Kiev Is Burning

[futon]

5 hours ago, ink said:

China's artificial islands are some 7000km from Hawaii. What business does the US have there exactly?

The Philippines, Taiwan, and Japan choose the US over China. CCP China should rethink their approach.

[Stefan Kotsch]

39 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

All reports are that Russian armaments production are massively up from pre-war across practically every category.

BTW. To conclude that economic growth would result from this would turn the laws of the market economy on their head.

Building tanks and missiles does not create added value. It's like the baker buying his own bread and then multiplying that production and buying even more of his own bread. This can not go well. Otherwise, Putin would have to be nominated for the Nobel Prize in Economics.

 

Edited November 25, 2023 by Stefan Kotsch

[Josh]

 

53 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

Drone's are not intended to defeat air defenses by outfoxing them, they work by simply swamping them with numbers.

You mentioned using a reusable carrier drone to deliver Lancets; I’m pointing there’s no availability platform that could do that, let alone a survivable platform. Perhaps S70, but it seems unlikely to me that is ever mass produced.

 

53 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

I don't think Russia could produce 5,000 a year, they would need China for that.  

I think China will keep all of its military UAVs and guidance systems to itself.

 

53 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

We're talking about tactical airpower, not strategic airpower.

I’m talking about both, and pointing out one of the two would be completely unaffected.

53 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

Assuming that the sortie rate you list can be maintained indefinitely, and that 20% of the missiles launched are shot down and another 25% miss due to jamming, that would be 375 attacks per day.  I have no idea what the average number of KIA per such attack is, but it surely must be at least 2, so the level of attack you list might be sufficient to inflict maybe 1,000 casualties per day?  That sounds decisive against an army of 100,000, but not for one that is 2 or 3 million strong.

Message me when Russia has an active army that large. It certainly doesn’t currently, despite being in a peer warfare situation.

 

53 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

The range of the JASSM is about 200 nautical miles, the range of the JDAM is about 50 miles. Seems a bit tight - close enough that defending systems, (S-400, SU-57, possibly J-20) can hope to inflict significant attrition on attacking forces.  What level of attrition are you proposing on USAF strategic assets per mission?

 

JASSM-ER is 500nm/1000km. The B-2s would have to be inside engagement ranges, but presumably there would be some complimentary tactical aircraft and UAVs to mitigate the danger.

Edited November 25, 2023 by Josh

[Perun]

1 hour ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

As seen here?

Hmm, MT-LB seems to be running out...

https://x.com/AndreiBtvt/status/1728487041451639273?s=20

And, the term increase is a broad field. 

What does this have with MT-LB

[Stefan Kotsch]

Ask Harkonnen? 

[Stuart Galbraith]

Naval RBU anti submarine rocket lancher? Just in case those sneaky Ukrainians start using Land Subs?

 

[txtree99]

US Arms Makers Dominate Top Expo As Russia Fails To Sell
 

Russia's standing as a global arms exporter has been diminished by Russian President Vladimir Putin's ongoing war in Ukraine, but exports had been declining for a few years prior to the conflict.

Data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute shows that Russia's share of global arms exports fell from 22 percent from 2013-17 to 16 percent from 2018-22.

https://www.newsweek.com/us-arms-makers-dubai-airshow-russia-sanctions-1845564

[Roman Alymov]

1 hour ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

BTW. To conclude that economic growth would result from this would turn the laws of the market economy on their head.

Building tanks and missiles does not create added value. It's like the baker buying his own bread and then multiplying that production and buying even more of his own bread. This can not go well. Otherwise, Putin would have to be nominated for the Nobel Prize in Economics.

Building tanks and missiles is massively better than taking money out of country to stock in in foreign bank accounts, buying palaces in London, football clubs etc. At least, now money are given to real production workers (increasing demand for education in such proferssions as welder etc. - not only PPT/Ecxel dwellers as it used to be for decades) and then spread to small businesses in provincial Russian cities, not pet stylists in London.

[Roman Alymov]

2 hours ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

As seen here?

Hmm, MT-LB seems to be running out...

https://x.com/AndreiBtvt/status/1728487041451639273?s=20

And, the term increase is a broad field. 

Not all units got MTLBs to convert, while next to all are looking for the way of having support weapon of their own with next to unlimited stock of ammunition (as it was massively produced in Soviet time and stored since then). And accuracy is good enough for "hit this corner of the field, with forest belts crossing" fire tasks.

[Josh]

18 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said:

Building tanks and missiles is massively better than taking money out of country to stock in in foreign bank accounts, buying palaces in London, football clubs etc. At least, now money are given to real production workers (increasing demand for education in such proferssions as welder etc. - not only PPT/Ecxel dwellers as it used to be for decades) and then spread to small businesses in provincial Russian cities, not pet stylists in London.

Presumably the money paying for munitions and other war related products comes from the government budget, not oligarchy bank accounts?

[Roman Alymov]

12 minutes ago, Josh said:

Presumably the money paying for munitions and other war related products comes from the government budget, not oligarchy bank accounts?

    State bubget was the source of oligarchy bank accounts, so no dofference.

Volunteer from Nigeria in RusArmy https://t.me/milinfolive/111466

[Stefan Kotsch]

42 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said:

Building tanks and missiles is massively better than taking money out of country to stock in in foreign bank accounts,

Old school socialism. 🤔

[Roman Alymov]

26 minutes ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

Old school socialism. 🤔

.....Or good old "Buy American Russian". Anyway, good news for Britons as they will not suffer from inflated housing prices in London anymore (or, at leasrt, will not be able to blame it on Russians - as, probably, there is a lot of criminal money coming from other places too).

