Forum menu
More to the point, the US has still refused to permit the use of their weapons systems inside Russia and Ukraine so far has been very careful not to cross that line.
Not any more. They have recently rescinded that, specifically in relation to the Kursk incursion. It sets a precedent though. Red lines? What red lines?
https://www.kyivpost.com/post/34783
That will really annoy alot of russians . A German tank , crewed by Ukrainian soldiers , driving across the Kursk battlefield killing russian teenagers.
As is often quoted , . The dildo of retribution has indeed arrived unlubed.
Still , what goes around comes around.
Those soft skinned vehicles could have just been shot up with 5.56 rounds . They are tiny so you wouldn't see holes in canvas .
Reminiscent of the road out of Kuwait city , lots of destroyed vehicles.
Interesting, I missed that.
If the gloves are off regarding Kursk that could explain why things are progressing so fast, wonder if we'll se the F16's in action before long.
wonder if we’ll se the F16’s in action before long.
All the knowledgeable commentary I've seen on the F16s says that they'll be used for air defense, so mostly shooting down cruise missiles or drones well behind the front lines, there probably won't really be much to see. Ukraine won't be risking them making low-level attacks on ground targets. If they are used against ground targets, it will be using stand-off weapons so the aircraft can stay 100 miles away from Russian air defenses.
From Reuters
"Russian Su-34, Su-35 and MiG-31 warplanes were based at the airfield, it said.A security source told Reuters that the attack was carried out by drones as dozens of planes and helicopters stood on the airfield, as well as a warehouse containing 700 guided bombs"
Shame I know they are fond of those newer su 35 Ms
it will be using stand-off weapons so the aircraft can stay 100 miles away from Russian air defenses
Which is probably what we'd do too until the air defences have been supressed. Shame we don't have a shed load of Storm Shadow to donate, we should have built a bigger stockpile.
Looks like they have a 3 pronged attack focusing on the E38 road. Securing this road will cut off a big chunk of territory. Also they are getting nearer the NPP.
Ukraine has been quietly and systematically destroying Russian air defences for a while now. Russian fast jets haven't operated effectively over Ukrainian territory for ages or anywhere near the border because of it. The glide bombs, which are admittedly effective ate released miles behind the Russian border. It will also allow a little more freedom of manoeuvre for the F16s, which in turn can (hopefully) threaten Russian aviation even further back. All this means future Ukrainian ground offensives have one less thing to worry about
i have greek island "wifi" so cant watch any vids or load much more than text, but still trying to follow whats going on so updates are useful on this thread
It will also allow a little more freedom of manoeuvre for the F16s, which in turn can (hopefully) threaten Russian aviation even further back
and
Not any more. They have recently rescinded that, specifically in relation to the Kursk incursion.
This use of "western" weapons in Russia seems to be evolving because the reported rules are constantly changing. The US is consistent that a) Ukraine is aware of the rules and b) no attacks deep into Russia
8/8/2024: SABRINA SINGH: — They (Ukrainians) are aware of the US policy and what we are supportive of. I think you know from the very beginning we are supportive of Ukraine and their success on the battlefield. But as the dynamics have shifted on the battlefield, they've been able to actually push the Russians back further into Russian territory. But as they see attacks coming across the border, they have to be able to have the capabilities to respond. And so you're seeing some of these cross-border counter fire measures that they're being able to take that are near the border of Ukraine.
We don't support long range attacks into (Russia). We've said that from the very beginning. I'm not going to draw, you know, a circular map here for you of where they can and can't strike, but we've been very clear with the Ukrainians. https://www.defense.gov/News/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/3867296/deputy-pentagon-press-secretary-sabrina-singh-holds-a-press-conference/
Other "western" countries have similar rules. Ukraine can use their own weapons as they like, hence the shooting down in April of a Russian TU22M3 bomber 307km inside Russia with a soviet S200 AD missile.
It sets a precedent though. Red lines? What red lines?
Russia has bet everything on the front line in Ukraine while maintaining forces in Africa, Syria and on international exercises. Yevgeny Prigozhin discovered in June 2023 that Russia's internal defences have been hollowed out.
