OT: Putin's War in Ukraine

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by kcdusk

The body go pro footage was a good watch. Even without direct enemy contact, every minute was on edge.

Also, theres been a bit of talk about how far away you can see the enemy (contact ranges) on the FL site. And this video showed me, that even if you can see a T-62 tank at range 500m. Whose is it? Ours (Ukraine) or theirs (Russian). My main point being sometimes range is short, and even then identifying friend or foe can be hard.

This is exactly why I broke my Observation & Spotting Chart (before someone DMs me and asks, YES it is posted on this website) in a chance to spot people and a chance to spot vehicles by "range bands" [for the spotting chance]. Keep in mind that SPOTTING and IDENTIFYING are two separate tasks.

[Raellus]

So Ukraine's counteroffensive seems to be going quite well, especially in the northeast. Russia's suffered another major defeat. I'm not ready to count Russia out yet, but Ukraine's recent successes are worth celebrating.

What's next? I saw one breathless headline today suggesting that Putin's days in power are numbered. That's rather sanguine, and probably naively hopeful.

I'm quite surprised that I haven't seen any dire predictions of what an increasingly humiliated and desperate Putin might do in the coming days and weeks. In the first few weeks of the war, as the Russian drive on Kiev sputtered to a halt, a lot of news outlets presented the possibility that Putin might resort to tactical nukes to regain momentum and achieve his strategic goals. As more Western aid appeared in Ukraine, Putin rattled his nuclear sabre.

At present, it seems like no one's particularly worried about potential use of nuclear weapons anymore. It seems to me that if Putin were ever to authorize/order tactical nuclear strikes, it would be now, with Ukrainian forces at the border in the northeast. Is Putin going to gracefully accept defeat? He missed his opportunity to declare victory a couple of months ago. Any such declaration now would ring hollow, and a strategic withdrawal or peace overture would appear to signal defeat. That doesn't strike me as Putin's style at all.

What do you think the coming weeks will bring?

-

[Tegyrius]

Has Putin made many public appearances lately? The past months have seen repeated speculation that he's in poor health, with photos over the summer seeming to bear that out. His reported COVID-19 paranoia also has kept his face-to-face contact with advisors and staff rather circumscribed.

- C.

[Heffe]

I think any predictions being made right now in this regard would be little more than guesswork, all being predicated on the idea of whether or not Putin is behaving as a rational actor any longer.

In my opinion, it's only a matter of time until Kherson falls back into Ukrainian hands - the Russians there are surely running short on fuel and ammunition, with no way to resupply other than by hand across the Antonivka bridge. When they're dry on ammo, I don't see them as having much other choice than to retreat across the bridge or surrender, leaving their heavy equipment behind.

As for Putin, how will he take the situation in the northeast and in Kherson when the above scenario comes to pass? If he's behaving as a rational actor, he'll sue for peace. He'll recognize that the war has failed, his military will take a generation to rebuild, and that the entire endeavor was a waste of time and resources. He'll try to keep the Donbas region through negotiations, though I think that by now he's lost the chance to hold onto the Crimean Peninsula.

If Putin isn't a rational actor (anymore) or is getting super desperate because his own life is on the line? I think there's a lot of things he might try, including but not limited to targeting Ukrainian civilian infrastructure (power plants, water processing facilities, etc), calling up the Russian reserves, instituting a draft, etc. I don't think he'd actually resort to using nukes, but so much depends on how far gone he is.

As for him potentially targeting civilian infrastructure, Russia wants people to support Russia. If he starts going after power plants just as winter is starting, he'll lose the possibility of holding Donbas as the people there will see him for the monster he is. As for the draft or calling up reserves, it's clear that his equipment stocks are on the path to depletion, which means any reserves would likely just be light infantry. Does he risk sacrificing a ton of Russians into a meat grinder and risk losing what popular support he has in Russia? I don't think he'd want to go that route either, but again, who knows?

[Targan]

Originally Posted by Heffe

As for the draft or calling up reserves, it's clear that his equipment stocks are on the path to depletion, which means any reserves would likely just be light infantry. Does he risk sacrificing a ton of Russians into a meat grinder and risk losing what popular support he has in Russia? I don't think he'd want to go that route either, but again, who knows?

Russian leaders sending vast waves of young Russian soldiers to their doom is standard operating procedure though, isn't it? At least for the last couple of centuries.

[Heffe]

Originally Posted by Targan

Russian leaders sending vast waves of young Russian soldiers to their doom is standard operating procedure though, isn't it? At least for the last couple of centuries.

It certainly is, and maybe we’ll see it again? I genuinely don’t know the internal situation in Russia right now. I know a large portion of the population aren’t fans of Putin, and surely a lot of them are willing to protest. The old timers and more conservative elements of the population though? I don’t know if they’d support a draft or not. And how heavy a hand would Putin take with his own people if the protesting gets bad? Just a lot of unknowns there.

