NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
On December 19 2022 08:12 KwarK wrote: I’d definitely like to see the UK turn over some challenger 2s. The Russians have nothing to counter those and it’s not like we’re using all of ours.
This is a common misconception / propaganda. One of the biggest advantages of a modern tanks over a cold war era tanks is target acquisition and engagement (fire control system, thermal imaging). They do have also an advantage in terms of protection, but in the end, a modern tank is not inherently invulnerable versus a cold war era tank. It has advantages, but given that russia started a modernise a bunch of their cold war era tanks, and has more modern tanks as well, there is plenty in ukraine that can take out a modern tank. Then there is advancements in ammunition, plus a number of looted anti tank weapons that fell into the russian hands. Would you rather be the crew sitting in the modern tank? Sure, but you can still die just the same in an engagement because that modernised cold war era tank saw you first and scored a good hit.
Who knows, maybe that is the secret why no western power wants to send their tanks into ukraine, as it would be inevitable that some of them will get taken out by an inferior tank.
I recently watched some interview with tank expert on T-62 and he said, that its main armament is powerful enough to penetrate modern tank armor from side or the back, but not from the front. So yes, modern tanks are not invunerable. Despite many advantages they can still be destroyed by old tanks if they get close enough or antitank weapons.
The reason is, penetration of modern anti-tank weaponry, both kinetic and HEAT is so high (in terms of homogenous steel), that even with all improvements in armor you could only protect the front of the hull and turret, and even that isn't a given. Of course it was kinda the same back to the WW2, but at least heavy tanks back then were capable of withstanding some of the less powerful AT fire to the sides at least from some range. Taking Tiger I as example, it had 100mm hull frontal armor, and 60mm hull side armor, on turret it was 100-120 (200 at some places on gun mantlet) front and 80 sides. Now, if we take M1, its frontal arc armor varies around 500-800mm of kinetic protection, and 800-1300mm HEAT protection (depending on the area), but side armor, especially from center to rear, is only 50-250mm of KE protection, and 250-550 HEAT protection. Very much penetrable even for T-62 with old ammo (around 350mm kinetic penetration at 0 degrees from 2000 meters), or standard RPG-7 (500-700mm HEAT penetration, depending on the ammo type). That's why work on active protection systems is so important for modern armies, since it's the only thing that could add considerably to protection of the tank within reasonable weight. For now only Israel made and battle tested stuff that actually works ("Trophy"), and sold it to Germany and US by now (US was especially keen to buy it). Both Russia and China are working on it as well (T-14 Armata and Type 99 have something implemented already, but it wasn't tested in the field (I mean actual combat), so effectiveness leaves to be questioned).
UK set to announce over $300 million in Military aid to Ukraine.
British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is set to announce a new $304m package of military aid for Ukraine to bolster its counteroffensive against Russia.
The package includes “hundreds of thousands of rounds of artillery” and aims to ensure “a constant flow of critical artillery ammunition to Ukraine throughout 2023”, a statement from the prime minister’s office announced on Monday.
Sunak will make the announcement during a summit of the Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF) in Latvia later on Monday, his office said.
The JEF summit brings together leaders from Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and the United Kingdom, and was called to discuss the “ongoing efforts to counter Russian aggression in the Nordic and Baltic regions”, the statement said.
At the meeting, Sunak will call on Nordic, Baltic and Dutch counterparts to maintain or exceed 2022 levels of support for Ukraine in 2023.
“The UK is already Europe’s leading provider of defensive aid to Ukraine, including sending Multiple Launch Rocket Systems and recently, 125 anti-aircraft guns,” the statement added.
“We have also provided more than 100,000 rounds of ammunition since February, with the deliveries directly linked to successful operations to retake territory in Ukraine.”
Since Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24, the UK has committed some $7.43bn in aid, according to the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, a Germany-based group that tracks support for Kyiv.
The UK is the second-biggest donor nation to Ukraine after the United States, which has pledged some $51bn in humanitarian, financial and military aid, according to the Kiel Institute.
Sunak’s office said the British leader had updated Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on the latest aid last week.
he pair had met in person when Sunak visited Kyiv last month.
Zelenskyy is meanwhile expected to address the JEF summit in the Latvian capital, Riga, via video link, according to Sunak’s office.
The JEF meeting will also discuss further air defence support for Ukraine, which has been scrambling to fend off Russian missile attacks on its critical infrastructure, including its power grid, it said.
The discussions in Riga will also touch on support for Finland and Sweden ahead of their accession to NATO, it added.