Ukraine let loose with "western" weapons would be a massive threat inside Russia and the concern in the west is that it could lead to WMD being used by Russia. It's an evolving balance in allowing Ukraine to defend their territory while not escalating the situation
8/8/2024: SABRINA SINGH: No, because at the end of the day, Ukraine is fighting for its sovereign territory that its neighbor invaded. So, if we want to de-escalate tensions, as we've said from the beginning, the best way to do that is Putin can make that decision today to withdraw troops from Ukraine.
Ukraine is going to do everything it can to continue to take back its sovereign territory. And that's what we're seeing they're doing in this — what you're referring to in this, you know, Kursk Oblast. We're going to continue to support Ukraine with the capabilities and the systems that they need. We don't feel like this is escalatory in any way. Ukraine is doing what it needs to do to be successful on the battlefield.
it could lead to WMD being used by Russia
Which makes the Kursk offensive even more awkward as deploying a battlefield nuke against it would effectively involve Russia nuking its own territory.
Problems upon problems
Ukraine let loose with “western” weapons would be a massive threat inside Russia and the concern in the west is that it could lead to WMD being used by Russia.
If Putin was going to use WMD, he would have done so long ago, back when the invasion first started to go bad. He hasn't used them because he know that they won't give him the result he wants. This latest setback won't make any difference to that calculus, his WMD bluff has been called and he knows it.
same issue with using massed artillery i presume?
More to the point, China have told him to not even think about using Strategic nukes and NATO have let it be known that if he nukes any Ukrainian city they'll glass Moscow.
That doesn't rule out tactical battfield nukes of course, but you'd think that if they were going to use them they'd have done it by now.
same issue with using massed artillery i presume?
It's difficult to know, there seems to be a hierarchy of acceptability. ATACMS, for example is off the table, whereas the smaller GMLRS missiles that are launched from the same vehicles can be used.
Artillery is short-ranged, typically 25 miles, although the winged rounds will fly further. It's probably better used on Ukrainian territory to clear massed troops, armoured vehicles and other artillery rather than on this attack, which doesn't seem to warrant it. Ammunition is in short supply and it's another thorn in the logistics side as well.
That doesn’t rule out tactical battfield nukes of course, but you’d think that if they were going to use them they’d have done it by now.
Tactical nukes are largely out of fashion in the "west" because modern weapon systems do a better job. There's a view that says that a nuke is a nuke and regardless of size it's an escalation.
Nobody expects Russia to use nukes in Ukraine because their own policy doesn't stretch that far and the war has mostly been confined to Ukraine's territory.
This war has shown that Russia's conventional weapons aren't as advertised and stepping too far into Russia will push that nuclear policy, “in response to large-scale aggression utilizing conventional weapons in situations critical to the national security of the Russian Federation.”
This is the conundrum facing politicians
ATACMS, for example is off the table
Its a bit odd because
Asked whether Ukraine’s Kursk incursion aligned with Washington’s position — which allows Kyiv to use U.S.-supplied weapons for defensive purposes — deputy U.S. Pentagon press secretary Sabrina Singh said, “It is consistent with our policy and we have supported Ukraine from the very beginning to defend themselves against attacks that are coming across the border and for the need for crossfires.”
“So they are taking actions to protect themselves from attacks that are coming from a region that are within the U.S. policy of where they can operate, you know, our weapons, our systems, our capabilities,” she said.
(CNN)
So not off the table in Kursk. The US has also just announced a $150m emergency aid package including additional ATACMS/HIMARS ammo. I cant keep up with US policy nuances. I wonder if now Harris is driving her election campaign greater authority and guidance is being given to the likes of Jake Sullivan, where previously Biden was dithering a bit. Dont get me wrong I am a massive Biden fan, but wonder if he was aware of his infirmity, which was slowing decision making.
The Russians are using their air force to bomb Ukraine advance position within the Kursk pocket.
Be a superb initiation if an Aim 9 was to find it's way up the exhaust pipes of those aircraft.
