"How Long Can The Western Consensus On The Ukraine War Hold?" Topic

"With Russian forces making slow, grinding progress in the eastern Donbas region and military experts speaking of a long war of attrition, have cracks started to appear in the West's support for Ukraine?

As he directs the fighting from the gleaming white halls of the Kremlin, what does Vladimir Putin make of the swirling Western debates over how best to support Ukraine, and the extent to which Russia should be punished?

In one corner, he sees governments in Britain, Poland and the Baltics calling for his unambiguous defeat…"

Main page

link

Armand

Perhaps this is the wrong question? I would ask, how much longer can the Russians keep up with feeding a poorly trained and poorly led army into the meat grinder of a poorly thought out and misguided "special operation."

The attrition question is a good one. Russia has a long history of sticking to its guns, but this time, morale may not be universally strong enough to keep them going.

Biden continues to reinforce that US and Allies support a war to defend Ukraine, not attack Russia. The US has taken extra care in its PR to make sure that It is always Putin who is the bad guy. In the PR war, Biden says nothing that could be used to hang the label of warmonger against the Russian people on the US. Thus the long range missile statement. This helps keep the Germans less concerned about ending up on the border of WW3, among other things. Russia is transitioning to second class status as a world power.

Keeping NATO united, not easy, it is the key component to keeping Russia in line down the road, whatever happens in Ukraine.

I agree Tort. Russia now holds 20% of Ukraine. I believe they are now thinking long game. In a year from now or two years from now how well will Ukraine be able to resist? Will they still be around to resist? Will the US and NATO still be as strong in their support?

Northern and central Europe will support Ukraine, even if Germany, France, Italy and Spain will hesitate. It is just in their best interest.

Fitzovich… history show us that the answer is: As long as he decided… Russian have no problem to send their men to the meat grinder…

Armand

The only countries we've really lost so far are Mexico & Hungary. As long as most of Northern Europe and the US are happy to kill Russians by proxy then Ukraine need not worry.

I think NATO knows that no matter how long this war goes on. That it is to their advantage to attrite Putin's forces to make it less possible for them to attack its neighbors.

Rheinmetall unveils new tank design: KF51 Panther

link

Panther KF51: Rheinmetall's New Main Battle Tank Features a 130 mm Gun

link

Armand

"Get some !!!!" With a 130mm !!!!

Legion, have we ever purchased foreign equipment, that you know of?

I don't know where this notion of the US not purchasing foreign equipment comes from. Just look at the huge list of stuff – everything from Barettas to Minimis to Carl Gustavs to NSMs to FREMMs. If anything, the question is, given that the US military industrial complex is so big, why do they purchase so much foreign equipment at all?

I notice the media frenzy has passed as the Russo-Ukraine War drags on. The thrill of the NEW CAUSE! is gone, so now the challenge for the "West" is long-term deliberate support that no longer gains Likes and Retweets from the media and bored Westerners…

SB, yes the frenzy has probably past, as it has in many wars after the initial excitement. But iMO the news media continues to provide some regular reporting and keeps up with developments, except for one cable news station whose programming seems like it is now mainly election predictions and gas prices, only some news in the afternoon for 3 hours or so. We remain angrily focused on ourselves. But we did just commit another billion to Ukraine.

The war remains front page news on the NYT, even with the 1/6 hearings and inflation competing for attention.

Gregmita2 I asked because I honestly did not know if we bought foreign stuff. But you raise a good point about the defense industry

So, this AM the NYT leads with 5 stories about Ukraine, the NY Post leads are about an alleged cop killer, followed by a Kloe Kardasian story and three other stories not about the war.
The ability of people to stay informed on the war depends on their media choices, I would say.

have we ever purchased foreign equipment, that you know of?

Not that I know of in large numbers. And if so it was for design characteristics, etc. in small numbers.

E.g. the UK designed MBT 105mm became a NATO standard during the Cold War for many NATO nations. But, and please someone correct me, I think the US bought the "copyright" for that weapon to be made in the US. I think we did similar with the AT4, IIRC from Sweden.

Beretta M92 9mm from Italy. I don't think we bought them directly. But just the "copywrite" ?

Plus maybe the M249 SAW & M240 MG copyrights from FN, in Belgium ?

AFAIK all 3 of those were made in the USA … I used/had the M92 & SAW in my Mech Co., …

US Spec Op have a few odd ball weapons that AFAIK were not made in the US.

The US does have a number of Russian vehicles & even aircraft. IIRC, the IDF captured those from Arab forces during one of their many wars. And gave them to the US. The US uses them for OPFOR training purposes. I've seen or crawled around BTRs, MTLBs, T55s, T62s, etc., and even a Hind-D. I'm sure there are more.