To add to that, it appears that tomorrow Zelensky will be in DC to speak to the US Congress. Hoping it can lead to more good things, especially since they're getting the Patriot systems
Got receipts for utility services for November this evening, which reminded me of a discussion few months back in the thread regarding housing utility prices and how they were impacted by war/sanctions/energy crisis. So I decided to give mine more detailed look. For the reference - my apartment is 42,7 sq.m, I own it, and we live here as a family of two (and the cat), though I'm registered here alone, wife is registered in her parents' country house, we still don't bother to fix that. Though it saves a bit of money, since her parents pay basically only for electricity and firewood, and it doesn't depend on number of people registered in the house.
Will be exchanging into dollars by current course (70 rubles/dollar). 1) Apartment utility service (dunno how to translate correctly, basically a payment to either the building governing company or the legally organized community of the apartment owners that keep it clean, safe, working and otherwise comfortable) - 23,4 cents per sq.m, 10 USD overall. This is actually very cheap (the head of our community is big enthusiast working for free here, so that helps). Generally it's around 40 cents per sq.m across the city, though may be much more if building is in need of repairs and maintenance (or governing organizaton is simply frauding people). 2) Garbage removal (each building has it's own container which is cleaned by garbage trucks once or twice a week (supposed to be twice at least)) - 1,11 USD per registered person, so 1,11 USD overall. 3) Intercom maintenance - 0,89 USD 4) Water (supply and removal) - 8 cubic metres, 1,18 USD per cubic meter, 9,44 USD overall. It may be a bit more or less, but I forgot to give readings from my water counter last month, so they charged me for a standartized consumption value. 5) Gas (for cooking). I don't have a counter for it, so it's simply a standartized price (for basically unlimited reasonable use of gas) - 4,68 USD per registered person, so 4,68 USD overall. 6) Electricity - I have day/night tariff ("night" is from 11 p.m to 7 a.m), and readings for November are - 63 kW/h day, 33 kWt/h night (yeah, I'm quite an owl actually). Pricing is 9,1 cents per kW/h at day, and 3,4 cents per kW/h at night. So 5,75 USD per day, 1,15 USD for night, and 6,9 USD overall. 7) Heating (apartment and water) - both are centralized, heating of apartment is counted by a centralized apartment counter and divided by the apartment area in sq.m, water heating - by individual heat counter (around 5 cubic meters last month). Temperatures in November were around 0 C, but went down to around -15 C to -20 C in the last week. Apartment heating - 29,55 USD, water heating - 2,96 USD, so 32,51 USD overall, 8) Payments to capital repairs fund - it can be either paid to the whole city fund to conduct repairs for the apartment buildings, whose owners can't afford it, or to the special account of your apartment community if you want to save for your own repairs, but spending from it is very strict and watched by banks providing the account. It's 14,2 cents per sq.m, and 6,07 USD overall. 9) Internet - 70 Mbps for 10,7 USD overall. Not a good price for my city, other providers can get you 100 Mbps for 10 USD easily. But the one I have is at least reliable (almost never experience any drops or slowdowns) and doesn't add some shitty services without my notice in my price tag. 10) Phone - 2,33 USD, though don't exactly remember their conditions. Package is something like unlimited calls on operators' number, 300 min on other numbers within region, 5 GB of Internet. SMS, calls on other numbers not from the region, or on stationary numbers have some price tag, but don't remember it, since I don't frequently use phone (if it's work, I have corporate SIM-card).
So 84,63 USD overall. Our family income is something around 1000 USD/month these days, so you can relate the numbers.
If compared with what it was back in summer, or at start of the year - prices didn't grew much, but we'll have increase in prices this month, after which price increases should be freezed until 01.07.2024 (we'll see how it will work out). Current increase compared with 01.01.2022 is around 10-15% depending on utility service (gas is less increased, electricity - more, heat and water in the middle).
Interesting anecdotal data, thank you for sharing. Lower than the increases seen by many in the west but that’s to be expected given that they’re domestically supplied and subsidized in Russia. Buying hydrocarbons in Russia is like buying sand in Arabia.
In the US I’m paying about $70 for natural gas, $50 electricity, $35/phone line, $70 water/sewer/trash, $60 internet, $200 local taxes so considerably more. As a % of monthly income it works out lower than yours though. Energy prices in my part of the US have gone up less than in Europe so my data isn’t representative of everyone.
Since we are sharing (i live alone in my flat, so I consume less than average). This is in big city in middle of Poland: -Interent $13 -Gas $8 every two months -Electricity $15 -Flat (water, heating, building maintenence, trash) - $90
Frankly it is more impactfull on my bills how much I work from home vs how much I work in office than recent increases. My bills were higher during the pandemic. But some people (in my job) owning houses which they heat themselves (and not from city network) have had very substancial rises of costs. Like 2-3 times. This is due to lack of Ukrainian and Russian coal on market. Funnily enough Poland has enormous coal deposits but for a long time it was cheaper to import it. The most visible rise in prices is for consumer goods: food etc.
If another attempt at taking Kyiv from Belarus becomes a reality, I think the West should give Ukraine the means and the green light to strike deep in Russia and Belarus. Hit them hard while they're amassing troops in perceived safety. What do you think?
On December 21 2022 18:29 Silvanel wrote: Since we are sharing (i live alone in my flat, so I consume less than average). This is in big city in middle of Poland: -Interent $13 -Gas $8 every two months -Electricity $15 -Flat (water, heating, building maintenence, trash) - $90
Frankly it is more impactfull on my bills how much I work from home vs how much I work in office than recent increases. My bills were higher during the pandemic. But some people (in my job) owning houses which they heat themselves (and not from city network) have had very substancial rises of costs. Like 2-3 times. This is due to lack of Ukrainian and Russian coal on market. Funnily enough Poland has enormous coal deposits but for a long time it was cheaper to import it. The most visible rise in prices is for consumer goods: food etc.
Major city in Spain: Community costs for the apartment (small building, no elevator): ~20 euros a month. My gas bill (only for tap/shower water) ~30 euros a month. My electric ~100 euros a month. Trash is a municipal tax of 115/year, so ~10 euros a month.
Gas and electricity are up significantly from a year ago (gas ~2x and electricity 1.5x). That said, we are fairly frugal with energy, and contract fixed rates, so we definitely know that other people around were hit a lot harder with the energy price spikes.
The main other things that I noticed the inflation on are petrol prices and some foodstuffs, but when I was in the Netherlands to visit my family, it seemed the energy price increase had hit a lot harder there than here.
Lol, once again shows how weird Germany is in this regard. I will know my utility costs for November in August at the earliest due to how stuff is run here.
Striking targets deep in Belarus would give Lukashenko an excuse to directly join the war. His government is weak, he knows Belarusians don't want to actively participate, but there should be enough morons in the country who could suddenly change their mind and support direct involvement in response to Ukraine "striking first".
I guess Ukraine could say it's going to bomb stuff in Belarus if Russia attacks from there again, if they didn't say that already. This would be a clear warning for Belarus, maybe enough to neutralize any attempts to present Ukraine as an agressor.
When i add up all of these it would come to around 500/600 per month for the netherlands. There is a lot of support though for lower income brackets so they will end up spending less in reality. And on the bright side:healthcare is 150/month.
A Russian all-in on Kiev and Nato supply lines in the west is the biggest risk for 2023. It has the potential to create a very dangerous and unpredictable situation. If it fails misserably it could bring nukes on the table again. And if it succeeds it wouldnt be great either obviously.
Nato at this point has no other option then to keep matching what Russia brings to the battlefield,they are in to deep. The alternative would be accepting a Russian victory which would have far reaching geo-political consequences.
Not sure how likely a Russian all-in is. Russia is playing with the idea but it would be a very dangerous move for them as well. Both sides are making preperations (i think the patriots can be seen as part of this preperation). But making preperations and following up on it,or even beeing able to follow up on it,is something different.
At this point i think the most likely outcome for 2023 is a continuation of what has been going on for the past months,potentially resulting in some sort of temporary compromise. Zelenskys visit to the US should tell us more. Will he get unlimited support or will there also be pressure to accept some sort of compromise. Putins speach today should also give some clues.
The conflict is nearing a major pivot point. Escalation,continuation or a slow de-escalation.
On December 21 2022 20:24 Sent. wrote: Striking targets deep in Belarus would give Lukashenko an excuse to directly join the war. His government is weak, he knows Belarusians don't want to actively participate, but there should be enough morons in the country who could suddenly change their mind and support direct involvement in response to Ukraine "striking first".
I guess Ukraine could say it's going to bomb stuff in Belarus if Russia attacks from there again, if they didn't say that already. This would be a clear warning for Belarus, maybe enough to neutralize any attempts to present Ukraine as an agressor.
According to the experts, Belarus's army is far less capable than Russia's and its numbers are low. Also, Belarus has already contributed its most valuable assets - their land access to Kyiv and military bases for missile strikes. Getting actively involved wouldn't change the situation much, especially if Ukraine can inflict massive casualties on unexpecting Russian troops.
Additionally, Belarus's involvement could precipitate the fall of Lukashenko.
@pmh
What exactly is a compromise between peace and genocide?
Just to be clear,in my posts i am not arguing for anything to happen. Just laying out how i think the situation could potentially develop.
