It wouldn’t hurt, but I’m not sure how much it would matter, given the Kremlin’s stranglehold on information and news in Russia. They’d just spin it to fit their F’d up narrative.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Europe under extreme duress
- Thread starter Randy Daytona
- Start date
Conscript troops. The young unattached and so called penal troops ( if real ) would be easy pickings. And don't forget, many thousands of Communist citizen fled to the west leaving behind loved ones. It does happen. Move the needle on the war? Manning wise, probably not. Troop morale and Info War affect back home, sure. Putin does not have a stranglehold on all news. We wouldn't be seeing protests if he did. Cell phones still call friends and relatives in Ukraine, Hungary, the UK and USA. The internet is not completely stifled, yet.
I didn't realize until recently just how much of a stranglehold the Russian government has on domestic news and how much their propaganda has inculcated much of the populace to Putin's beliefs. There have been several articles that have highlighted that fact, from a widely held belief that the Ukrainian government is a bunch of Nazis to blaming the US and NATO for the conflict because we are poised to attack them to family members in Russia not believing their Ukrainian relatives that there is really a war going on.
As for the protests, they are very small and are quickly being quashed. While notable for Russia 3000 people protesting ain't much. So while we can all hope I seriously doubt that getting a handful few conscripts to turn is going to make much of an impact at all.
It takes a lot of courage to come out and protest in Russia. How many people are mindful of what is really going on and are supportive of protestors, but just don't hit the streets? Still a small number in a country of 140M but I don't think the number REPORTED as arrested is a good indication of public dissatisfaction. And as nice as it would be to see a popular uprising end the war and possibly usher out Putin, it isn't the general population's protest that will do it. It is the ultra rich that jet around the world and are exposed to independent news sources. They know the real reason they have lost hundreds of millions of dollars, had accounts frozen, assets seized and are watching their business holdings damaged. And those that have escaped direct sanctions, they may be next.
Max the Mad Russian
Hands off Ukraine! Feet too
Look, Russians traditionally are very religious, but they mostly don't believe. A paradox of a kind. The Russian Orthodox Church is essentially an ideological dept of Putin regime, and it has absolutely nothing in common with trust in God. So when the average Russian thinks about what to believe, s/he (unfortunately there's A LOT of quite pretty but absolutely, ultimately, totally stupid women in Russia - "Russian bride" is often beautiful but equally often totally dumb creature) prefers to believe a mighty political figure, usually Tsar. Tsar is not just monarch, he is God's ambassador. And there's no Pope in Ortho world to say: hey, tsar, who do you think you fucking are? In this respect nothing has changed for the last century: tsar might have neither glorious nor noble origin, but if he's holding the power - he is essentially sacred cow. Putin is clearly viewing himself this way and radiating this image to a people. Given awfully low level of liberal arts education in Russia, this is not big surprise.
Last edited:
LGuapo
Active Member
Ideally the Orthodox Patriarch of Moscow should be calling out the "Tsar" in God's name for his atrocities. But unfortunately, Kirill appears to be just another Kremlin puppet. True Christianity should mix with nationalism just about as well as oil in water.
I don't think that's a problem unique to Russia.
Max the Mad Russian
Hands off Ukraine! Feet too
... with shoulder boards of FSB LtGen, as many state. Russians themselves call him "potz-riarch", where "potz" is "dickhead" in old south Jewish slang.
Last edited:
Max the Mad Russian
Hands off Ukraine! Feet too
Yeah but most embarrassing thing in that way is not a number of brainless little chicks (though there are many, either) but number of respected mothers ready to bless their sons to "liberate" Ukraine. With arguments like: "we have smart weapon, you're safe my boy, just go to walk over there". Fucking old hens...
I saw the vote on the 27th didn't go so well, for the Belarusian people or Ukraine. Rejected non nuclear stance so Putin can roll in nukes, gave Lukashenko lifetime immunity from criminal prosecution, and increased the power of the All Belarusian People's Assembly which are all Lukashenko supporters. If the Belarusian people really do not support the war, it seems, expectedly, the referendum vote was as fraudulent as Lukashenko's election.
Max the Mad Russian
Hands off Ukraine! Feet too
Worse. Belarussians outside country (near 700K) didn't vote at all, since that wasn't established by the rules.