I don't know where this notion of the US not purchasing foreign equipment comes from. Just look at the huge list of stuff – everything from Barettas to Minimis to Carl Gustavs to NSMs to FREMMs. If anything, the question is, given that the US military industrial complex is so big, why do they purchase so much foreign equipment at all?

See my post above. I have never seen any weapon system, '79-'90, that said "Made in_____" anywhere but the USA. But I may be wrong.

Why would the US buy foreign weapons in large numbers makes no sense to me ? Save for some behind the curtain geopolitical skullduggery that is not generally known to the public ?

Oh wait … I heard when the US Army went to the black beret for all. They bought a massive amount from China …

Well the EU big three leaders have been in Ukraine today. EU candidate membership is being discussed.

Clearly regardless of what the political faces say, there is plenty on activity behind the 'curtain'
link

The UK is still finding Russians to sanction, including the Russian human rights commissioner over forced adoptions and the Patriarch – it will be interesting to see if there is any comment on that one in particular from other Christian leaders!

So it sounds like we stay on top of other countries designs and weapons and appropriate or license design features we like. This makes sense to me.

I think that is correct … As I said never saw a weapon in the US Army that didn't say, Made in USA … or something similar.

Legion 4- I think that there are a few more to add to the list above. You are quite right that most US military equipment is made in the US- but a significant proportion of it has a quite a lot of 'foreign DNA':

The 1960s-1980s 105mm L7 standard US tank gun was indeed British designed, and the 120mm which replaced it and is still in use today is a German design by Rheinmetall. Both were/are built in the US. The 90mm that went before was all-American, but that was a long time ago.

The US M777 155mm howitzer and the M119 105mm howitzer are also both British designed weapons, by BAE Systems- which is new 'globalised' name for British Aerospace. The M119 is all US made now I think, but the M777 is partly made in the UK and components shipped to the US for final assembly. BAE now also owns production of the M109 Paladin and M2/M3 Bradley. Although those are of course originally American designs, I think a lot of the design work for capability improvements etc is actually now done in the UK.

The M252 US standard 81mm mortar was designed as the Anglo-Canadian L16.

The Striker is originally an Austrian design IIRC, and I think the 120mm mortar is French.

None of that is intended to be critical- just an illustration of how globalised military equipment is now. We Brits use masses of US and other foreign equipment of course. We are also quite pleased with ourselves about the NLAW these days- but it's basically Swedish designed….

Globalisation of equipment is probably inevitable. But I guess it could be a worry if much of the design expertise for one's tank armament and FA has actually resided in other countries (albeit very friendly ones) for several decades.

I think any country that can do so will try to *manufacture* weapons within their own (or highly friendly) territory, for obvious reasons. It's buying foreign *designs* that shows flexibility and avoidance of "not invented here" syndrome. Of course, if you have to buy a lot of foreign designs when you already spend tons of money on your own defense companies, it's nice to ask where all that money is going…

Russian Military Continues To Build-Up Its Forces In The Arctic

link

Armand

I recently saw a similar map in a more reliable source. Actually Russian forces in this area are fewer than before the latest invasion of Ukraine, as some forces have gone there.

Druzhina
Illustrations of Costume & Soldiers

Good intel Stillsenneffe … I knew some US weapons' linage came from outside sources. As pointed out many from other NATO nations, etc. But yes, like many other items, weapons systems have become Globalized. E.g. I had heard the IDF's Namer IFV is or was being made in the USA.

I think any country that can do so will try to *manufacture* weapons within their own (or highly friendly) territory, for obvious reasons.

Besides from a military stand point. But the Defense Industry/Military-Industrial Complex making weapons, ammo etc. is good for business/the flow of goods & services, etc. I hope my broker has got me some Raytheon stocks for my mutual funds.

Great map Tango, but I think the US has nothing to fear from a Russian attack on Alaska !

Wow! Even at 60, you can learn things! I had never thought much about Greenland… assuming it was US or Canadian controlled… never thinking Greenland still had ties with little Denmark! Thanks for the Map!

U.S. Allies In The Middle East Want The Biden Administration To Come Up With A Strategy To Contain Iran

link

Armand

The Ukrainian War and a New World Order

link

Armand

"The Ukrainian War and a New World Order" pushes the theories of John Mearsheimer.

"The scandal entails Mearsheimer's refusal to see Putin's aggression as anything other than the behaviour of a great power at bay." newstatesman March 22

John Mearsheimer is wrong about the crisis in Ukraine
By Benjamin Baharlias, dailycardinal, April 7, 2022.

Druzhina
Illustrations of Costume & Soldiers

U.S. Allies In The Middle East Want The Biden Administration To Come Up With A Strategy To Contain Iran

That may be "A Bridge Too Far", IMO. Will woke, CRT, 1619, gender topics, etc., be in that strategy ?