Use the F16 at supersonic speed to get in fast , fire and forget then rtb before any amraams can be launched by the ruskis
Ukraine launched a second incursion further south?
https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1822158063190573158
So not off the table in Kursk
Unfortunately they are. It's conceivable that they might be allowed in time and similar restrictions will apply to certain other systems, e.g. some missiles as fitted to F16
Nick Schifrin (7th August 2024): "Ukraine also wants to use ATACMS elsewhere, inside Russia, especially on bases with planes that drop devastating 2,000-pound bombs, but the U.S. restricts ATACMS use to inside Ukraine" https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-ukraine-is-achieving-success-using-u-s-weapons-in-russian-occupied-region-of-crimea
Nick Schifrin https://www.pbs.org/newshour/author/nick-schifrin
NBC News (24th April 2024): "The powerful missiles have a range up to 300 kilometers (about 187 miles) and allow Ukraine to strike the Russian military throughout Crimea and in occupied parts of eastern Ukraine that had been difficult to reach." https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/ukraine-uses-long-range-atacms-russia-first-time-rcna148309
Ukraine launched a second incursion further south?
I wonder if this is a very deliberate plan to draw out and thin out more Russian forces. Followed by a different or bigger move back on the Ukrainian side?
An interesting assessment in the Kyiv Post of the likely use of F-16s in the short term. TLDR - those received so far (10) are configured for air defence and are likely to be primarily used to shoot down drones and cruise missiles. They are not configured for ground attack and it would be too risky to attempt that at the moment due to Russian AD. 20 in total are due to be in theatre by the end of this year, with another 60 due next year. Future versions could be configured differently. There is a lot more detail in the article,worth a read.
"Mr President...."
Putin: Oh, for **** sake!"
https://twitter.com/TheSeanMitchell/status/1822380951500132697
seems airfields are easy targets now. you would expect these to be some of the best defended positions russia has....
That video^^ is, I think, from the 3rd August attack on Morozovsk
An opportunity was missed in June https://www.kyivpost.com/post/36986
Ukraine seeking permission to use ATACMS in Russia... https://www.kyivpost.com/post/37154
Apparently the Morozovsk attack hit a large stockpile of those FAB glide bombs that Russia's been lobbing at Ukraine for the last 6 months.
That's a few less to end up in children's hospitals and blocks of flats then.
Ukraine is now attacking over the border into Belgorod region near to Priles'e (Russia). This is well to the south of the invasion of the last week and is adjacent to a road network
Chkalovsky airfield 20 miles E of Moscow has been attacked by drones. It won't be lost on Russians that if the drones were launched from the west then they flew past/over Moscow
There are some huge political points being made here
Good article about use of drones by Ukraine.
The Kursk pocket is constantly expanding and contrary to initial expectations (mine included - I got it wrong), it appears they are planning on staying. They are excavating defensive trenches so when the Russians do try to dislodge them, it's going to be extremely costly for them. This Forbes article suggests there are up to 10,000 Ukrainian troops in the pocket. This has created 75,000 Russian refugees so far and fear of further incursions in Belgorod and elsewhere will create panic along the border and mean Russia will have to bolster defences everywhere. At the cost of reinforcing or rotating troops from their offensives in Donbas and elsewhere.
The Kremlin is desperately playing this down, calling it a 'counter terrorist operation' which is 'under control'. They can't admit to the full scale of the assault for fear of answering why it wasn't foreseen and countered. But neither can they say it was just a small group - because how have they captured several hundred square kilometres of Russia with such ease? They've gone from taking Ukraine in 3 days, to being unable to defend their own borders from a country they claim doesn't exist. This is not a good look for strong man Vlad.
I'm still not entirely clear where they are going with this. The size and seeming permanence of the pocket does now suggest it may be a territorial bargaining chip in any future negotiations. Russia will have to try to dislodge them and this will draw seasoned troops from elsewhere which will create opportunities for Ukraine. Further expansion could cut Russian supply lines. More than anything it puts Russia on the back foot and keeps them guessing 'what next'?
Once again Ukraine have surprised everyone, I hope they squeeze every tactical, strategic and diplomatic advantage out of it.
There's a slight 'Tet Offensive' vibe to this, maybe not in terms of the detail or military strategy but in the overall vibe and intended result.