A temporary compromise would be some sort of ceasefire. Which could become an attractive solution for both sides if the conflict is getting closer and closer to a stalemate and both sides are fully exhausted. Not saying this will happen,i honestly have no clue at this point. But it is a theoretical possibility that could result from a continuation of the current course of action.
On December 21 2022 20:51 pmh wrote: Just to be clear,in my posts i am not arguing for anything to happen. Just laying out how i think the situation could potentially develop.
A temporary compromise would be some sort of ceasefire. Which could become an attractive solution for both sides if the conflict is getting closer and closer to a stalemate and both sides are fully exhausted. Not saying this will happen,i honestly have no clue at this point. But it is a theoretical possibility that could result from a continuation of the current course of action.
A ceasefire is not in Ukraine's interests at all. It would likely mean a reduction in supplies from the West while Russia would spend every second preparing for a new offensive.
On December 21 2022 20:24 Sent. wrote: Striking targets deep in Belarus would give Lukashenko an excuse to directly join the war. His government is weak, he knows Belarusians don't want to actively participate, but there should be enough morons in the country who could suddenly change their mind and support direct involvement in response to Ukraine "striking first".
I guess Ukraine could say it's going to bomb stuff in Belarus if Russia attacks from there again, if they didn't say that already. This would be a clear warning for Belarus, maybe enough to neutralize any attempts to present Ukraine as an agressor.
According to the experts, Belarus's army is far less capable than Russia's and its numbers are low. Also, Belarus has already contributed its most valuable assets - their land access to Kyiv and military bases for missile strikes. Getting actively involved wouldn't change the situation much, especially if Ukraine can inflict massive casualties on unexpecting Russian troops.
Additionally, Belarus's involvement could precipitate the fall of Lukashenko.
@pmh
What exactly is a compromise between peace and genocide?
Furthermore, i would be very, very surprised if Lukashenko looks at the war in Ukraine and thinks "yeah, i want in on that!". There is very clearly nothing to gain and lots to lose for him there.
A ceasefire the likes of N/S Korea is a likely outcome but not until Russia is out of Ukraine's borders.
So long as the West keeps supply Ukraine with weapons and ammo Ukraine will keep bombing Russian positions until they break. There will be pauses where the situation looks to stalemate while Ukraine restocks supplies and prepares for their next offensive but they have shown they will keep fighting for their country.
Putin had a large meeting with members of Ministry of Defence today. Some key points:
- War will continue in 2023, until all objectives are achieved. - Critique of problems in military is allowed and even encouraged and should be evaluated by MoD. - Putin demanded the increase of UAV production and usage (up to the squad level) and to decrease time between spotting the enemy and firing (chain of command delay in this regard was haunting Russian army since Chechnya, and on all levels, I guess that's why he adressed it in particular) - Russia will continue attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure. - Military comissariats would be modernized to increase mobilization effectivness. - 250 000 soldiers and officers recieved combat experience in Ukraine (I guess it means military personnel that was engaged in war, but not including Rosgvardia (it has its own ministry), LDPR forces and Wagner, not sure about volunteer battalions like BARS). - Military production is increased, stuff that was ordered to be delivered in 2024-2025 would be moved to 2023. Putin said that there would be no limitation on financing the army. - Shoigu said that two new military districts will be created - Moscow and Leningrad. Military presence on the north-west of Russia is planned to be increased. Army is planned to be increased up to 1,5 million men, 670 thousands of whom would be contract soldiers.(it's 1 million now, and was supposed to be 1,12 million from 01.01.2023). - 2 new airborne divisions will be formed. - Each tank army should have it's one fighter-bomber division and helicopter brigade. That's an interesting hint (if there is no mistake in the statement) - Russia currently has only one tank army, being 1st Guards Tank Army. All others are considered "combined arms". But Shoigu speaks like there are (or will be?) several.
How much of that is actually realistic, and how much of it is just demands and wishful thinking that will never be met by reality anyways?
Especially the speeding up of production of all of the stuff at once sounds suspicious to me. I thought there were already problems with producing stuff at the speed it is being used? It sounds unlikely that you can just turn some dial and have the stuff that should be delivered in 2025 in 2023 instead, even if you throw lots of money at the situation. Building up capacity takes time.
Also, it is nice and easy to say "I want reduced time between spotting and firing", but you actually have to have new procedures for that to work, and train your people in these new procedures. Which is usually pretty hard in the middle of a war.
"increased mobilization" and "No limitation on financing the army" sounds as if you are drifting towards total war? So i guess the plan really is to throw more people into the meatgrinder in the hopes of eventually jamming it, with no exit plan out of this insanity?
EPT