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by Raellus

I'm quite surprised that I haven't seen any dire predictions of what an increasingly humiliated and desperate Putin might do in the coming days and weeks. In the first few weeks of the war, as the Russian drive on Kiev sputtered to a halt, a lot of news outlets presented the possibility that Putin might resort to tactical nukes to regain momentum and achieve his strategic goals. As more Western aid appeared in Ukraine, Putin rattled his nuclear sabre.

At present, it seems like no one's particularly worried about potential use of nuclear weapons anymore.
-

The Times carried an article on the above subjects on Friday

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/w...ions-t7k2vsgc5

I'm not sure if you'll be able to view it as I think it's behind a paywall (I have a subscription and checking without logging in would suggest you can't but it may be different outside the UK). Options mentioned in the article were

1. Detonate a nuclear weapon over the Black Sea as a demonstration of intent and see what happens

2. Intensified conventional attacks on major population centres, e.g. Kyiv

3. Blow up the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant

4. Tactical nuclear attack on Ukrainian armed forces

[bash]

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six

The Times carried an article on the above subjects on Friday

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/w...ions-t7k2vsgc5

I'm not sure if you'll be able to view it as I think it's behind a paywall (I have a subscription and checking without logging in would suggest you can't but it may be different outside the UK). Options mentioned in the article were

1. Detonate a nuclear weapon over the Black Sea as a demonstration of intent and see what happens

2. Intensified conventional attacks on major population centres, e.g. Kyiv

3. Blow up the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant

4. Tactical nuclear attack on Ukrainian armed forces

The problem with rattling a nuclear saber is it's only scary once unless you actually use a nuke. After nothing happened after Putin's nuclear talk back in February I think it's apparent he has no intention of ever using nukes.

1. Putin has a decent enough lock on power within Russia. Even if Russia pulled out of Ukraine tomorrow the internal spin would just say "Mission Accomplishski" and the majority inside Russia would cheer.
2. People outside of Russia don't care about Russia. Russia only is concerning to some ex-Soviet satellites that are now backed up by NATO. Russia won't invade them. Russia is also ruined economically and militarily for decades now. Putin will be gone before they're able to threaten anyone again.
3. The US likely has a pretty good handle on Russia's nuclear arsenal and isn't worried about them using it. Like the rest of Russian equipment it's been rotting since the 90s. Hydrogen bombs need constant maintenance (tritium expires) lest they become just low yield fission bombs.
4. Putin nuking anyone runs a very real risk one of several nuclear armed powers says "screw it" and drops a ground burst on whatever dacha he spends the most time at. The rest of the world would probably give that country a mulligan and a sternly worded letter of thanks.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by bash

The problem with rattling a nuclear saber is it's only scary once unless you actually use a nuke. After nothing happened after Putin's nuclear talk back in February I think it's apparent he has no intention of ever using nukes.

So if a dictator doesn't immediately follow through on a threat, that threat should no longer be taken seriously?

That seems like a very risky maxim to follow.

The saber rattling continues, with both sides issuing veiled threats.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...in-on-nuke-use

Originally Posted by bash

1. Putin has a decent enough lock on power within Russia. Even if Russia pulled out of Ukraine tomorrow the internal spin would just say "Mission Accomplishski" and the majority inside Russia would cheer.
2. People outside of Russia don't care about Russia. Russia only is concerning to some ex-Soviet satellites that are now backed up by NATO. Russia won't invade them. Russia is also ruined economically and militarily for decades now. Putin will be gone before they're able to threaten anyone again.
3. The US likely has a pretty good handle on Russia's nuclear arsenal and isn't worried about them using it. Like the rest of Russian equipment it's been rotting since the 90s. Hydrogen bombs need constant maintenance (tritium expires) lest they become just low yield fission bombs.
4. Putin nuking anyone runs a very real risk one of several nuclear armed powers says "screw it" and drops a ground burst on whatever dacha he spends the most time at. The rest of the world would probably give that country a mulligan and a sternly worded letter of thanks.

1. You might be right. Putin's control of information within Russia is pretty tight.

2. Sweden and Finland don't seem to agree with that assessment; Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, and Moldova definitely don't. Russia's invasion of Ukraine turned what's been a looming threat for the past 20 years or so into a present-day reality for former Soviet republics no longer aligned with the Russian Federation. To say that Putin wouldn't launch a military action against another former SSR flies in the face events since February of this year. That said, can Russia invade another SSR, given it's massive recent losses in Ukraine? Probably not.

3. The US isn't worried about Russia's nuclear arsenal? Where did that conclusion come from? I haven't come across that assessment from any reputable military analyst, so if you have a reliable source that back's that up, I'd be very interested to see it.