Does the USA need all the troops they can get and start to have females sign up for the draft ? And called to action if need be… ? This idea was vetoed. But now back on the table in the annual defense bill … Is the US prepping to increase its military numbers in case of WWIII in Europe & the PTO ? Probably not … ?

From Military.com :

link

I think the priority should be supporting the current capabilities based on best equipment and quality, relevant training. More troops can be a burden, especially if we have to fool around too much with social training issues, more logistics, costs, etc.

But if some people at DOD are thinking there new needs, the contingency plans make more sense. Biden was shifting to a Pacific strategy before Ukraine. NATO is now a bigger priority and that means troops in Europe.

As for Iran, the Saudis want a friendlier US admin back on their side. But they could restore oil production, which was cut under pressure from the previous administration in order to jack up prices, if they can get Biden to back off on the negative human rights stuff, Kashogi, Yemen, and assure military hardware will flow.
The Iran deal restart is dead, looks like Israel is handling Iran for now.

The US Military should do everything to prep for war in Europe & the PTO.

And support of Ukraine is paramount for getting the "New Russia" attempt at an empire, a very costly failure. To attrite the Russians as much as possible. Make them weak and less of a conventional threat.

The KSA has seen what the deal is with the current US leadership. The US leadership changes every 4-8 years. They know that too. The KSA was to balance out the threat, perceived or otherwise, of Iran who overran our embassy in the past. And support terrorist, etc., that end up killing Americans or our allies. Of course, the KSA is generally no better, remember 9/11. If someone has a solution let the rest of us know.

I hope the Iran Deal in now DOA. I still can't imagine the reason that any in the US leadership would think it would be idea to start this up again. But yes, fortunately the Israelis will keep them in check most likely. It is life or death for them.

Agree Legion. I don't know if all this means we need a bigger army, though. Are you thinking this is the case?

No immediate solution with the Saudis. I hate that we deal with them, do not look forward to the return of business as usual with them.

Are you thinking this is the case?

Not necessarily but we need to have very well armed, trained, and capable forces. And no we don't need to downsize anything. Not even one Inf, Tank, etc. Co. Nor one ship, or one plane. Unless we have a better weapons systems to replace those. Again too much time is wasted on non-combat "training", topics, subjects and dogma.
And once again the USA has a shortage of recruits. It has been this way for decades. 70% of the military age males[and even females] could Not pass any of the tests, physicals, etc.

At this point the KSA may be a necessary evil. However, the best way to have less to do with this type of anachronistic regime/culture is become energy independent. Israel is our best ally in that area of the world. But we have to play geopolitics/Realpolitik in that region, regardless.

Norway Blocks Supplies To Russian Settlements In The Svalbard Islands

link

Armand

Wow … that is something … a bit risky I'd think.

It is a Russian owned mine rather than a Russian settlement.

In a linked article Oslo cites EU sanctions in holding up supplies to a Svalbard mining town. "The foreign ministry in Oslo acknowledged on Tuesday that the Russian application for a humanitarian exemption had been rejected."

The Russians can separate the food and medical equipment from the contraband at the border and send that. If they can't buy "spare parts" from outside Russia, they are out of luck. If you give into a bully ("appropriate retaliatory measures") once, how do you stop giving in?

Druzhina
Illustrations of Costume & Soldiers

Thanks!

Armand

The EU's New Plan to Counter Russian Mercenaries is Dead on Arrival

link

Armand

Ukraine Requests Turkey To Detain A Russian-Flagged Ship It Says Is Carrying Stolen Ukrainian Grain

link

Armand

The EU's New Plan to Counter Russian Mercenaries is Dead on Arrival

No surprise there … Mercs are everywhere, the UN can't effectively do anything either.

NATO is unified now. Will 'war fatigue' set in later?

link

Armand

If NATO waivers … Putin wins …

In North Africa, a fighter jet arms race, with Russia and the US on either side

link

Armand

I read a lot of conservative blogs, and they were 90% -- but not 100% -- supportive of Ukraine when Putin invaded. I am beginning to see diminished support, but only slightly:maybe 80% pro-Ukraine now. There HAS been a lot of criticism of Biden, especially in making Putin an evil monster (which I have no doubt he is) because it is not wise to push a possibly deranged man who controls a lot of nukes into a corner. That isn't the same as not supporting Ukraine, but it could become a basis for Republican reimaging the war at some point in the future.

NATO Has Become the Very Thing It Was Created to Fight | Opinion

link

Forward Defense: How NATO Could Stop A Russian Invasion

link

Armand

Europeans Unwilling To 'Pay The Price' To Defend 'Democracy' In Ukraine

link

Armand

link

We have to support Ukraine, and not start WWIII …

Thanks da, a reminder to always check sources.