Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Russia/Ukraine conflict

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
It is not just the radiation. Many simulations have found that the nuclear winter triggered by even a small scale (think 200) nukes will hit the plant life really hard.
Absolutely true. some people here think it’ll be like Hiroshima where 1 nuke is dropped at a time and only a few hundred thousands will die, once MAD is triggered hundreds of nukes will be sent during phase 1 and 2, on day 1 about 50 million people will perish, day 2 close to 100 million. Each subsequent phase will be followed by more nukes sent than the last. As you said, it will only take 200 nukes to alter this planet for good, to the point of no return. During wartime, the most dangerous thing that can happen is when soldiers/politicians misinterpret the situation and over react. In the face of a heated moment, it’s always wise to hold one’s composure, this is exactly what the US is doing. We are putting aside our emotions for the sake of NOT escalating until Russia crosses NATO.
 
Absolutely true. some people here think it’ll be like Hiroshima where 1 nuke is dropped at a time and only a few hundred thousands will die, once MAD is triggered hundreds of nukes will be sent during phase 1 and 2, on day 1 about 50 million people will perish, day 2 close to 100 million. Each subsequent phase will be followed by more nukes sent than the last. As you said, it will only take 200 nukes to alter this planet for good, to the point of no return. During wartime, the most dangerous thing that can happen is when soldiers/politicians misinterpret the situation and over react. In the face of a heated moment, it’s always wise to hold one’s composure, this is exactly what the US is doing. We are putting aside our emotions for the sake of NOT escalating until Russia crosses NATO.

There was a story couple years back about all the super rich having spots in doomsday habitats. Some have gotten their accommodations personalized to their tastes. Locations are top secret, obviously.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: SwedishAdvocate
Absolutely true. some people here think it’ll be like Hiroshima where 1 nuke is dropped at a time and only a few hundred thousands will die, once MAD is triggered hundreds of nukes will be sent during phase 1 and 2, on day 1 about 50 million people will perish, day 2 close to 100 million. Each subsequent phase will be followed by more nukes sent than the last. As you said, it will only take 200 nukes to alter this planet for good, to the point of no return. During wartime, the most dangerous thing that can happen is when soldiers/politicians misinterpret the situation and over react. In the face of a heated moment, it’s always wise to hold one’s composure, this is exactly what the US is doing. We are putting aside our emotions for the sake of NOT escalating until Russia crosses NATO.

Reagan was quite the war hawk until ABC sent him an advance copy of the TV mini-series The Day After
The Day After - Wikipedia

According to the stories he wouldn't stop talking about it to anyone and everyone in the White House for days afterwards and then he opened nuclear reduction talks with the USSR.

I remember it was a big deal when it aired. I didn't watch because my imagination was already good enough. I didn't need it drilled home.

The soldier who videoed his rape of a child has been arrested in Russia (so they claim)

Apparently he planned to sell the video on the dark web.
 
Reagan was quite the war hawk until ABC sent him an advance copy of the TV mini-series The Day After
The Day After - Wikipedia

According to the stories he wouldn't stop talking about it to anyone and everyone in the White House for days afterwards and then he opened nuclear reduction talks with the USSR.

I remember it was a big deal when it aired. I didn't watch because my imagination was already good enough. I didn't need it drilled home.
I can’t say this about everyone here, but you’re one of the few that has intellect and the ability to decipher through vast amounts of military and political information. Most don’t understand the complexities around sending things like jet fighters and are driven emotionally to push our government to act for the sake of Ukraine, while ignoring other ramifications such as the possibility of nuclear war without the basic understanding of what this would mean. My message wasn’t for you, but for others who hasn’t quite grasped the potential dangers ahead and why our government has been navigating carefully.
The soldier who videoed his rape of a child has been arrested in Russia (so they claim)

Apparently he planned to sell the video on the dark web.
As the war prolongs more stories like this will get out, as cruel as it is, Russians need to hear about it.