So some (random) thoughts:
I am wondering if the Russian shelling of the Ukrainian cities is ultimately a very stupid move from a tactical standpoint? I am assuming they are doing this out of frustration as their forces are having such trouble due to lack of training/logistics/mud season. But if they are planning to try and "take" the cities after bombing and shelling them to rubble, that to me seems like a terrible idea, because a rubble-strewn city is a defender's best friend. In the Battle of Stalingrad in WWII, this was the mistake the Germans made. They bombed the city completely, but because it was all rubble, they couldn't maneuver their tanks.
Now in an urban environment in particular, tanks and infantry are best friends. They both need one another. Without the tanks being able to maneuver, the infantry will be far more vulnerable. And from what we've seen, the Russian military doesn't seem much trained to begin with while the Ukrainians are. In WWII, the Russians did the following in the city:
1) General Chuikov (tasked with the defense of Stalingrad) came up with the strategy called "Hug the Enemy," i.e. get so close to the enemy that he dare not use his artillery and air power lest he run the risk of killing his own forces (the Vietnamese did this to our forces in the Vietnam War).
2) The Russians piled up the rubble to make lines of trenches throughout the city. These trenches had defensive nodes along them with machine guns that were aimed to create interlocking fields of machine gun fire. The trenches also allowed for the nodes to keep in communication. The Germans were having to go up and over these trenches constantly, thus going right into the fields of fire.
3) The Russians used tactics to funnel German tanks and troops into special "killing zones" where they would destroy them.
4) They used the sewers to maneuver around and do things like pop up and lob Molotov cocktails and grenades at Germans and then quickly disappear.
5) Snipers were cited all throughout the city
6) When out of ammo, the Russians threw bricks at the Germans
7) The Russians kept up attacks at night to prevent the Germans from sleeping
As a result, Stalingrad was a meat grinder, the bloodiest battle in the bloodiest war (Russo-German War) of WWII. Now in that battle, the Russian troops were inferior to the quality of the Germans tactically. The German force there was the Sixth Army, the crack army of the German military. They were also very motivated to fight. Now with Ukraine, you have kind of the opposite: the Russians (being the invaders this time) are poorly trained and don't seem too motivated while the Ukrainians are very motivated and seem to be higher skilled.
I think it will depend on how well supplies can get in to the cities, but IMO I think if Putin tries to amass a force to go into such a city (say a very rubble-strewn Kyiv or Kharkiv) to take it over, that could prove catastrophic for the force used. That would be very dangerous for a well-trained military like the U.S. Army or infantry Marines or the Brits, let alone the Russians, IMO. Now one might say, how does an example from WWII apply here, but the thing is, the Russians don't seem to have the logistical capability or training to use their weapons as a modern military would fight and the Ukrainians, who are better trained, don't have the weapons to use. So I think the WWII analogy may fit.
As for trying to break the will of the Ukrainians, I don't think that will work as bombing of the Germans in WWII didn't break them, it didn't break the Japanese, it didn't break the British, it didn't break the Russians, and I don't think it broke the Vietnamese in the Vietnam War. So I doubt it will work here, especially given the Ukrainian will to resist.
I am wondering if the Russian shelling of the Ukrainian cities is ultimately a very stupid move from a tactical standpoint? I am assuming they are doing this out of frustration as their forces are having such trouble due to lack of training/logistics/mud season. But if they are planning to try and "take" the cities after bombing and shelling them to rubble, that to me seems like a terrible idea, because a rubble-strewn city is a defender's best friend. In the Battle of Stalingrad in WWII, this was the mistake the Germans made. They bombed the city completely, but because it was all rubble, they couldn't maneuver their tanks.
Now in an urban environment in particular, tanks and infantry are best friends. They both need one another. Without the tanks being able to maneuver, the infantry will be far more vulnerable. And from what we've seen, the Russian military doesn't seem much trained to begin with while the Ukrainians are. In WWII, the Russians did the following in the city:
1) General Chuikov (tasked with the defense of Stalingrad) came up with the strategy called "Hug the Enemy," i.e. get so close to the enemy that he dare not use his artillery and air power lest he run the risk of killing his own forces (the Vietnamese did this to our forces in the Vietnam War).
