Am I the only one who is disconcerted by lack of women conscription in the UKR Army?

[glenn239]

On 10/26/2024 at 4:46 PM, X-Files said:

 

That's not what I asked you, but ok - I see you.

In terms of your question, as I informed you during our conversation in 2022 about Ukraine's capacity to train mobilized civilians, I have no military experience or training.  I recall from that conversation that you have trained a National Guard unit from scratch, but as we discussed in 2022, you did that under optimal conditions.

[X-Files]

28 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

In terms of your question, as I informed you during our conversation in 2022 about Ukraine's capacity to train mobilized civilians, I have no military experience or training.  I recall from that conversation that you have trained a National Guard unit from scratch, but as we discussed in 2022, you did that under optimal conditions.

Like I have the time or inclination to remember your comments from 2022. 

[glenn239]

5 minutes ago, X-Files said:

Like I have the time or inclination to remember your comments from 2022. 

Then I'm happy to share my recollections.  You had trained, I believe, a National Guard unit on weekends over the course of maybe something like a year or more and succeeded admirably with the end product.  You extrapolated from this experience that Ukraine could do the same thing with raw recruits.  I, in turn, thought that conditions were considerably different in Ukraine than what you had experienced, and that it would prove much more difficult, that you were being too optimistic.

History seems to have rendered a verdict, and the verdict is that Ukraine failed overall in its training programs, as the scale of the task under real war conditions was too much not only for it, but seems so for NATO as well.  (It wasn't so much that NATO didn't have the capacity to train troops, its that its training was not that useful in comparison to real combat conditions).

You now seem to be leaning towards the conclusion that recruiting 18-20 year olds will allow Ukraine to stabilize the situation at the front.  Possible, but I'm more skeptical that this will prove to be the case, as the training problem continues and morale on the Ukrainian home front is cratering.  Younger recruits, I think overall, are more explosive, more willing organize against their officers, and their parents are going to be even angrier that the types of dog shit that have sent the older men into combat with huge losses and poor training have learned nothing, and will repeat this with their children next.

Time will tell.

[LeeWalls]

On 10/25/2024 at 8:04 AM, X-Files said:

Drafting 18 year olds is what's done in wars throughout history. 

1) Seems like most of the older Ukrainians with experience are now dead or WIA to the point of being non-deployable

and

2) war is a young man's game because it's physically exhausting.

After two years of high intensity combat, the old guy survivors are most likely fried.

Indeed.   My understanding is that the preference historically has been to go after the younger ones first and increasing (rather than decreasing) the age of liability to be drafted has been viewed as a sign of desperation.   The Ukrainian approach to this has been odd to say the least.   The notion that drafting under 20s should be avoided as likely to cause internal rebellion is sui generis to Glenn as far as i am aware.

[glenn239]

6 hours ago, LeeWalls said:

   The notion that drafting under 20s should be avoided as likely to cause internal rebellion is sui generis to Glenn as far as i am aware.

In the months since that discussion, NATO and the Americans have exerted tremendous pressure on the Ukrainians to drop the age of conscription to 18.  The Ukrainians have replied with a flat no.   The situation at the front is getting progressively worse, so the reason for the refusal is not because they are not needed.  That leaves two possibilities.  Either Zelensky and friends have some sort of moral line past which they will not go, or they fear that public anger is so deep that such a measure may break the camel's back.

Edited January 18 by glenn239

[LeeWalls]

Maybe so.   It just seems like an odd line to draw and without historical precedent as far as I am aware.

[urbanoid]

14 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

In the months since that discussion, NATO and the Americans have exerted tremendous pressure on the Ukrainians to drop the age of conscription to 18.  The Ukrainians have replied with a flat no.   The situation at the front is getting progressively worse, so the reason for the refusal is not because they are not needed.  That leaves two possibilities.  Either Zelensky and friends have some sort of moral line past which they will not go, or they fear that public anger is so deep that such a measure may break the camel's back.

There's yet another explanation that has been around since 2022. 

Ukraine had the worst demographics in Europe, war has made it worse, so they'd rather draft those who have already had kids and/or are less likely to have them in the future. It makes sense, as their own predictions are that the postwar Ukraine (assuming it survives more or less as it is) may be a country with a population as low as 20 million (compared to 35-37 million before the war).

[Roman Alymov]

2 hours ago, urbanoid said:

There's yet another explanation that has been around since 2022. 

Ukraine had the worst demographics in Europe, war has made it worse, so they'd rather draft those who have already had kids and/or are less likely to have them in the future. It makes sense, as their own predictions are that the postwar Ukraine (assuming it survives more or less as it is) may be a country with a population as low as 20 million (compared to 35-37 million before the war).

As for me, the wery idea of UkrGov officials concerned about demography is illusional (since they were doing nothing about it for 30+ yeras of "independence" - why they would take more care now?). Social structure of society in our barbaric places is the answer. On post-Soviet space, man of about 40+ yo is usually de-facto "lonely wolf", his parents are allready dead or too old to do anything to save him from recruiters, his family relations are often complicated and strain - si if he is abducted from the street by press-gang, nobody would care long-term, no prospects of social riots etc. Recruitment of 18-yo on mass is completely different thing: his parents are still in active age, and would highly likely do all they can to save the only son. That is immediate political danger, not long-term demographic ones.

[Stuart Galbraith]

They didnt do anything for 30 years of independence, because they werent expecting a bunch of dozy pillocks to go and invade them.

[LeeWalls]

45 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

They didnt do anything for 30 years of independence, because they werent expecting a bunch of dozy pillocks to go and invade them.

Well in fairness, who could have predicted that Presidentish Joe Biden would invite Russia to indulge in a "minor incursion" into their country.   People tend to forget this for some reason.

[Stuart Galbraith]

But that started much earlier, in 2014. The lack of response to that is clearly what set the stage for what came later.

Which is why I dont really want to see Russia gain any territory under a deal. if it does, its going to take away the message that it can get what it needs from aggressive war. This is a lesson that proved very popular in 1939 and it took 6 years of bloodshed before we put it back in the box.

[Stefan Kotsch]

11 minutes ago, LeeWalls said:

Joe Biden would invite Russia to

Bullshit. 

[LeeWalls]

9 minutes ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

Bullshit. 

It's literally on video.

 

 

Edited January 19 by LeeWalls

[LeeWalls]

13 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

But that started much earlier, in 2014. The lack of response to that is clearly what set the stage for what came later.

Which is why I dont really want to see Russia gain any territory under a deal. if it does, its going to take away the message that it can get what it needs from aggressive war. This is a lesson that proved very popular in 1939 and it took 6 years of bloodshed before we put it back in the box.

Yes Obama certainly has a lot to answer for.   But hey, at least we proved we're not racist, and that's the important thing right?    Right????

[Stefan Kotsch]

1 hour ago, LeeWalls said:

It's literally on video.

Still bullshit. Because that's not the reason for the war.

..

Edited January 19 by Stefan Kotsch

[Mighty_Zuk]

25 minutes ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

Bullshit. 

Dovish policies invite war. Even if Bidet did nothing, the inaction itself tempts hostilities.

[LeeWalls]

On 10/28/2024 at 8:32 AM, X-Files said:

Like I have the time or inclination to remember your comments from 2022. 

You remind me of the Earl of Sandwich.    Can't quite put my finger on it....

[glenn239]

18 hours ago, urbanoid said:

There's yet another explanation that has been around since 2022. 

Ukraine had the worst demographics in Europe, war has made it worse, so they'd rather draft those who have already had kids and/or are less likely to have them in the future. 

Sounds like a good reason to suppose that the domestic front could explode into open revolt if they proceed....

[glenn239]

7 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

They didnt do anything for 30 years of independence, because they werent expecting a bunch of dozy pillocks to go and invade them.

Sounds like the ending of The Unforgiven where the idiot saloon owner didn't expect a shotgun colonoscopy for decorating his premises with the body of Clint Eastwood's friend.  If the Ukrainians didn't anticipate that the inevitable result of their NATO policies and attempts to crush the rebels in Donbas would be absolute and total ruin in a war with Russia, then they are stupider than even I could have imagined.  

[urbanoid]

3 minutes ago, glenn239 said:

Sounds like a good reason to suppose that the domestic front could explode into open revolt if they proceed....

Or just a cynical calculation that the young are more likely to reproduce, which will result in new taxpayers for the future.

[glenn239]

6 hours ago, LeeWalls said:

Well in fairness, who could have predicted that Presidentish Joe Biden would invite Russia to indulge in a "minor incursion" into their country.  

Well, for starters, the 7 billion people on the planet that understood intrinsically that Russia's 6,000 nuclear weapons place it in a different category than any of the Derka Derka Derbies that the Americans have fought in the last decades.  

[glenn239]

5 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Dovish policies invite war. Even if Bidet did nothing, the inaction itself tempts hostilities.

Hawkish polices also invite war, and the more hawkish the behavior the more inevitable the war becomes.  The key is that there is not one principle of international relations that balances the risks.  Statesmanship is an art.

[urbanoid]

1 minute ago, glenn239 said:

Sounds like the ending of The Unforgiven where the idiot saloon owner didn't expect a shotgun colonoscopy for decorating his premises with the body of Clint Eastwood's friend.  If the Ukrainians didn't anticipate that the inevitable result of their NATO policies and attempts to crush the rebels in Donbas would be absolute and total ruin in a war with Russia, then they are stupider than even I could have imagined.  

There were no NATO policies (and no chance to have any realistic prospect of joining, as among others Germany was dead set against it, they also struck prospects of Ukrainian membership in 2008, before any territorial issues came up) nor any unusual concentration of Ukrainian forces in Donbas prior to Feb 24.

[Roman Alymov]

7 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

They didnt do anything for 30 years of independence, because they werent expecting a bunch of dozy pillocks to go and invade them.

Here is the graph of population of Ukraine, 1950-2012

Seems to me "a bunch of dozy pillocks" invasion happened in 1991.

[Stefan Kotsch]

Here is the graph of population of Russia, 1950-2025. If you show the graph of population of Ukraine at the same scale, it looks the same.

Seems to me "a bunch of dozy pillocks" invasion happened in 1994?

@source: https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/rus/russia/population

Edited January 19 by Stefan Kotsch