The video below is shared on YouTube by a 23 year old Russian girl who has studied hard all her life for a brighter future. Her description of sanctions paint a tough reality that average Russians are facing, the protests/arrests that continue, and why she feels leaving Russia is for the best. The way the Russian police are reacting tells me how paranoid Putin has become.

 
A no fly zone without military intervention is an oxymoron. In order to implement a “no fly zone” US troops would need to be sent in (which means boots on the ground), our boys would need to setup its Patriot missile system, map out the terrain and teach the system to read its surroundings, our jets will need to also be sent in to enforce the no fly zone rule is being followed. Then lastly, our military will need to hunt down Russian bases and shoot down any threat that crosses into its stated no fly zone. “A no fly zone” is in essence a declaration of war, WW3 will soon follow if the Us declares a no fly zone should Putin choose to not pull back his troops.
Ok... My bad. The text I quoted is from a template that citizens in democracies can send to their democratically elected leaders. She didn't ask for US military involvement. She's asking for weapons so the Ukrainians can create their own "no fly zone" to combat Putler.

Why does US Military personnel have to setup the Patriots? Why can't we teach the Ukrainians how to do it? Then they'll be able to do it themselves.

This war has now lasted some eight years. It's probably going to continue for years to come. It's long overdue to start factoring that in...

EDIT: Ok.. So the Ukrainians can get overrun, and the Patriots can end up in Russian hands. But then we need to find some other Surface to Air system that is available in the kind of numbers that are necessary to last for a war that drags on for years.
 
Last edited:
If you were to do the max possible as preparation (even if Ukraine doesn't eventually get the kit, it's leverage/message to Putin), you'd do a few things

  1. Prep spare western kit using all available military and contract resources in Nato & allies. More the merrier, well maintained reserve kit of every kind. If Ukraine found uses for Maxim guns, they can use M113s upgraded with armour, optics, missiles, engines
  2. Train spare specialists (even if it's procedures, intel use, co-operation, comms), whether pilots, aircraft/vehicle maintenance, missile operators, artillery.
  3. Get & train willing Ukrainians outside the country, perhaps ex airforce who now maintain airliners, those who have worked for military maintenance contractors, heavy equipment or anyone who isn't a liability, has transferrable skills.
  4. Let it be known that treasure less important than blood. Putin can't compete. Morale of Russian top-brass affected when contrasted with scraping together usable Russian kit (akin to sending birthdays cakes across the Atlantic through logistics channels to US troops during WW2 as indication of abilities). Show off/peacock logistics/money.
  5. Have the ability to flood Ukraine, Georgia, Baltics, Japan, Korea etc with kit at will.
  6. Mass kit near allies in safe/Nato countries. Don't hide it, park it on roadsides, display openly on trains going from Belgium ports to Poland/Romania. Publicise.
  7. Let ethnic Russians/Belarusians outside Russia/Belarus know about the disparity - word will get back
  8. SpaceX sensibly moved away from single-use rockets. War is different, in high intensity conflicts, kit gets destroyed, even through wear and tear, difficulty of supplying parts, overworked maintenance crews. Consider vast amounts of effectively single use kit, as long as crew survive. Mount shot from under you, lame? Get a new one. It then becomes a job of getting fully-prepped and tested kit to the the teeth as a constant flow in one direction, even leave the trucks at the front/assembly areas and drivers go back quickly by car/rail/helicopter. One way system doubles road capacity going to the front.
  9. Pre-fabricate anything useful, parts of entrenchments (concrete elements, Czech hedgehogs, whole armoured rooms that can be buried, avoiding trenchfoot)
  10. Set up thousands of small dumps off-grid, Ukrainians will find ways to get the kit to the front. Vietnam and Korean wars both saw logistics via bicycle and small backpacks over mountains.
  11. Whether each element is released to Ukraine is a separate question.
  12. Medical, missiles, small arms, etc ok. Other systems are leverage with Putin
 
I can’t say this about everyone here, but you’re one of the few that has intellect and the ability to decipher through vast amounts of military and political information. Most don’t understand the complexities around sending things like jet fighters and are driven emotionally to push our government to act for the sake of Ukraine, while ignoring other ramifications such as the possibility of nuclear war without the basic understanding of what this would mean. My message wasn’t for you, but for others who hasn’t quite grasped the potential dangers ahead and why our government has been navigating carefully.