The main point of Tet was to dishearten the American public and to make them doubt their leaders' assurances that victory was just around the corner. It was ruinously costly militarily to the North Vietnamese in the short term but it completely altered the tone of the discourse back in the States and whilst the war dragged on for another 5 years it was the beginning of the end.
We all know that, unlike 1960's America, Putin has a vicelike control on the Russian media but even he won't be be able to keep a lid on a major incursion into the home nation. And how close to victory can you be if you're getting invaded back?
A UAF attack on the Kinburn spit near Kherson in the south.
https://twitter.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/1822933167650586752
The main point of Tet was to dishearten the American public and to make them doubt their leaders’ assurances that victory was just around the corner. It was ruinously costly militarily to the North Vietnamese in the short term but it completely altered the tone of the discourse back in the States and whilst the war dragged on for another 5 years it was the beginning of the end.
We all know that, unlike 1960’s America, Putin has a vicelike control on the Russian media but even he won’t be be able to keep a lid on a major incursion into the home nation. And how close to victory can you be if you’re getting invaded back?
Mark Galeotti was saying something similar, but thinks its unlikely to do much in terms if dislodging Putin.He also suggested it would be counterproductive as its easier to justify fighting for the motherland rather than stealing ukraine, making the public (whos conscript children are now on the new frontline) more pro war rather than anti.
https://inmoscowsshadows.buzzsprout.com/1026985/15563482-in-moscow-s-shadows-159-the-kursk-incursion
A UAF attack on the Kinburn spit near Kherson in the south.
Just a special forces raid but the Kinburn spit is strategically significant due to it being THE very obvious place you'd land if you were attempting an amphibious assault to get behind Russia lines in Kherson and advance on Crimea so I'm surprised it wasn't better defended.
I remain suspicious that the whole Kursk adventure was initially designed to draw as many Russians North as possible before launching a Ukrainian operation elsewhere, probably southwards but then it went much better than expected so they're now just kinda running with it.
This Forbes article suggests there are up to 10,000 Ukrainian troops in the pocket
The Russian MOD said it's a small incursion of about 1,000 Ukrainian fighters and that they've killed about 1,000 Ukrainian fighters so everything is under control.
The Russian MOD said it’s a small incursion of about 1,000 Ukrainian fighters and that they’ve killed about 1,000 Ukrainian fighters so everything is under control.
Yep, I saw that even state TV propagandist Olga Skabeeva openly queried that dodgy arithmetic!
The Russian MOD said it’s a small incursion of about 1,000 Ukrainian fighters and that they’ve killed about 1,000 Ukrainian fighters so everything is under control.
So they've killed them all?
https://maritime-executive.com/article/ukraine-destroys-an-offshore-platform-used-for-gps-spoofing
An oil rig off Crimea that was being used by Russian military has been taken out.
So they’ve killed them all?
No, just 1,000 out of 1,000.
Again, I'm getting the feeling that there's some lining up going on. Drawing resources and focus away, the oil rig, testing the defences of that spit, the last few weeks going after radar and missile sites, nearest air bases etc....
It might not lead to a sudden change of pace, but it's all continuing the clever and strategic push back from the Ukrainians.
But I do hope for a sudden push forward, maybe just before the autumn weather arrives?
They are running out of time. Do now or have the chair pulled out from under them when trump wins.
when trump wins.
If, surely?
when trump wins.
3 weeks ago I'd have agreed, but now I feel it's very much 'If' and not 'When'.
If the USA had pulled its support a year or more it would have been existential, now the various EU parties have had time to (to various degrees) 'Trump-proof' their Ukraine assistance programs and to spool up their own production.
So now, whilst I think that a second Trump presidency will be very bad for Ukraine I don't think it automatically means the end of their military resistance in the way it may have earlier in the war.
I also think that one thing that's been under priced in the US election is just how many American jobs now rely on Ukrainian aid, all that kit has to be made somewhere.
So now Russian soldiers reported to be looting in Kursk.
https://twitter.com/ChrisO_wiki/status/1823003072177553458
https://twitter.com/ChrisO_wiki/status/1822953065940406661