4. Would Russia allow a decapitation nuclear strike on its own soil, without, at the very least, retaliating in kind? That's a huge gamble.

-

[bash]

Originally Posted by Raellus

So if a dictator doesn't immediately follow through on a threat, that threat should no longer be taken seriously?

That seems like a very risky maxim to follow.

The saber rattling continues, with both sides issuing veiled threats.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...in-on-nuke-use

Launching nuclear attacks takes preparation, if for no other reason than to make sure your forces can absorb a retaliation. Russia hasn't changed their posture to one that is preparing for nuclear retaliation. So the threats (to me) ring pretty hollow.

Originally Posted by Raellus

2. Sweden and Finland don't seem to agree with that assessment; Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, and Moldova definitely don't. Russia's invasion of Ukraine turned what's been a looming threat for the past 20 years or so into a present-day reality for former Soviet republics no longer aligned with the Russian Federation. To say that Putin wouldn't launch a military action against another former SSR flies in the face events since February of this year. That said, can Russia invade another SSR, given it's massive recent losses in Ukraine? Probably not.

Russia won't attack another former SSR even if they could specifically because they're in NATO. They wouldn't have moved on Ukraine if they were a NATO member, likely not even if they were just an EU member. The EU is as much a defense pact as a trade pact. Sweden and Finland are joining NATO because membership guarantees safety from Russian aggression.

Originally Posted by Raellus

3. The US isn't worried about Russia's nuclear arsenal? Where did that conclusion come from? I haven't come across that assessment from any reputable military analyst, so if you have a reliable source that back's that up, I'd be very interested to see it.

I should clarify my assertion to not suggest the US isn't concerned with Russia's nuclear arsenal to instead say they're not so worried that Russia has the devastating first strike capability they might have had forty years ago. It costs a lot of money to maintain nuclear weapons. We spend just on our nukes about what Russia spends on their entire military. The level of support given to Ukraine, despite nuclear threats from Putin, infers NATO's intelligence says he's not about to use nukes anywhere.

Originally Posted by Raellus

4. Would Russia allow a decapitation nuclear strike on its own soil, without, at the very least, retaliating in kind? That's a huge gamble.

-

My point is that if Putin decided to use nukes in Ukraine there would be no political fig lead to hide behind. He personally doesn't want to open the can of nuclear works because he knows he's unlikely to personally live to regret it. With Putin gone how much of the leadership wants to follow him in a suicide pact?

[Raellus]

Thanks for clarifying. For what it's worth, I agree with you on most points.

Originally Posted by bash

Launching nuclear attacks takes preparation, if for no other reason than to make sure your forces can absorb a retaliation. Russia hasn't changed their posture to one that is preparing for nuclear retaliation. So the threats (to me) ring pretty hollow.

To clarify my counter-point, I don't think, at this stage, anyone in places of power is overly concerned about a Russian strategic nuclear attack on Ukraine or any NATO member nation. The concern at present seems to be about Russian use of battlefield tactical nuclear weapons on Ukrainian soil.

Battlefield tactical nukes require much less preparation than strategic nuclear weapons do. They're reasonably easy to deploy and conceal, and launch-warning is minimal. AFAIK, there's no way to differentiate between the release of a nuclear-armed air-launched missile and a conventional one (of which the Russians have used hundreds so far). The Russians have a sizeable arsenal of tactical weapons, some of them of quite recent vintage, with several means of delivery at their disposal.

If Putin decides to avoid a major operational/strategic defeat in Ukraine by the application of one or more TBNs, would he be particularly concerned about retaliation in kind? Probably not. Ukraine is not a NATO member, so NATO would not be obligated to respond directly, or with nuclear weapons. NATO's not going to nuke Russian forces on de jure ally Ukraine's home soil, and it's probably not going to risk an escalation with Russia by nuking Russian troop concentrations on Russian soil. Putin's a cunning fellow, and we all know he's willing to take big risks to achieve his geo-political goals. Who, in the Russian hierarchy, is likely to stop him? At this point, he's surrounded by yes-men. That's a real worry.

What's the red line for Putin? No one knows, but I think some analysts believe that any threat to Putin's grip on power in Russia, a particularly destructive attack on Russian soil, or the impending loss of Russian territory (read: Crimea), could provoke a [tactical] nuclear response. Desperate people, take desperate measures.

A not un-reasonable fear is that if and when the Pandora's box of tactical nuclear weapon use is reopened, things could quickly spiral out of control. The USA does not have an established post-Cold War nuclear doctrine/strategy, so there's no playbook.

-

[swaghauler]

Here's another update with a tactical display of Ukraine's offensive.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=gJRjKuss_Co&feature=sh

Swag