I've observed for years that politics is not the art of getting everything you want, it's the art of achieving what's possible. There are many things that might we think are great ideas, but there is too much political opposition to it. Getting a few baby steps in the right direction is often the only thing that can be achieved.

As the war prolongs more stories like this will get out, as cruel as it is, Russians need to hear about it.

The video below is shared on YouTube by a 23 year old Russian girl who has studied hard all her life for a brighter future. Her description of sanctions paint a tough reality that average Russians are facing, the protests/arrests that continue, and why she feels leaving Russia is for the best. The way the Russian police are reacting tells me how paranoid Putin has become.


Russians under their early 40s have no first hand experience of what the Soviet Union was like. Even Russians under about 60 have few memories of the hardships before they started opening up a little bit in the 1970s. There were a fair number of western goods available in the last years before the USSR collapsed, and then there was a decade of hardship followed by Putin's rise to power. Putin and his cronies robbed the country blind, but they allowed in a wide array of western goods and the major cities saw rises in incomes that allowed a growing middle class to afford those goods.

That's why Putin has enjoyed such popularity. He's seen as rescuing Russia from the grips of the 90s chaos.

Russia is returning now to a world similar to the USSR under communism, but it's not the 80s fairly decent version of communism when Russia was opening up and a lot of the restrictions were lifting, it's going to be the 30s dark, grim world that almost nobody in Russia remembers. The hardliners who want the "good old days of communism" are thinking about the heyday of the 1980s and they are not going to be happy with the grim police state that is likely coming.

Ok... My bad. The text I quoted is a template that citizens in democracies can send to their democratically elected leaders. She didn't ask for US military involvement. She's asking for weapons so the Ukrainians can create their own "no fly zone" to combat Putler.

Why does US Military personel have to setup the Patriots? Why can't we teach the Ukrainians how to do it? Then they'll be able to do it themselves.

This war has now lasted some eight years. It's probably going to continue for years to come. It's long overdue to start factoring that in...

Putin has a shelf life and so does the army. Russia can't keep the army in the field much longer. Their losses have been staggering and they are doing things like shanghaiing men off the streets of towns in occupied Donbas to be thrown into the meat grinder and raising units of poorly equipped, untrained men from the poorest regions of Russia. They are also scouring their reserve pools of equipment for anything that runs.

One regiment commander committed suicide because of the replacement tanks he was given, only 10% ran. Almost all had missing optics and electronics that had been stolen and sold for whatever the soldiers could get for it. Some of the tanks didn't even have engines. All the vehicles had been sitting out in the Russian winters for 30 years and were in bad shape.

There are stories of soldiers sent out at night to take the uniforms off dead soldiers to give to new recruits. Replacements have been seen with WW II style helmets and rifles retired from frontline service decades ago. A few have been seen with WW II rifles. A video of a new unit recruited from a rural province showed them wearing cheap plastic rain boots you would see for kids at Walmart.

I have read several stories that Putin has put tremendous pressure on the army to capture the entire Donbas by May 9th (VE Day which is a huge military holiday in Russia) so they can declare a "great" victory and end the war. They are trying to do it with a very depleted army. If they hadn't tried to capture Kyiv and threw those troops at the Donbas, they might have succeeded, but the units that were engaged in the north have suffered huge losses and now are going to be thrown back into the fray with less to work with than they had in February.

