Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-24

[Chz]

No one thinks a sheer lack of troops is hindering the Ukrainians?

While they could certainly use more manpower, the fact is that they struggle to equip and train the soldiers that they have. So unless they want to move to the tactics the Russians are currently employing, pure manpower doesn't do them much good unless it comes with an increased training capacity and more weapons. That's the reason you haven't heard them complaining about it as much as other things.

Edit to add: Ukraine already has one of Europe's largest armies. Manpower is only a problem because of who they're facing, not because it's something they're inherently short of. Sending 10% of the active British Army would hardly be noticed in terms of pure manpower, though you'd hope they'd arrive a lot better equipped and trained. I stress hope.

 

[The39thStep]

While they could certainly use more manpower, the fact is that they struggle to equip and train the soldiers that they have. So unless they want to move to the tactics the Russians are currently employing, pure manpower doesn't do them much good unless it comes with an increased training capacity and more weapons. That's the reason you haven't heard them complaining about it as much as other things.

Edit to add: Ukraine already has one of Europe's largest armies. Manpower is only a problem because of who they're facing, not because it's something they're inherently short of. Sending 10% of the active British Army would hardly be noticed in terms of pure manpower, though you'd hope they'd arrive a lot better equipped and trained. I stress hope.

You want the Tories to send 10% of the British Army to Ukraine?

 

[existentialist]

You want the Tories to send 10% of the British Army to Ukraine?

Way to miss the point.

 

[Chz]

You want the Tories to send 10% of the British Army to Ukraine?

No, the whole point was that it's not what they need.

 

[Pickman's model]

While they could certainly use more manpower, the fact is that they struggle to equip and train the soldiers that they have. So unless they want to move to the tactics the Russians are currently employing, pure manpower doesn't do them much good unless it comes with an increased training capacity and more weapons. That's the reason you haven't heard them complaining about it as much as other things.

Edit to add: Ukraine already has one of Europe's largest armies. Manpower is only a problem because of who they're facing, not because it's something they're inherently short of. Sending 10% of the active British Army would hardly be noticed in terms of pure manpower, though you'd hope they'd arrive a lot better equipped and trained. I stress hope.

I think the mod would notice. Can't even equip a division - the British Army couldn't cope with any determined opponent atm.

 

[The39thStep]

Way to miss the point.

That's why I asked for clarification

 

[The39thStep]

No, the whole point was that it's not what they need.

I initially read it as the MoD would hardly notice the 10% , so thanks for clarification.

 

[Pickman's model]

That's why I asked for clarification

But this is the home of obfuscation

 

[two sheds]

You want the Tories to send 10% of the British Army to Ukraine?

that would decimate it

 

[TopCat]

I think the UK should send troops to support Ukraine. Lord knows we've got enough of them sat around doing fuck all at ludicrous expense.

E2a: Actually I think UK forces should make their own way to Ukraine and volunteer to fight en masse. They're such brave lads after all, I'm sure they'd be happy to fight against a country with a non-zero capacity to defend itself for once.

I don’t really know what you actually mean with this post. What is sarcasm, hyperbole, etc.

 

[JimW]

that would decimate it

It worked so much better when we were imperial.

 

[SpookyFrank]

I don’t really know what you actually mean with this post. What is sarcasm, hyperbole, etc.

Neither.

Ok, so the bit about brave lads was sarcasm but the rest is legit.

 

[TopCat]

Neither.

Ok, so the bit about brave lads was sarcasm but the rest is legit.

I think most of the UK armed forces would be reluctant to go fight Russia for the Ukrainians.

 

[Chz]

I think most of the UK armed forces would be reluctant to go fight Russia for the Ukrainians.

I figure most people are reluctant to go somewhere they might die. But I'd wager they'd prefer fighting in Ukraine to Afghanistan or Iraq.

 

[TopCat]

But I'd wager they'd prefer fighting in Ukraine to Afghanistan or Iraq.

Why?

 

[JimW]

A fair few of the lads I knew who went into the forces always made out they were keen to go to war, though this was only acquaintances and obviously the sort of thing a young man might talk big about.

 

[Chz]

Why?

Two reasons.
One, your equipment is actually designed for this fight rather than being quickly retrofitted for guerilla attacks in a desert.
Two, 90+% of the people who live in the country are happy that you're there and support you. Morale was always a huge problem in the Middle East because only part of the country was behind them.

A reluctant third, I'm guessing there's a not insignificant part of the British Army who would rather be fighting shoulder to shoulder with white Europeans.

Politically, it won't happen unless the Russians and the Chinese storm off from the Security Council in a huff and a UN force gets approved.

 

[TopCat]

A fair few of the lads I knew who went into the forces always made out they were keen to go to war, though this was only acquaintances and obviously the sort of thing a young man might talk big about.

Gung ho lasts until your mates get killed, maimed etc. Bad enough trying to live with deliberately killing people. I knew a lot who were in Iraq. Not a gung ho type left amongst them.

