Forum menu
Reading this morning that the use of the weapons in Russia has never been an issue.
The issue has been to use them properly they require integration with NATO targeting and electronic warfare capabilities, which effectively means that NATO would have a direct involvement 'on the ground'*. This then is big debate.
.
.
.
*yes, I know from Rivet Joint, satellites and etc, but still.
Maybe someone (BUTR..) could say how close this is to the real situation or not
My knowledge is way too dated to talk specifically about the newer systems under discussion but I think Matt's post below yours probably answers it pretty well. I suspect it is unlikely that any outside help would be needed* on the ground, once trained for the Ukrainians to input targeting info and launch. It's the provision of that targeting information and coordination of other assets that would need NATO help.
*that's not to say there wouldn't be "observers" in the background
OSINT accounts on twitter don't seem to have much trouble buying up to date (almost hourly) satellite images of airfields with planes and choppers etc all parked out neatly.
OSINT accounts on twitter don’t seem to have much trouble buying up to date (almost hourly) satellite images of airfields with planes and choppers etc all parked out neatly.
Accurate targeting is a little more complex than just looking at commercially available satellite images. The Russians have previously made use of plywood decoy aircraft, SAAM systems etc. They also have a lot of aircraft in mothballs or disrepair - targeting those rather than operational kit would be a waste of scarce precision munitions. The Russians will also be dispersing and disguising some of their more effective/vulnerable equipment and C&C personnel. More capable military satellite systems with higher resolution, thermal imagery etc. and the resources to properly interpret them is needed. Backed up by SIGINT, HUMINT etc. to know where to look in the first place.
“He (putin) claimed that, for missile launches into Russia, Ukraine would require data from Western satellites and that only servicemen from Nato member states would be able to “input flight missions into these missile systems”.
Thanks to the debacle involving German senior officers and a recording released publicly by Russia on 1st March, this is implied and on public record.
In the recording officers discussed UK and US personnel in Ukraine helping targeting decisions, “When it comes to mission planning, I know how the English do it,” the German commander tells his subordinates on the call. As well as working with advisers back home, the British* “also have a few people on the ground, they do that, the French don’t”
and "A week ago, Scholz himself referred to the presence of British troops in Ukraine helping with “target control” and said he could not accept similar for Germany whether inside or outside the country because he felt it risked making Berlin a “participant in the war” https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/04/what-are-the-implications-of-russias-apparent-interception-of-military-talks-on-ukraine *my note- Storm Shadow (UK) and SCALP-EG (France) are essentially the same.
The issue has been to use them properly they require integration with NATO targeting and electronic warfare capabilities, which effectively means that NATO would have a direct involvement ‘on the ground’*. This then is big debate.
I don't know enough about this, but my thought is that the larger NATO countries all have their own systems. Russia likes to conflate independent actions as "NATO" because it suits their narrative, but the systems are no more "NATO" than a UK made weapon system that meets NATO standards and is donated to Ukraine. I could be massively wrong, so please correct that if needed.
A further thought on long-range weapons: If their use is authorised for anywhere within range by an agreement involving the US, then surely the US is equally complicit in their use; they might as well follow up by authorising the use of US weapons as well.
I wonder if the "leak" by Michael McCaul ^^ is actually a step in escalation. The leak yesterday to the Guardian (also ^^) and the Times is similar. The US announced ATACMS prematurely in September 2023 and I wouldn't have expected to see it repeated so soon
...and all the time putin is drawing red lines, they are sourcing arms from elsewhere themselves. They just love playing the victim.
I wonder if the “leak” by Michael McCaul ^^ is actually a step in escalation. The leak yesterday to the Guardian (also ^^) and the Times is similar.
Indeed I thought that.
Games are being played in the background.
I note that the Russians have taken back one village in Kursk, in an area which Ukraine did not have full control over or indeed many forces in at all.
Meanwhile Ukraine started another cross border attack and took about 5x the land the Russians took back.
Maybe they should ok NATO bombs once the first Iranian missile lands on Ukraine.
Partly related as it is part of the information war, the US against Russia as well as Russia against Ukrainian support. The US, reported as "the Biden administration" are to release RT being integrated with the Russian Intelligence community, it says Friday so could be later today.
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/09/13/politics/biden-administration-rt-russian-intelligence/index.html
I suspect the first we will know restrictions have been lifted 100% is when an airfield gets blown up.
And the irony of Russia using NK and Iranian missiles to strike Ukraine....
I suspect the first we will know restrictions have been lifted 100% is when an airfield gets blown up.
I think I would prefer a line of smoking wrecks of planes. Harder to replace than concrete.