Russia has a tradition of getting antsy about changing leadership after a loss. The US can shake off the losses in Afghanistan and Iraq and move on. Most Americans don't even think about it. But for Russia their military success is a source of great pride and failures are a source of great shame. Most Russians who were old enough to remember the break up of the USSR see it as a huge national shame that needs to be erased by putting the empire back together.
Trying to do it and failing is another shame.

Russia has a very different history than the rest of Europe. There is a lot of Mongol Horde mentality in the culture. They also have a lot of paranoia because many peoples have invaded the country over the years. Because the most populated parts of the country are also very flat, it's fairly easy to invade. Russia built its empire over centuries slowly conquering all of northern Asia. They furthered that empire after WW II by making vassal states out of Eastern Europe.

Russia's growth hinged on conquering the people's who were already occupying the territory they invaded. They developed brutal ways to put down uprisings and would be uprisings.

The American empire is very different. North America is a vast, natural fortress and the United States has been blessed with only two land neighbors, neither of which ever posed a serious invasion threat after the War of 1812 and have been generally fairly peaceful. The US also had a continent that was mostly unpopulated. It was believed for some time that the population of the Americas when Europeans arrived was around 120 million, but a recent scholarly analysis has revised that down to around 40 million.

Quite a few died of diseases the Europeans brought with them in the first centuries, so by the time Americans started spreading westward, there were not that many people to oppose them. In hindsight it would have been much more humanitarian to come to some kind of agreement to share the continent. Unlike the Russians empire, sharing with the Native Americans could have been achieved without the fighting if the Europeans had been less racist about it.

But to conquer the continent the American government needed to give their settlers a fairly free hand to go where they wished and settle where they wanted because the main thing they were conquering was the land, and the people were just an inconvenience that was swept out of the way. (Not saying it was right, that was the attitude.)

Psychologically because the Russians have had such competition with other people for the land over the centuries, they freak out when they lose a war because on some level it feels like an existential threat to their existence. Logically Russia itself is not going to lose anything significant to Russia's existence if they lose this war, but the national PTSD over losing militarily will likely kick in.

Kamil Galeev is in the process of writing three essays on what will likely happen to Russia coming out of this war.
1) Putin survives and Russia turns into a hermit state like North Korea.
2) Putin is toppled and replaced with another autocrat who tries to reboot imperial Russia.
3) Russia's ethnic divides come out as the country goes into turmoil after the war and Russia breaks up into multiple countries.

He has written the first two, the third is coming.

I think the top leadership under Putin will give him a "Russian retirement" when it becomes obvious they have lost the war, put another autocrat in who is Putin-light, and blame the entire war on Putin. But with the economic chaos caused by the sanctions and mixed loyalties between Putin's old guard and the people who are backing the new guy, the ethnic divides will start to surface and various regions will start to break away from the union.

I see Kadyrov (Chechen leader) is preparing for this eventuality. His troops around Mariupol are making a lot of videos of their heroism which are clearly staged and they are doing none of the fighting. He's doing what Chaing Kai Shek did in WW II, trying to avoid combat with the current enemy to save his forces for the civil war that's coming. If Chechnya has a functional army and the rest of Russia's army is a broken force, Chechnya can declare its independence and there isn't much Russia can do about it.

Chechnya leaving could trigger a cascade of other regions wanting to leave. The provinces in far eastern Russia have little cultural connection to Moscow. In a weakened Moscow scenario they might see it as an opportunity to leave and the Chinese would support that. They could end up economic vassals of China, but they would be gone from Russia.

Other regions in Russia's south are Muslim cultures that don't feel much of a connection to Moscow either, I could see them leave too.

The Moscow-St Petersburg region would probably stick together. Culturally they have a fair bit in common. But I could see a lot of the far east and southern parts of the country leaving.

It is possible Putin will manage to hang on and it's also possible that a new autocrat could hold Russia together. A new imperial Russia is probably the most dangerous for the rest of the world. The Putin remaining scenario is probably grimmest for the people stuck in Russia.
 