 

[Pickman's model]

Two reasons.
One, your equipment is actually designed for this fight rather than being quickly retrofitted for guerilla attacks in a desert.
Two, 90+% of the people who live in the country are happy that you're there and support you. Morale was always a huge problem in the Middle East because only part of the country was behind them.

A reluctant third, I'm guessing there's a not insignificant part of the British Army who would rather be fighting shoulder to shoulder with white Europeans.

Politically, it won't happen unless the Russians and the Chinese storm off from the Security Council in a huff and a UN force gets approved.

nothing to do with it being a war of choice where british soldiers were sent into battle with shitty kit eg the unarmoured land rovers which had nothing to do with the feb 15 demonstration etc. sod the country, if the mod's not really supporting you of course morale's going to tumble.

 

[two sheds]

It worked so much better when we were imperial.

dodecamate

 

[SpookyFrank]

I think most of the UK armed forces would be reluctant to go fight Russia for the Ukrainians.

Yes because they're a bunch of poltroons.

 

[Spymaster]

Yes because they're a bunch of poltroons.

Just when we think it's impossible for you to be any more of a bellend, you surprise us with something like this, Plank!

 

[UnderOpenSky]

Apparently there are between 2000 to 3000 British volunteers fighting in Ukraine. Or were. I couldn't find how many have been killed.

 

[Rob Ray]

How do you see a path to a peace? How would it be achieved?

That question is also one for you to answer.

Putting aside the obvious most likely outcome (war grinds on for a couple of years until one side runs out of rope), the problem is a "negotiated peace" on Russia's terms at this stage isn't actually peace, it's a temporary break in hostilities. This is a pretty fundamental factor, imv, for the debate from a class struggle standpoint in which we are aiming to, ultimately, minimise the amount of war that's actually happening. The Kremlin has had form both for physically pushing its borders outwards towards its desired Greater Russia line while committing mass murder in the course of doing so (as well as for ongoing brutal repression in victory), for 20 years now. It's entirely open about its ambition to "reclaim" Ukraine in its entirety, along with many other parts of other countries in Europe. I've yet to see any convincing argument that appeasement would forestall the same thing happening again down the line.

 

[TopCat]

Yes because they're a bunch of poltroons.

This isn’t right. I have known a lot of service people and cowards they have never been.

 

[Dogsauce]

How does the war possibly end though? Russian regime change is a delusional fantasy. With all the western weapons the Ukrainians have not advanced.
?

apart from taking back Kharkiv and Kherson. They seemed to manage that OK. Some see it as Ukraine currently sitting back letting Russia come at them and extracting a high price for territorial gains, knowing that the tools and weather for a counter attack will be in place in a few months. Whether that’s just a spin/coping method I don’t know, because facts on the ground are still facts on the ground. Somewhere there‘s hope that Russian tolerance of having their sons or partners slaughtered by the thousand for a non-existential threat may be limited, as it has been in the past, but this is a much more moulded society than then. So fuck knows, but I wouldn’t write off Ukraine’s chances based on a slowly shifting front against them.

 

[MickiQ]

Apparently there are between 2000 to 3000 British volunteers fighting in Ukraine. Or were. I couldn't find how many have been killed.

I personally know of only one UK volunteer (son of a friend). He served in Afghanistan with the Para's and then did a stint fighting ISIS alongside the Kurds and is now in Ukraine. Last I heard, (I haven't seen his Dad since before Xmas) he was still alive.

 

[Artaxerxes]

That question is also one for you to answer.

Putting aside the obvious most likely outcome (war grinds on for a couple of years until one side runs out of rope), the problem is a "negotiated peace" on Russia's terms at this stage isn't actually peace, it's a temporary break in hostilities. This is a pretty fundamental factor, imv, for the debate from a class struggle standpoint in which we are aiming to, ultimately, minimise the amount of war that's actually happening. The Kremlin has had form both for physically pushing its borders outwards towards its desired Greater Russia line while committing mass murder in the course of doing so (as well as for ongoing brutal repression in victory), for 20 years now. It's entirely open about its ambition to "reclaim" Ukraine in its entirety, along with many other parts of other countries in Europe. I've yet to see any convincing argument that appeasement would forestall the same thing happening again down the line.

I asked him this morning and answer came there none.

War bad, the west shouldn’t give Ukraine things seems to be about the nearest straight answer I’ve seen.

 

[strung out]

I asked him this morning and answer came there none.

War bad, the west shouldn’t give Ukraine things seems to be about the nearest straight answer I’ve seen.

Don't forget that 'the West' owes a debt to Russia. Presumably 'the West' can repay that debt by telling Ukraine to give away some of their country.

 

[Chilli.s]

Speaking of debt

Now weapon supplies from the west are getting to a higher level, how are sanctions going and are they ramped up too?