Russia/Ukraine conflict

[bkp_duke]

Yeah but Russia is also sanctioned so what does it have to give Iran (that it isn't already running short of)?

The scary answer to that: nuclear know-how.

 

[EVCollies]

Russia Begins Repairs to Bomb-Damaged Crimean Bridge​

"He (Marat Khusnullin, Russia's deputy prime minister for construction and regional development) reported that one barge had been moved into place earlier in the week and a second was expected to be on the site when weather allowed."

I wonder if UKR will notice these barges?

Crimea bridge repairs to be finished by July 2023 - Russian government document​

"Repairs to the bridge between the annexed Crimean peninsula and southern Russia, which was damaged in an explosion last Saturday, are to be finished by July 2023, a document published on the Russian government's website said."

Hmmm...

 

[iPlug]

If Iran exports enough missiles to Russia, I see an opportunity for Israel in the future.

They heard you and agree:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1581671085061251073

https://twitter.com/x/status/1581671089108754432

 

[elasalle]

If true the human race would have died out long ago. It does seem to be universally the case that older generations complain about newer ones:

“The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.”​

― Socrates

The problem with quotes on the internet is that they are often not true - Abraham Lincoln

 

[JRP3]

Warning, loud: "Strikes on airport area in Belgorod, Russia"

https://twitter.com/x/status/1581568791246671873

 

[stopcrazypp]

The problem with quotes on the internet is that they are often not true - Abraham Lincoln

The quote was misattributed (was actually written by Kenneth John Freeman for his Cambridge dissertation published in 1907), but his thesis was basically that in ancient times this feeling was already being expressed:
Misbehaving Children in Ancient Times – Quote Investigator

 

[KBF]

1. Russia has a UN P5 veto. Given the state of the sanctions process (JCPOA) and the likely proximity of Iran to nuclear breakout status that veto would be handy to Iran.

2. Russia has railroads and grain, fertiliser, etc exports and a severe lack of warm water ports. Iran would like the hard cash and further help in building its railroads and ports, plus a handy backup to remind China that Iran has more than one friend.

3. Russia has some interesting technology Iran would like.

(Iran makes its own missiles. Iran has spent so long under sanctions that it knows how to play this game).

(Iran can get funds in and out for commercial purposes that are sanctions-compliant. )

Another reason Russia should lose their security council seat/veto powers. They have proven to be bad actors and actively work against the spirit of the UN.

 

[JRP3]

The quote was misattributed (was actually written by Kenneth John Freeman for his Cambridge dissertation published in 1907), but his thesis was basically that in ancient times this feeling was already being expressed:
Misbehaving Children in Ancient Times – Quote Investigator

Well that's just disappointing.

 

[STS-134]

Another reason Russia should lose their security council seat/veto powers. They have proven to be bad actors and actively work against the spirit of the UN.

Well the original seat with the veto power wasn't Russia, it was the USSR. UN should give the seat to another former SSR. How about Ukraine? I think they should have as much of a right to that seat as the Russian Federation does, and given that the Russian Federation hasn't used the power wisely and to advance the interests of the UN...

For that matter, the UN could also switch recognition back from the PRC to the ROC and then give the ROC the seat with the veto power. And just like that, the two most annoying governments wouldn't be able to veto any security council resolutions.

 

[RobStark]

There is the revolutionary generation.

The builder generations.

The generations that live off of the interest.

The generations that live of the capital.

Then implosion and repeat.

This has been so since some dudes convinced some farmers in Mesopotamia that they would provide protection in exchange for 10% of their harvest.

 

[ElectricIAC]

There is the revolutionary generation.

The builder generations.

The generations that live off of the interest.

The generations that live of the capital.

Then implosion and repeat.

This has been so since some dudes convinced some farmers in Mesopotamia that they would provide protection in exchange for 10% of their harvest.

Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.

 

[SPadival]

Did anyone but the USA have nukes back then?

Vlody wants (B)illions, not pocket change.

Definitely! Vlody’s benefactor/godfather Igor Kolomoisky pilfered $1.8 billion.. yes..billion in IMF loans

[Heart of Empire] | Undelivered Goods, by Andrew Cockburn | Harper's Magazine

How $1.8 billion in aid to Ukraine was funneled to the outposts of the international finance galaxy

harpers.org

Although we hear much about corruption in countries such as Ukraine in general terms, a precise, detailed accounting of the means by which an impoverished country has been stripped of precious assets is not usually easy to come by. In this case however, thanks to investigative work by the Ukrainian anticorruption watchdog group Nashi Groshi (“Our Money”), we can actually watch the process by which the gigantic sum of $1.8 billion was smoothly maneuvered offshore, in the first instance to PrivatBank accounts in Cyprus, and thence into accounts in Belize, the British Virgin Islands, and other outposts of the international financial galaxy.