If you were to do the max possible as preparation (even if Ukraine doesn't eventually get the kit, it's leverage/message to Putin), you'd do a few things

  1. Prep spare western kit using all available military and contract resources in Nato & allies. More the merrier, well maintained reserve kit of every kind. If Ukraine found uses for Maxim guns, they can use M113s upgraded with armour, optics, missiles, engines
  2. Train spare specialists (even if it's procedures, intel use, co-operation, comms), whether pilots, aircraft/vehicle maintenance, missile operators, artillery.
  3. Get & train willing Ukrainians outside the country, perhaps ex airforce who now maintain airliners, those who have worked for military maintenance contractors, heavy equipment or anyone who isn't a liability, has transferrable skills.
  4. Let it be known that treasure less important than blood. Putin can't compete. Morale of Russian top-brass affected when contrasted with scraping together usable Russian kit (akin to sending birthdays cakes across the Atlantic through logistics channels to US troops during WW2 as indication of abilities). Show off/peacock logistics/money.
  5. Have the ability to flood Ukraine, Georgia, Baltics, Japan, Korea etc with kit at will.
  6. Mass kit near allies in safe/Nato countries. Don't hide it, park it on roadsides, display openly on trains going from Belgium ports to Poland/Romania. Publicise.
  7. Let ethnic Russians/Belarusians outside Russia/Belarus know about the disparity - word will get back
  8. SpaceX sensibly moved away from single-use rockets. War is different, in high intensity conflicts, kit gets destroyed, even through wear and tear, difficulty of supplying parts, overworked maintenance crews. Consider vast amounts of effectively single use kit, as long as crew survive. Mount shot from under you, lame? Get a new one. It then becomes a job of getting fully-prepped and tested kit to the the teeth as a constant flow in one direction, even leave the trucks at the front/assembly areas and drivers go back quickly by car/rail/helicopter. One way system doubles road capacity going to the front.
  9. Pre-fabricate anything useful, parts of entrenchments (concrete elements, Czech hedgehogs, whole armoured rooms that can be buried, avoiding trenchfoot)
  10. Set up thousands of small dumps off-grid, Ukrainians will find ways to get the kit to the front. Vietnam and Korean wars both saw logistics via bicycle and small backpacks over mountains.
  11. Whether each element is released to Ukraine is a separate question.
  12. Medical, missiles, small arms, etc ok. Other systems are leverage with Putin

Furthermore, if I use F16 and M113 as examples.

Both are widely used, presumably lots of kit in various states of repair/disrepair, lots of current and former training and maintenance people who may be reservists, military contractors or just willing to temporarily go back to maintenance work in their own country for a good cause. Nato countries can pass special reservist-type legislation to pay/reserve jobs. Countries like Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt and others can do this to earn income. Look at the number of operators and consider how many countries would be willing to repair M113s for financial reasons alone - operators - M113 armored personnel carrier - Wikipedia

Go through inventories, triage the kit, concentrate on the best ones and prep. It should be done on a grand/existential threat scale. This will be done in home bases, free from interruption.

Get long-range optics/precision targeting to mass production levels.

My guess is that F16 might not go to Ukraine but a flood of M113 can go to Georgia, Ukraine and Romania. T72 vs M113 might seem unfair, but M113 could be there in vast numbers, supported by drones, western intel, comms, long range top-attack missiles, smart artillery munitions, dismounted infantry with missiles atop any small rise in the ground. Probably best for minimum of incendiary material inside the vehicles, external fuel tanks, external munitions (ACAV/ but mostly missiles) and a minimum of crew. Use identical-looking support M113 for reloads or just use ferry drivers to deliver new armed kit in a constant wave. Fuel use is minimal compared to tanks. I'd hope they have better ground-pressure, off-road and cross-water abilities than Russian kit.