[Stefan Kotsch]

More bullshit. 

[mkenny]

56 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said:

.....Or good old "Buy American Russian". Anyway, good news for Britons as they will not suffer from inflated housing prices in London anymore (or, at leasrt, will not be able to blame it on Russians - as, probably, there is a lot of criminal money coming from other places too).

Don't worry Boris made a KGB tool a Lord and he now has a seat in The House Of Lords.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evgeny_Lebedev

 

Lots of MPs were made 'consultants' to various Russian mobsters and made a lot of money out of it. 

[seahawk]

10 hours ago, Roman Alymov said:

.....Or good old "Buy American Russian". Anyway, good news for Britons as they will not suffer from inflated housing prices in London anymore (or, at leasrt, will not be able to blame it on Russians - as, probably, there is a lot of criminal money coming from other places too).

That is the good thing. The only thing the Western sanctions achieved is to re-vitalize Russian industries. Russia should decide to keep Western products out of Russia forever. Russians should buy Russian.

[Roman Alymov]

Pro-Rus T-80 tank saved by "sunshed" from FPV drone strike, Avdeevka "promka" https://t.me/milinfolive/111492

[Stuart Galbraith]

13 hours ago, Roman Alymov said:

.....Or good old "Buy American Russian". Anyway, good news for Britons as they will not suffer from inflated housing prices in London anymore (or, at leasrt, will not be able to blame it on Russians - as, probably, there is a lot of criminal money coming from other places too).

Good, dont let the fucking door hit you on the way out.

 

[ex2cav]

17 hours ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

BTW. To conclude that economic growth would result from this would turn the laws of the market economy on their head.

Building tanks and missiles does not create added value. It's like the baker buying his own bread and then multiplying that production and buying even more of his own bread. This can not go well. Otherwise, Putin would have to be nominated for the Nobel Prize in Economics.

 

Well, in a sense it does. Bakers, or manufacturers, in the US can report unsold bread which rots as a loss and recover such in tax write-offs. Even a bullet plant will count the value of what is has made if not sold. It would just be listed as an asset. It is the same in the US that keeps arms manufacturers in business. All that foreign aid is really just credit to extended to foreign countries to but American arms (not exclusively I know). One can argue there are secondary industries that keep the bullet, or drone, or tank plant operating. Economic growth can be generated. Of course it can be taken too far, see North Korea.

[ex2cav]

22 hours ago, Josh said:

You miss the differences between knocking over a country that the US can immediately incapacitate vs a peer competitor with nuclear weapons (something the U.S. has never done even when it had a clear advantage-see Soviet Union in the 50s and early 60s). There also is a big difference in current appetite for war versus previous eras. A huge percentage of the US population lived its entire adult life with a pair of open ended wars that seemed to accomplish nothing. Getting into another one would be hard for any administration to survive (Iran I think is safe for the next year at least).

What advantage would there be to war with China? Within two decades their population implodes and their economy likely enters a series of lost decades, assuming something doesn’t trigger that sooner.

I have argued that the "China Threat" to the west is a red herring. It keeps defense expenditures growing, and helps focus anger outward. China supplies too much of America's goods to go to war with except for an extreme rationale. It was decided decades ago to offshore American industry.  You don't go to war with your supplier. 

Though my assumption is America's leadership are rational actors. 

[Stefan Kotsch]

1 hour ago, ex2cav said:

... Bakers, or manufacturers, in the US ...

In Russia, the state is the majority shareholder in large defense companies. And ROSTEKH (URALVAGONZAVOD is part of it), as the largest company, is even state-owned. State-owned enterprises cannot account for war losses yourself 'as a loss and recover such in tax write-offs'. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rostec#Organization
or
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almaz-Antey_Corporation#Structure

Edited November 26, 2023 by Stefan Kotsch

[Stefan Kotsch]

1 hour ago, ex2cav said:

I have argued that the "China Threat" to the west is a red herring

Until February 2022, the same thing was said about Russia.

[glenn239]

1 hour ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

Until February 2022, the same thing was said about Russia.

If NATO wanted a problem with Russia, Ukraine was the place to look for it.

[Stefan Kotsch]

1 minute ago, glenn239 said:

If NATO wanted a problem with Russia,

NATO wanted a problem with Russia? The Western states preferred to look the other way. Because business with Russia was considered much more important.

But this topic has already been discussed several times? Apparently unsuccessful.

[glenn239]

20 hours ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

BTW. To conclude that economic growth would result from this would turn the laws of the market economy on their head

From what I can see it appears that the Russian economic reorientation away from the G7 has succeeded in a way that was not expected in the West prior to the war.  

Quote

Building tanks and missiles does not create added value. It's like the baker buying his own bread and then multiplying that production and buying even more of his own bread. This can not go well. Otherwise, Putin would have to be nominated for the Nobel Prize in Economics.

It is precisely because Putin held Russian debt in check for decades that Russia is now in a position to spend at a level to fund the war and boost Russian military capabilities even while stimulating the economy in the civilian sector.   Debt to GDP ratios are a vital strategic asset, and for 2023 they are here,

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/debt-to-gdp-ratio-by-country

Russia is at 17.8%, in the top ten best ratios in the world, while the US at 128% is listed as the 12th worst in the world