue to be largely stalled and plagued by logistical issues, according to an assessment from the US-based Institute for the Study of War.

In its daily sum-up of the campaign, the institute noted that Russian forces did not conduct any offensive operations near Kyiv on Monday, and instead reinforced their defensive positions.

Similarly, Russian forces in north-eastern Ukraine remained stagnant and have been "unable to solve logistics issues", the institute said.

In Mariupol, on the other hand, the institute believes that Russian forces have made "slow but steady progress", and have shelled civilian infrastructure. The institute believes the city will fall sometime in the next few weeks.

Additionally, the institute said that Russia has been forced to deploy "low quality" reserves, including "low readiness units" from Russia's Far East, to replace losses in frontline combat units.


As much as I like seeing tanks and other combat vehicles being plinked by Bayraktar, I really think the Ukrainian forces should be prioritizing trucks as their targets. The more they can hinder Russian logistics, the longer the advance will be stalled. I'd also recommend implementing a "scorched earth" policy of destroying any vehicles larger than a motorbike before they fall into Russian hands (of course Russia, is itself doing a fine job destroying every vehicle in the cities they attack), as well as disabling fuel storage/gas stations etc.

I'm sure they're probably already doing these things but every truck that gets taken out of commission is another load of food, fuel or ammo that won't reach the Russian front lines.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

As much as I like seeing tanks and other combat vehicles being plinked by Bayraktar, I really think the Ukrainian forces should be prioritizing trucks as their targets. The more they can hinder Russian logistics, the longer the advance will be stalled.

From what I've read, and I don't have the articles at my fingertips at this moment, the Ukrainians are practicing precisely this. Of course they're taking out tanks as targets when they are encountered (unless, of course, they're being towed by tractors, lol), but what I've read indicates that Ukrainian military tactics are indeed focused on logistics resources including supply trucks, as a priority for mission-planning.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

In further news:

The U.S. is sending Ukraine some Soviet-made air defense equipment that Washington took charge of decades ago through a secret program, The Wall Street Journal reported on Monday.

The systems, to include the SA-8 short-range surface-to-air missile system, were obtained by the U.S. for the purposes of examining Russian military technology and helping train American troops, U.S. officials told the outlet.

[...]

But the U.S. government has been hesitant to detail exactly what is being sent in so as not to tip off or draw the ire of Moscow. The Kremlin has publicly stated that any Western country that provides certain weapons to Ukraine, including aircraft and missile defense systems, could be seen as entering the fight.

The U.S. has a small number of Soviet missile defense systems it acquired in the past 30 years as part of a secret, $100 million project that first gained notice in 1994, a former official involved in the mission told the Journal.

Among the weapons the U.S. received — some of which have been kept at Redstone Arsenal, Ala. — is the SA-8, which can be easily moved with ground forces and provide cover from aircraft and helicopters.

Also in the U.S. stockpile is the S-300 long-range air defense system. The system is meant to protect larger areas and is already owned and operated by the Ukrainians. That weapon, however, will not be sent to Ukraine, according to one official.

The administration is authorized to transfer such equipment under the new annual government spending bill President Biden signed into law last week. The legislation approves a $13.6 billion aid package for Ukraine, of which about $3.5 billion will go to the Pentagon to backfill equipment being sent from the U.S. to Ukraine.

Also under the law, the U.S. can transfer lethal aid to NATO allies that is already overseas or in existing stockpiles.

US sending secretly acquired Soviet air defense equipment to Ukraine: report

The U.S. is sending Ukraine some Soviet-made air defense equipment that Washington took charge of decades ago through a secret program, The Wall Street Journal reported on Monday.

thehill.com

This hopefully means opening the door to transferring Patriot batteries to backfill for S-300s sent to Ukraine from other NATO countries.

Also:

Speaking to NBC News, the unnamed NATO official said, "If we're not in a stalemate, we are rapidly approaching one."

"The reality is that neither side has a superiority over the other," they added.

According to the official, Belarus, a close Moscow ally, may soon launch an attack on Ukraine or allow Russia to position nuclear weapons on its soil. Belarus allowed Russian soldiers to amass along its border with Ukraine prior to the start of the invasion on Feb. 24.

[...]

"So what happens when you have these two forces then grinding on each other in this way? The loss of life and the damage is going to be quite severe," said the official. "Neither side here can win. Neither side will capitulate."

[...]

A senior U.S. defense official told reporters that the Ukrainians had "effectively struck at the Russian logistics and sustainment capabilities."

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said on Sunday that Putin was now attempting to "reestablish some momentum" in his attack on Ukraine.

Discussing Russia's alleged use of hypersonic missiles in Ukraine, Austin said these actions could suggest that Putin was in short supply of other weapons or lacked confidence in his troops.

NATO official says Russia-Ukraine war 'rapidly approaching' stalemate: report

The war between Russia and Ukraine is nearing a stalemate, with neither side nearing victory or willing to give in, according to a NATO intelligence official.

thehill.com

The emboldened passage above directly addresses buffnut453 's point about striking at the weak link of logistics.

 

[buffnut453]

From what I've read, and I don't have the articles at my fingertips at this moment, the Ukrainians are practicing precisely this. Of course they're taking out tanks as targets when they are encountered (unless, of course, they're being towed by tractors, lol), but what I've read indicates that Ukrainian military tactics are indeed focused on logistics resources including supply trucks, as a priority for mission-planning.

Doesn't surprise. They're far too savvy to simply go tank plinking for the sake of it. It's just that most of the videos show combat vehicles being hit rather than trucks.

Love the comment about being towed by tractors, BTW!

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Doesn't surprise. They're far too savvy to simply go tank plinking for the sake of it. It's just that most of the videos show combat vehicles being hit rather than trucks.

Love the comment about being towed by tractors, BTW!

The videos show a lot of tanks, probably because they're big and scary-looking, bu there are many videos I've seen of supply convoys and support elements bing ambushed and taken out -- and you're spot-on, the Ukrainians are far too savvy to hunt only tanks. Much like Fighter Command in the BoB, this isn't about glory, but survival, and that means killing the unglamorous targets relentlessly.

 

[vikingBerserker]

They appear to be targeting fuel trucks as well.

 

[buffnut453]

They appear to be targeting fuel trucks as well.

Good!

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

They appear to be targeting fuel trucks as well.

It's a great way to render the unit useless ... or gather another donated piece of kit.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Russian operations in Ukraine continue to be largely stalled and plagued by logistical issues, according to an assessment from the US-based Institute for the Study of War.

In its daily sum-up of the campaign, the institute noted that Russian forces did not conduct any offensive operations near Kyiv on Monday, and instead reinforced their defensive positions.

Similarly, Russian forces in north-eastern Ukraine remained stagnant and have been "unable to solve logistics issues", the institute said.

In Mariupol, on the other hand, the institute believes that Russian forces have made "slow but steady progress", and have shelled civilian infrastructure. The institute believes the city will fall sometime in the next few weeks.

Additionally, the institute said that Russia has been forced to deploy "low quality" reserves, including "low readiness units" from Russia's Far East, to replace losses in frontline combat units.


As much as I like seeing tanks and other combat vehicles being plinked by Bayraktar, I really think the Ukrainian forces should be prioritizing trucks as their targets. The more they can hinder Russian logistics, the longer the advance will be stalled. I'd also recommend implementing a "scorched earth" policy of destroying any vehicles larger than a motorbike before they fall into Russian hands (of course Russia, is itself doing a fine job destroying every vehicle in the cities they attack), as well as disabling fuel storage/gas stations etc.

I'm sure they're probably already doing these things but every truck that gets taken out of commission is another load of food, fuel or ammo that won't reach the Russian front lines.

I'd love for them to find a away to launch a counter offensive. Knock em back a bit.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

I'd love for them to find a away to launch a counter offensive. Knock em back a bit.

If only --

 

[Admiral Beez]

It's a great way to render the unit useless ... or gather another donated piece of kit.

I imagine every MoD and military school are studying this war. Ideas on deploying (or acquiring new) tanks, the importance of (and of protecting) your logistics, the use and threat of drones, MANPATS, MANPADS and MRLS. So much to learn and apply. Drone jamming and some sort of rapid fire or laser CIWS to protect tanks or aircraft, plus counter battery missiles may be top of list.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

I imagine every MoD and military school are studying this war. Ideas on deploying (or acquiring new) tanks, the importance of (and of protecting) your logistics, the use and threat of drones, MANPATS, MANPADS and MRLS. So much to learn and apply. Drone jamming and some sort of rapid fire or laser CIWS to protect tanks or aircraft, plus counter battery missiles may be top of list.

I think if nothing else, this war is showing how the thoughtful application of tech can allow asymmetrical warfare to be a fairer fight if one is the weaker side.

The stuff about providing and protecting logistics isn't new, though. I think the Russians just disregarded it in thinking that they could do a 100-mile steamroller and be done, so didn't provide for long-term sustenance. If I'm correct about that, it boils down more to Russian misjudgment than a new lesson.

Another major blunder they've repeatedly committed is throwing armor into urban areas without infantry scouting and reliable artillery support, as wlewisiii pointed out upthread in his great post on combined arms. They could probably use some choppers in that mix too.