It looks to me as if the Russians in the north haven't used the "indirect approach". tactics are probably improving but Ukrainians using their initiative with better training and communications, supported by the free world should be able to run rings around many Russian units (badly led, motivation, supplies).

This has the potential to undo much of the division the world has seen over the last few years (much probably encouraged by Putin bots and money) by uniting with Ukraine.
 
Last edited:
Ukrainian troops in the besieged city of Mariupol have warned that they may be facing their "last battle" against Russia.
"Today will probably be the last battle, as the ammunition is running out," an account belonging to the 36th marine brigade said on Facebook.
"It's death for some of us and captivity for the rest," it said.
 
Слава Україні! Героям Слава!
Слава нації! Смерть ворогам!
Україна понад усе!
Слава Україні will come when the truth comes out. Learn the common language of the world. You have a story to tell. Tell it. Be passionate. You are being attacked by a kleptocracy, because the criminals feared Ukraine would expose their corruption. Russia is making billions from oil and gas and squandering it on a few. Most of the Russian people live near poverty, while a few exploit them.

For my American friends: How can we claim to be defenders of freedom when we don't defend freedom? And instead hide behind the fear of a nuclear strike from criminals and murderers? We have the power to do the right thing. Let's do it! Ukraine will hold our hand as we walk thru this fear.
 
Last edited:
Problem solved. Russia knows this. They aren't suicidal.
Hmmm . . . sending at least 15,000 soldiers to their death in less than a month is not suicidal? Well, perhaps the individuals are not suicidal, but the ones in power seem to have no qualms having their subordinates eliminated by the thousands (millions?). And they think they are safe in their underground bunkers in the Urals. --> Dr. Strangelove
 
  • Like
Reactions: madodel
Furthermore, if I use F16 and M113 as examples.

Both are widely used, presumably lots of kit in various states of repair/disrepair, lots of current and former training and maintenance people who may be reservists, military contractors or just willing to temporarily go back to maintenance work in their own country for a good cause. Nato countries can pass special reservist-type legislation to pay/reserve jobs. Countries like Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt and others can do this to earn income. Look at the number of operators and consider how many countries would be willing to repair M113s for financial reasons alone - operators - M113 armored personnel carrier - Wikipedia

Go through inventories, triage the kit, concentrate on the best ones and prep. It should be done on a grand/existential threat scale. This will be done in home bases, free from interruption.

Get long-range optics/precision targeting to mass production levels.

My guess is that F16 might not go to Ukraine but a flood of M113 can go to Georgia, Ukraine and Romania. T72 vs M113 might seem unfair, but M113 could be there in vast numbers, supported by drones, western intel, comms, long range top-attack missiles, smart artillery munitions, dismounted infantry with missiles atop any small rise in the ground. Probably best for minimum of incendiary material inside the vehicles, external fuel tanks, external munitions (ACAV/ but mostly missiles) and a minimum of crew. Use identical-looking support M113 for reloads or just use ferry drivers to deliver new armed kit in a constant wave. Fuel use is minimal compared to tanks. I'd hope they have better ground-pressure, off-road and cross-water abilities than Russian kit.

It looks to me as if the Russians in the north haven't used the "indirect approach". tactics are probably improving but Ukrainians using their initiative with better training and communications, supported by the free world should be able to run rings around many Russian units (badly led, motivation, supplies).

This has the potential to undo much of the division the world has seen over the last few years (much probably encouraged by Putin bots and money) by uniting with Ukraine.
Warming to my own theme, if the WW2 (or Serbian, more recently) amateur boffins were in charge, they'd be making loads of inflatable/wooden/dummy tanks, SAM traps for Russian aircraft dropping unguided bombs and spacing out to a huge degree forcing lower altitude air attacks. Having an overabundance of M113s, many uncrewed or just with a driver with no ammo is a feature, not a bug.