The scheme, as revealed in a series of court judgments of the Economic Court of the Dnipropetrovsk region monitored and reported by Nashi Groshi, worked like this: Forty-two Ukrainian firms owned by fifty-four offshore entities registered in Caribbean, American, and Cypriot jurisdictions and linked to or affiliated with the Privat group of companies, took out loans from PrivatBank in Ukraine to the value of $1.8 billion. The firms then ordered goods from six foreign “supplier” companies, three of which were incorporated in the United Kingdom, two in the British Virgin Islands, one in the Caribbean statelet of St. Kitts & Nevis. Payment for the orders—$1.8 billion—was shortly afterwards prepaid into the vendors’ accounts, which were, coincidentally, in the Cyprus branch of PrivatBank. Once the money was sent, the Ukrainian importing companies arranged with PrivatBank Ukraine that their loans be guaranteed by the goods on order.

 

[Fred42]

Well the original seat with the veto power wasn't Russia, it was the USSR. UN should give the seat to another former SSR. How about Ukraine? I think they should have as much of a right to that seat as the Russian Federation does, and given that the Russian Federation hasn't used the power wisely and to advance the interests of the UN...

For that matter, the UN could also switch recognition back from the PRC to the ROC and then give the ROC the seat with the veto power. And just like that, the two most annoying governments wouldn't be able to veto any security council resolutions.

Russia is the legal successor government to the USSR. All international rights and obligations of the USSR apply to Russia and not to any other former Soviet republic.

 

[Artful Dodger]

Why is Iran doing this? What does Russia have that Iran wants?

Is potato.

 

[wdolson]

Frankly, I think U.S. intelligence had a pretty good idea of the woeful state of Russia’s military. However, that truth would undermine feeding the Military-Industrial Complex monster that holds so much sway over American politics and foreign policy. Just watch. As Russia is collapsing before our eyes like a slow motion car crash, the MICMonster is ramping up its anti-China rhetoric in order to continue feeding its voracious appetite.

I’m not saying China does not pose a threat, but the MICMonster must inflate that risk as concerns over Russian hegemony fade in the face of the pathetic reality of its capabilities.

Trent Telenko has had a number of threads where he goes into detail how and why US intelligence blinded themselves to the reality of the state of the Russian military. They really did overrate Russia because they made a number of assumptions that turned out to be untrue.

This had everything to do with the advanced antiaircraft VTFuze shell developed at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory. Before that it was nearly impossible for a naval gun to down an aircraft. With that it was like shooting fish in a barrel. It is every bit comparable to the difference between modern guided munitions in howitzers vs the Russian's 1943 artillery. The Russians can fire 10,000 rounds and never hit their target, it only takes one round from a guided munition to hit the target.

The Japanese air force was technologically defeated by superior weaponry. It had nothing to do with lack of skill, training, exhaustion, strategy or anything else.

A lot of people would disagree with you, among them the pilots who shot down 12,672 Japanese aircraft in air to air combat in the Pacific as well as another 1504 in the CBI (China, Burma, India theater). Naval 40mm flak, which was too small to carry a proximity fuze started running up a score of medium range shoot downs starting in mid-1942. The 40mm guns protecting the Hornet and Enterprise in the Battle of the Eastern Solomons virtually wiped out a dive bomber attack by the Japanese.

The proximity fuze was first used with naval 5 inch guns during the invasion of Sicily in July, 1943, but production was not sufficient for widespread naval use until late 1944. As proximity fuzes got into widespread use the 5 inch gun became the primary flak gun kill over the 40mm. This did help when the Japanese switched to Kamikaze tactics in October 1944. CAP (Combat Air Patrol) had gotten very good at vectoring fighters onto target by 1943, but no matter how good CAP is, they will always miss some aircraft coming in, either from the base (or ship) not seeing them for some reason, the fighters being out of position, or too many planes coming in for the CAP to get them all. Then defense is up to the anti-aircraft and proximity fuzes did help, but the quality of Japanese air crews was severely degraded before they came into use.

Here are some site where you can compare air to air effectiveness vs ship borne AA
Enemy aircraft shot down by Allied aircraft type (all shoot downs in the Pacific and CBI are Japanese aircraft with a very small number of Japanese allied aircraft in the CBI, mostly Thailand)
Warbirds and Airshows- WWII US Aircraft Victories

Here is the worldwide ship borne AA numbers
HyperWar: Antiaircraft Action Summary--World War II

Allied aircraft accounted for over 25,000 shoot downs while USN ships claimed a little over 2200. You can see the jump in AA kills in 1945. By then pretty much every USN 5 inch gun had proximity fuzes.

 

[nativewolf]

Trent Telenko has had a number of threads where he goes into detail how and why US intelligence blinded themselves to the reality of the state of the Russian military. They really did overrate Russia because they made a number of assumptions that turned out to be untrue.



A lot of people would disagree with you, among them the pilots who shot down 12,672 Japanese aircraft in air to air combat in the Pacific as well as another 1504 in the CBI (China, Burma, India theater). Naval 40mm flak, which was too small to carry a proximity fuze started running up a score of medium range shoot downs starting in mid-1942. The 40mm guns protecting the Hornet and Enterprise in the Battle of the Eastern Solomons virtually wiped out a dive bomber attack by the Japanese.

The proximity fuze was first used with naval 5 inch guns during the invasion of Sicily in July, 1943, but production was not sufficient for widespread naval use until late 1944. As proximity fuzes got into widespread use the 5 inch gun became the primary flak gun kill over the 40mm. This did help when the Japanese switched to Kamikaze tactics in October 1944. CAP (Combat Air Patrol) had gotten very good at vectoring fighters onto target by 1943, but no matter how good CAP is, they will always miss some aircraft coming in, either from the base (or ship) not seeing them for some reason, the fighters being out of position, or too many planes coming in for the CAP to get them all. Then defense is up to the anti-aircraft and proximity fuzes did help, but the quality of Japanese air crews was severely degraded before they came into use.

Here are some site where you can compare air to air effectiveness vs ship borne AA
Enemy aircraft shot down by Allied aircraft type (all shoot downs in the Pacific and CBI are Japanese aircraft with a very small number of Japanese allied aircraft in the CBI, mostly Thailand)
Warbirds and Airshows- WWII US Aircraft Victories

Here is the worldwide ship borne AA numbers
HyperWar: Antiaircraft Action Summary--World War II

Allied aircraft accounted for over 25,000 shoot downs while USN ships claimed a little over 2200. You can see the jump in AA kills in 1945. By then pretty much every USN 5 inch gun had proximity fuzes.

Why would the pilots disagree? They had superior planes, the Flying Tigers had figured out the pros/cons of the Japanese Zero by the start of WWII and we understood the weaknesses of the enemy air platforms. So our kill ratios increased as we introduced better and better weapons.

Japanese pilots did change attack strategies through the war as the effectiveness of the ship borne anti air fire increased, entire ships were converted to basically provide just this fire. So yes, it seems they were effective but they were just part of a layered defense and that was what was so powerful. Air patrols, better secure communications, air-air defense, then the anti-aircraft from ships, then the damage control systems of the major platforms and damage control training. Certainly the ship borne anti-aircraft fire was critical, the fact that so many attacking planes eluded the air patrols speaks to this however, it was 1 part of system.


When USA planes attacked Japanese fleets it was the feet air that they had to contend with but it they could defeat that they had a good chance of securing hits. If they did hit it was often deadly. Even when they Japanese hit the hits often could not kill the major ships.

 

[SmokyPeat]

Kamikaze air strikes have become a serious problem once again. Kyiv took many hits from the Iranian made Shahed drones last night. I find this accelerated use of drone warfare quite troubling. I suppose it was inevitable, but to me, a scary glimpse into future warfare.

 

[Dangerous Fish]

Scary if you're a drone being followed by another drone...

 

[Artful Dodger]

If Iran delivers SSMs w. 700 km range to Russia; then Western Allies deliver ATACM to Ukraine; Ukraine deliveres ATACM to Crimea Airfields, Ports, and Railway Bridges.

Sounds like Israel has finally decided to provide Anti-missle kit to Ukraine. Iron Dome would be appropriate IMO, due to the ongoing bombardment of the capital, Kyiv.

Interesting development that an airfield in Belgorod was hit with a missle strike. Important step to ensure that Russian aircraft can not launch ASMs with impunity by operating in another country's airspace

Belorus Oblast, indeed.

 

[wdolson]

Why would the pilots disagree? They had superior planes, the Flying Tigers had figured out the pros/cons of the Japanese Zero by the start of WWII and we understood the weaknesses of the enemy air platforms. So our kill ratios increased as we introduced better and better weapons.

Japanese pilots did change attack strategies through the war as the effectiveness of the ship borne anti air fire increased, entire ships were converted to basically provide just this fire. So yes, it seems they were effective but they were just part of a layered defense and that was what was so powerful. Air patrols, better secure communications, air-air defense, then the anti-aircraft from ships, then the damage control systems of the major platforms and damage control training. Certainly the ship borne anti-aircraft fire was critical, the fact that so many attacking planes eluded the air patrols speaks to this however, it was 1 part of system.

Hacer was asserting that the back of Japanese air power was broken by proximity fuzed AA shells, which were not in wide use until late 1944 and air to air combat with fighters shot down more than planes than AA. Japan's pilot quality was in sharp decline by mid-1943, before proximity fuzes came into use.

When USA planes attacked Japanese fleets it was the feet air that they had to contend with but it they could defeat that they had a good chance of securing hits. If they did hit it was often deadly. Even when they Japanese hit the hits often could not kill the major ships.

The Japanese were pretty good in the early part of the war, they sank 4 fleet carriers in the first year and almost sank the Enterprise. The US got very good at sinking small ships with skip bombing with B-25s, but while the USN had a fantastic 8 minutes at Midway crippling 3 carriers at once, their performance against capital ships even later in the war was less than spectacular. In the early part of Leyte Gulf when the Japanese Center Force was spotted and attacked for most of a day from the air, the performance of the USN aircraft was less than you would expect. With no Japanese air cover, the force was a sitting duck. The USN managed to sink the Musashi and damage the cruiser Myoko so badly she had to retire, but the rest of the force was intact and participated in the Battle Off Samar the next day where a large Japanese surface force encountered a group of escort carriers and sank a couple of them.

USN air did even worse earlier in the war. In the first year of the war the USN had carrier encounters with Shokaku and Zuikaku three times (Coral Sea, Battle of the Eastern Solomons, and the Battle of Santa Cruz). Slight correction from my earlier post I misremembered the Hornet was sunk at Santa Cruz.

Shokaku was damaged in all three battles and the Zuikaku was never hit at all. Both carriers were next used in the Battle of the Philippine Sea where the Shokaku was sunk before the battle by the submarine USS Cavalla. Another fleet carrier was sunk by the USS Albacore. After playing perfect defense against Japanese air attacks the US launched their own maximum range attack with every bomber they had. The Americans managed to score hits on 4 Japanese carriers, but only managed to sink the Hiyo which was a converted ocean liner with minimal armor protection. Hiyo's sister the Junyo was hit but survived.

The US did a perfect job of sinking the Yamato in April 1945 with air power, but again it was with no air protection and a small task force of one battleship, one light cruiser, and a handful of destroyers.

In the early part of the war the Japanese were a formidable opponent, by the end of 1942 every US heavy cruiser assigned to the Pacific was sunk or undergoing massive repairs. Two had huge chunks of their bows blown off. One lost the forward turret, the bow broke off that far back. One had its steering gear so badly damaged that it took an extensive field repair just to get it away from Guadalcanal.

Japanese surface warfare ability didn't degrade like their airpower did because it didn't get used as much, but they were definitely on the weaker side by the Battle of Leyte Gulf. The Battle of Surgio Strait was one of the most lopsided surface battles in history. The Japanese sailed into a well laid trap and got pummeled. The only US casualties were from friendly fire.

The Battle Off Samar the next morning was a bit better for the Japanese, but they failed to close the deal with a much stronger force.

Kamikaze air strikes have become a serious problem once again. Kyiv took many hits from the Iranian made Shahed drones last night. I find this accelerated use of drone warfare quite troubling. I suppose it was inevitable, but to me, a scary glimpse into future warfare.

There are many anti-drone technologies under development in many places around the world ranging from electronic warfare to jam them or fry their circuitry to various methods to shoot them down. Militaries with small budgets will be able to field swarms of cheap drones, but within a year or two there will also be countermeasures available.

Perun's latest video talks about some of these things under development.