Fingers crossed.
The first German attack on London possibly occurred by accident(may not actually be true, though thats how some see it).. But we see how that then developed from a tit-for-tat reprisals to full scale carpet bombing of entire cities on both sides.
So what happens if Ukraine launches into Russia, which causes mass casualties, and Russia then decides to stop hitting infrastructure and concentrate on wiping out Ukrainian families en masse.
This mass drive and need on here for escalation is disturbing.
I think I would prefer a line of smoking wrecks of planes. Harder to replace than concrete.
That's already unlikely... https://www.newsweek.com/white-house-russian-aircraft-out-ukraine-atacms-range-1949214
So what happens if Ukraine launches into Russia, which causes mass casualties, and Russia then decides to stop hitting infrastructure and concentrate on wiping out Ukrainian families en masse.
They're already engaged in missile strikes on civilian property. One example from last week, Yaroslav Bazylevych lost his wife and three daughters, 21, 18 and 7 years. https://metro.co.uk/2024/09/07/ukrainian-man-loses-wife-three-daughters-horrific-russian-missile-strike-21565629/
This mass drive and need on here for escalation is disturbing.
Russia is ahead on escalation and has been using missile strikes and bombing into Ukraine for almost three years.
The difference is that Russia has been acting outside international law from the start in 2014, which includes the Geneva Convention, UN sanctions on Iranian and N.Korean weapons, etc. Ukraine is far more law-abiding.
It doesn't make it "right", but Ukraine's ability to strike targets in Russia might bring an end to the madness that is this war
Russia then decides to stop hitting infrastructure and concentrate on wiping out Ukrainian families en masse.
It seems Russia has been quite happily hitting civillian targets just as much as millitary ones... It wouldn't be much of a step change, IMO.
That’s already unlikely…
But what that does mean is that it's harder work for the Russians to use them.
I also suspect this is why there is a Ukrainian focus on longer range drones.
And Mariupol 🙁
It doesn’t make it “right”, but Ukraine’s ability to strike targets in Russia might bring an end to the madness that is this war
Of course it doesn't, and every death is a tragedy.
But what that does mean is that it’s harder work for the Russians to use them.
Yes, to an extent. The aircraft are a small cog that will still work effectively after an additional 15 minutes flight time. More dispersed aircraft means more dispersed logistics, which is also an issue, but Russian aircraft and logistics will be far enough away from long-range weapons to overcome that.
The long-range weapons won't now be aimed at the small cogs, but the bigger wheels of command and control, its communications, computers, facilities and personnel.
They'll continue to strike personnel training, fuel and weapons supply lines. Without these the aircraft are static display pieces
I also suspect this is why there is a Ukrainian focus on longer range drones.
I'm sure you're right that aircraft will remain on the list
It doesn’t make it “right”, but Ukraine’s ability to strike targets in Russia might bring an end to the madness that is this war
Nope, the time to supply Ukraine with everything it needed to rout the Russians from it's borders was back in march 2022 (or 2014 if I'm being pedantic), since then Putin has placed the Russian state on a war footing and reinforced its capabilities to dig in and hold on for the long run.
Ukraine is never going to get its land back - the western nations have sold Ukraine down the river, we have dithered to such an extent that Putin knows he's won.
Zelensky needs to call Putin telling him to keep what’s he’s got and see if they can call it quits. If you want to escalate it more get over there and fight .
And if you want to tell Ukrainians to hand over their country "get over there" and tell them to their face.
Zelensky needs to call Putin telling him to keep what’s he’s got and see if they can call it quits. If you want to escalate it more get over there and fight .
I'm sure Putin would be 100% happy with what he's acquired, and definitely won't regroup and come back for more later.
Zelensky needs to call Putin telling him to keep what’s he’s got and see if they can call it quits.
Good plan. It worked well in 2014.
Trumps plan is to tell Zelensky to give up the Donbas or he withdraws US support. Let’s pray that Harris wins.
He wouldnt stop there . Russia have way more territory on the ground to the south to pull forces back and settle for just the Donbas. Zelensky to hand the Donbas but Russia to pay reporations to Ukraine for 26 months of damage and loss and Putin to stand in Hauge in front of the ICC . Ah such a simple idea
I think there's a big difference between escalation for the sake of it and standing up to aggression. There are often parallels drawn with the 1930s, quite accurately in my opinion. Nobody wanted an escalation over the Rhineland, Austria, Czechoslovakia... But ultimately the earlier we had got involved the easier it would have been.
I know the political situation in Ukraine at the time, in terms of corruption etc, made it difficult for Western leaders to be seen to be supplying Ukraine with this current level of military support but we should have have given them everything they needed to take back Crimea and the other occupied areas. I don't normally say very positive things about our previous government but at least they started the process of training Ukrainian soldiers back then. However, if we had gone all in and granted them NATO membership we wouldn't be where we are now. We are either involved or we aren't, we either let Putin do what he wants or we stop him, hanging about in the middle doing neither is just dragging this out
It’s always been like this on this thread. Armchair generals fantasising about WW3. It’s terrifying and depressing in equal measure.
A gross distortion, and a bit of an insult tbh. There are a few on here who have enough experience of the realities to be having nightmares about the prospect of a WW, rather than 'fantasising' about it. Perhaps they think that appeasing Putin and encouraging him in his desire to recreate the Soviet empire will make a major European war far more likely? I know I do. It's fine to express an alternative view, but maybe without the insults eh?
It’s terrifying and depressing in equal measure.
Why? What possible impact will some people nattering on a cycling forum have on geopolitics?
It seems highly unlikely Ukraine gets the land Russia is currently occupying back - the best they can hope for is that they can stop Russia taking any more.
Europe/USA and its allies also need to start decoupling itself from China. It appears China are benefiting the most out of the current situation .. so let them start paying an economical price for supporting Russia.
Europe/USA and its allies also need to start decoupling itself from China
Yes if you want the UK economy to collapse completely. And no doubt the US would be facing monumental problems itself, as well as pretty much everyone tied to them as allies.
To 'decouple' would take an extremely long time and mean immense investment, the likes of which have never been seen.
No easy job to kickstart dozens of industries that China currently supplies.
No easy job to kickstart dozens of industries that China currently supplies.
It's happening by default anyway. More and more manufacturing is moving from China to India, Vietnam and others. Because of increasing wages, an ageing workforce in China and a load of other factors. It won't happen overnight but that's the direction of travel.
No easy job to kickstart dozens of industries that China currently supplies.
Yes, like it or not, the economic relationship between 'the west' and the 'far east' is far too entwined and symbiotic to do much about with any great speed.
manufacturing is moving from China
the company I recently left did this about 5 years ago due to cost- moved final assembly to the Philippines from China. Some components are still sourced from Chinese suppliers but they are looking for cheaper alternatives.
manufacturing is moving from China
My employer is also doing this. Vietnam, Turkey and other places I can no longer keep track of. At least in part due to the sanctions introduced by Trump but also a desire not to be caught out again next time there's a global pandemic and everyone in China stops making things.
It seems highly unlikely
UkraineRussia gets the landRussiaUkraine is currently occupying back – the best they can hope for is that they can stopRussiaUkraine taking any more.
FTFY.
the company I recently left did this about 5 years ago due to cost- moved final assembly to the Philippines from China. Some components are still sourced from Chinese suppliers but they are looking for cheaper alternatives.
Could do with its own thread, as a knock on consequence of potential economic troubles for China is political trouble, and the entity that is China has a track record that is extremely long, and at times, extremely violent and it's a lot of people needing fed.
Could do with its own thread, as a knock on consequence of potential economic troubles for China is political trouble, and the entity that is China has a track record that is extremely long, and at times, extremely violent and it’s a lot of people needing fed.
I'm still pondering the eventual outcome of Ukraine being that China ends up with Siberia.
It looks like the man arrested for planning to assassinate Trump yesterday was a Pro-Ukraine activist.
I have zero clue how this plays out but Ukraine and Trump's determination to sell them out is now surely going to be a major point of discussion in the US election, at least over the next week.
Ukraine and Trump’s determination to sell them out is now surely going to be a major point of discussion in the US election, at least over the next week.
New "major issues" for the election arise about every three days and the old ones are forgotten.
I also suspect this is why there is a Ukrainian focus on longer range drones.
The Black Sea Fleet has now sailed from Novorossiysk, which is outside ATACMS range but not Storm Shadow/SCALP-EG https://mil.in.ua/en/news/russian-black-sea-fleet-grouping-leaves-the-base-in-novorossiysk/
This mass drive and need on here for escalation is disturbing.
It’s always been like this on this thread. Armchair generals fantasising about WW3. It’s terrifying and depressing in equal measure.
WW3 is exactly what people don't want and is what a balanced political approach is about.
Sure, there will be questions about whether the balance is correct in the face of Russia escalating by getting more and more weapons from Iran, N.Korea and others.
I'd like to think that for the most part the thread is balanced and thoughtful, but I don't think that (m)any are fantasising about WW3