Single driver vehicles can be carrying food/water internally with trailers for incendiary material (fuel/ammo). Trailers probably also help with lower ground pressure over dodgy terrain. More targets than Russian airforce can hit safely, more unknown-if-crewed threats for Russian ground forces, more than Russian ammo could destroy. Many M113s with SAM crews to shoot down low altitude aircraft, especially helicopters.

I'm really minded to think of these not as "tanks" (misused term) / fighting vehicles but as updated Bren/Universal carriers, a nearly forgotten key to allied success in WW2. 113,000 (I'm surprised not more) of these were built and they were used post-WW2 as well. With a tow hook, tracked trailer M113s could be carrying infantry weapons of all kinds SAMs (low altitude), anti-tank missiles, mortars, ammo, fuel and everything. Also could tow artillery/rockets.

Universal Carrier - Wikipedia

Older relatives raved about Bren-gun carriers - it took the effort off the infantry and for operations in open terrain, I can imagine that lightly loaded M113s with trailers, corduroy roads could escape much of the worse of the mud come autumn and fulfil a similar role.

Any T72 targeting one of a group of M113s supported by drones, artillery will become a target very quickly. It's rather like in WW2 that Germans learned to avoid firing at allied spotter aircraft as risk/reward not worth it (until someone added bazookas to a spotter).

Use of Universal/Bren Carriers increased over time (from 10 to 33), a sure sign that Bren carriers worked and was wanted, it was just supply-constrained. The constraints on doing something similar NOW are largely money, will with some real, hard constraints of parts, training and essential kit such as optics.

"Universal Carriers were issued to the support companies in infantry rifle battalions for carrying support weapons (initially 10, 21 by 1941, and up to 33 per battalion by 1943). A British armoured division of 1940–41 had 109 carriers; each motor battalion had 44"

"In Motorised Infantry Battalions in BAOR (British Army of the Rhine) in the early 1950s the Universal was issued one per platoon carrying the Platoon Commander, driver, signaller and the 2-inch Mortar group Nos 1 & 2."


The Ukrainians are amateurs (in the best sense, lovers - from French? They have purpose, fire, a mission and can innovate, supported by tech-savvy people and the west), not top-down constrained. I firmly believe if you give them kit of any kind, they'll be inventive.

The other thing that elderly relatives talked about was their use of indirect / plunging machine gun fire (taught even in the 1950s, presumably used in Korea). How much better with computerisation, digital comms, remote weapon stations and heavy machine guns. A bunch of networked, computerised half inch machine guns using plunging fire must be devastating to unprotected troops such as artillery or even entrenched if no top-cover. Mounted on M113s, spread out, converging fire on point or area targets.

According to reddit (must be true then..)

"The maximum effective range for an area target (read: direct fire) for the M2 is 1,830m, but the maximum range for the weapon is 6,764m. Effective plunging fire therefore falls somewhere in between this range, generally around 3000 - 4000m."

I doubt Elon wants to become Tony Stark in his arms dealer days, but this is a bit of robotics, programming and building on existing kit. Add grad rockets, mortars etc. The driving of M113s must be done by people, and targeting can be done by people in M113, on foot, ebikes, drones, satellite/intel while the firing solutions can be computerised.
 
Ok... My bad. The text I quoted is from a template that citizens in democracies can send to their democratically elected leaders. She didn't ask for US military involvement. She's asking for weapons so the Ukrainians can create their own "no fly zone" to combat Putler.

Why does US Military personnel have to setup the Patriots? Why can't we teach the Ukrainians how to do it? Then they'll be able to do it themselves.

This war has now lasted some eight years. It's probably going to continue for years to come. It's long overdue to start factoring that in...