2) The Russians piled up the rubble to make lines of trenches throughout the city. These trenches had defensive nodes along them with machine guns that were aimed to create interlocking fields of machine gun fire. The trenches also allowed for the nodes to keep in communication. The Germans were having to go up and over these trenches constantly, thus going right into the fields of fire.
3) The Russians used tactics to funnel German tanks and troops into special "killing zones" where they would destroy them.
4) They used the sewers to maneuver around and do things like pop up and lob Molotov cocktails and grenades at Germans and then quickly disappear.
5) Snipers were cited all throughout the city
6) When out of ammo, the Russians threw bricks at the Germans
7) The Russians kept up attacks at night to prevent the Germans from sleeping
As a result, Stalingrad was a meat grinder, the bloodiest battle in the bloodiest war (Russo-German War) of WWII. Now in that battle, the Russian troops were inferior to the quality of the Germans tactically. The German force there was the Sixth Army, the crack army of the German military. They were also very motivated to fight. Now with Ukraine, you have kind of the opposite: the Russians (being the invaders this time) are poorly trained and don't seem too motivated while the Ukrainians are very motivated and seem to be higher skilled.
I think it will depend on how well supplies can get in to the cities, but IMO I think if Putin tries to amass a force to go into such a city (say a very rubble-strewn Kyiv or Kharkiv) to take it over, that could prove catastrophic for the force used. That would be very dangerous for a well-trained military like the U.S. Army or infantry Marines or the Brits, let alone the Russians, IMO. Now one might say, how does an example from WWII apply here, but the thing is, the Russians don't seem to have the logistical capability or training to use their weapons as a modern military would fight and the Ukrainians, who are better trained, don't have the weapons to use. So I think the WWII analogy may fit.
As for trying to break the will of the Ukrainians, I don't think that will work as bombing of the Germans in WWII didn't break them, it didn't break the Japanese, it didn't break the British, it didn't break the Russians, and I don't think it broke the Vietnamese in the Vietnam War. So I doubt it will work here, especially given the Ukrainian will to resist.
You are probably over thinking this. The use of “fires” (cannon artillery, missiles, rockets, and aerial bombs) is typically a combat enabler designed to save infantry lives or dictate the pace of battle. In this case, I imagine the Russians are using it to keep up pressure on a city while not risking troops who appear unwilling to engaged in direct, heavy battle.
At the same time I also believe the Russians front loaded too much “Class 5” (ammunition) and not enough Class 1 and Class 3 (food and POL). They appear to be wasting a lot of munitions on pointless targets and that tells me they are either totally incompetent or looking to clear some stock off their supply lines…or maybe a bit of both.
Lastly, you are a bit off on your history. The Russians used artillery at Stalingrad en masse. I could do the homework to know for sure, but I am willing to bet that they matched, pound-for-pound Russian shells to German bombs in that city creating as much trouble for them as the Germans did. I’d dare say the Russians are (or maybe were) masters of artillery used in massed formations - at Kursk they had a 2 to 1 edge over the Nazis and used those tubes to devastating effect on those battlefields. Tactically they haven’t moved much from how they used it in WWII and that is what we are seeing. When it comes to urban warfare, tanks are a “nice to have” in the fight but not an absolute necessity. Given my experience in Iraq I’d rather have 25 armed drones capable of loitering (so they could strike sniper positions) than a battalion of tanks.
Yes, the Russians used tanks, air planes, and artillery at Stalingrad. I agree on the drones but does the Russian military have such drones? I have read that it seems the Russians are trying to mass forces near the cities like Kyiv and Kharkov in an effort to then go in and take them, in which case shelling the city seems like a very bad idea IMO.
Max the Mad Russian
Hands off Ukraine! Feet too
All this is very bad idea. Total fuck-up of Russian diplomacy and interpretation of social reality in Ukraine, followed by near total military fuck-up. The only result is that Russia quickly transforms itself into buyer's market for China. But this is up to them.
Just before the war started I tried to suppose that Russian regular infantry is quite dependent from armour to a degree that it is unable to operate on its own, let alone in urban environment. We all see kinda proof: having armour destroyed they either flee or surrender. After yesterday's bombing of children in hospital (250-kg freefalls, unbelievable) I suggest surrender would be of little help. Sad but true...