EDIT: Ok.. So the Ukrainians can get overrun, and the Patriots can end up in Russian hands. But then we need to find some other Surface to Air system that is available in the kind of numbers that are necessary to last for a war that drags on for years.
All good questions. We’ve heard the slogan “amateurs talk tactics, professionals study logistics.” To put it bluntly, the answer to all your questions comes down to money, and national security. Here’s how the $13 billion funding Congress approved for Ukrainian aid breaks down:
8F5C36C1-137F-4083-B472-F5BAC3E073EE.jpeg

From the chart above, the bulk of aid given to Ukraine from the $13.6 billion is allocated in “Traditional foreign aid,” which consists of $6.9 billion, while the 2nd largest chunk $3 billion is allocated to US deployments and intelligence, which pays our troops. This leaves only $3.5 billion for actual military supplies. So let’s get back to talking about logistics and breakdown where the bulk of that $6.9 billion of “Traditional foreign aid” goes:
33ED4CA8-3254-477E-B848-70832499935E.jpeg

From the chart above, most of this aid goes to “food assistance, health/medical care, migrating refugees, diplomats, etc.”

To better understand how complex systems like the Patriot missile is you can start by watching this video, which is the best I was able to find on YouTube:


Once you get a better understanding of how complex the Patriot missile system is, it goes way beyond just the training aspect that’s preventing the US from handing over this weapon. It generally takes a battery of 90 soldiers to setup the system, and 600 to mobilize it. The cost of this system ranges between $1 billion to $4 billion, which is already higher than the $3.6 billion that’s given to Ukraine for military supplies. This system is so expensive that governments like South Korea has opted to purchase it second hand. You’re probably asking yourself so why not just increase the budget and give the Patriot to Ukraine? Well, it’s question of National security, the US produces these systems and sells them abroad, it’s part of our economic GDP, and if we just give them away there won’t be a need for anyone to buy them.

Other factors: these systems often don’t work isolated and alone, they coordinate with the air force and navy in order to triangulate. Since Ukraine has a very weak Navy, the question of “accuracy and dependability” comes into play. If the Patriot system fails or misfires in Ukraine due to poor triangulation, it’s reputation can be tarnished on the world stage, this could lead other nations to scale down purchases of our defense systems, again a question of national security and interest.

With only $3.6 billion in military aid, Ukraine will need to spend its money wisely so that it can logistically send ammunition where the fighting is. If Ukraine spends 1/3 of its budget on a used Patriot that sits in one place, it’ll do more harm to the war effort than good. This is not to say that Ukraine doesn’t have any surface to air missiles, they do. The problem with this war is that Russia has more bombs than Ukraine can put defense missiles on the ground.

Keep in mind that the $1-4 billion price tag is just for staters, Poland has spent up to $10 billion for this system:


During the Vietnam war, as it became less popular amongst US voters, the south Vietnamese army’s budget went from $1.3 billion down to $600 million of US aid. The military assessment was that the South Vietnamese would run out of ammunition if given that budget, that assessment was correct. We don’t want Ukraine to run out of ammunition, they’ll need to spend that budget wisely. This is why sending an $80 million F-15
to Ukraine isn’t a wise move.

If the Russians get their hands on our system, they’ll be able to reverse engineer and possibly develop a hack to evade or outsmart our weapons.

When it comes to money, the Russians have the advantage, but they can’t get/buy the parts to supplement its army, this is where US sanctions come in to level the playing field. Some argue that sanctions won’t deter Putin, they’re missing the point. War comes down to logistics, and if sanctions prevent China from joining, it’s only a matter of time before Putin sees the writing on the wall. The wild card that may tilt the favor to one side or the other is how LONG will the US and the world stand behind Ukraine? For Vietnam it was about 8-10 years. Ukraine will need to win the PR war with the west to keep this in the headlines, otherwise, once our people/citizens starts to get distracted with other things, then military and humanitarian aid might not come. This is why it’s important to keep guys like Trump out of the picture, because if he returns to office, all bets are off the table. According to Trump, Putin is still a genius, still his BFF

I hope this helps.
 
Last edited: