In reply to Floating Doc (Forum Supporter) :
Yes, I think you are spot on here. I am sure we all here could easily agree what we think Russia should "get", but the reality is that Russia is very much (at least now) in a position to have some say (a lot really) in the results and, as is ongoing now, even whether there is even a stop to hostilities.
Noddaz said:I do not totally understand the Russian wave missile attacks on infrastructure. I understand the idea of breaking the will of the government or the will of the people, but wouldn't those weapons have a better result if they were used against military targets? Of course this is an army that is STILL using meat waves when attacking.....
As you note, the goal is certainly breaking the will (as well as making any manufacturing more difficult).
The reason why they are not targeting military targets more is almost certainly because significant military targets will have robust defenses so are much harder to hit. The F16's for example are certainly in air fields well in the west, well hidden, scattered and likely with many decoys, in addition to the defenses is the fact that the F16's are likely commonly in the air trying to shoot these missiles down during the attacks.
The energy infrastructure they are attacking is (pretty much by definition) very well scattered, and much harder to defend. Most of the major power plants / dams have already been mostly knocked out, so I suspect many of the targets now are things like sub-stations etc, and those are going to be very difficult to point defend individually.
Also, it should be noted, they are certainly still attacking military targets, just if they do, and even if they are not successful, we will not hear about it. The Ukrainians have been very good with their InfoSec (information security). The Ukrainians are making a crap load of drones somewhere, and I am sure the Russians are hunting for those factories also.
Slightly off-topic, I'm disappointed with the amount and quality of the discourse on the effect of future US weapon procurement given what drone capabilities have demonstrated in Ukraine. The idea of configuring a F-35 for "ground attack" seems 10x more ludicrous to me now than it did five years ago, for example.
Yes, it seems ludicrous that anybody is talking about human crewed vehicles, when Ukraine has shown that remote piloted or autonomous vehicles can do much of the kinetic work for far less cost.
In reply to stroker :
I know it might not be the 'future' of ground support drones, yet I can't help but want to see an A-10 reimagined as a stealthish ruggedized drone still fundamentally built around the 30mm Avenger cannon that doesn't need to protect any squishy organic bits. 
The US is preparing for a very different fight than what we're seeing in Ukraine. Any conflict with China is going to be naval- and air-driven, and done at very long ranges into layered defense networks. Drones have a place, but in very different ways (persistent naval drones, both surface and subsurface, wingmen slaved to manned fighters, long-range reconnaissance). I'd be more worried about hardening US information-sharing networks and communications to ensure C4I dominance in the battlespace more than anything else.
In reply to stroker :
I think you misunderstand what the F35 is designed to do. One way to think of them is they are an aerial (localized) command and control center. These are not "turn and burn" fighters in the sense of an F-16 nor the "blast them with shells" A-10. Much closer to the fleet defense roll of the F14, which was essentially "zap them from a distance" (though obviously, you saw they movie, they could mix it up).
The F-35 is an massive collection of sensors and integrated systems. The power requirements for the plane is huge (they had to upgrade the engine to meet the future power requirements!!). It's basic roll is to listen and sniff for targets (radars etc), and of course be feed targets from other sources (e.g. AWACS, satellites etc), then coordinate attacks. Those attacks can come from other planes of course (e.g. F15X a massive missile carrier). And, potentially use it's stealth to drop whatever guided (self-guided) weapons it has (very likely almost always long range stand off weapons)
One of the expected primary weapons to be used are drones. Far more sophisticated than the hobby drones being used in Ukraine, but still drones. And those drones, might have drones...
One thing to consider, and what is being learned in Ukraine already, is that the radio controlled FPV drone, which has been super effective, is now down almost to the 50% effectiveness rate because of more concentrated electronic warfare, thus the appearance of the wire-guided drones (as in miles an miles of monofilament wire!).
In a more sophisticated environment in the future, you can also expect to see anti-drone specific weapons (like lasers, and even reactive shotgun like devices), so the US is certainly not going to throw everything at low cost drones (which will still be effective in some environments, and we have had switchblade drones for a while). Let's face it, the US is know for dropping hundred thousand dollar weapons on $5000 trucks, and that is not likely to change too much!
Here is what a switchblade drone looks like in action:
More weirdness out of Ukraine (Russia of course):
So, that Russian city the Ukrainians captured, Sudzha, is a natural gas pipeline hub. Which has, you know, pipelines running into it. Well... the Russians decided to use the actual pipelines to attack, as in, moving through the actual pipeline! It's not entirely clear what happened. Some reports that they suffocated (not a lot of air in a natural gas pipeline), but there is evidence of them exiting the pipeline. But it apparently is known that most of them are now, no longer. These were likely pretty experienced troops also.
Also, it's starting to look like the Kursk encursion may be disappearing soon. The map is not looking good.
Russian forces reportedly advanced in Sudzha itself with support from North Korean forces. Russian milbloggers claimed that Russian forces advanced into the industrial area in northeastern Sudzha and that Russian forces maintain positions in the town along the east bank of the Sudzha River.[8] One Russian milblogger claimed that some areas of the industrial zone are a contested "gray zone."[9] Another Russian milblogger claimed that Russian forces are attempting to advance into central Sudzha and crossed to the west bank of the Sudzha River in at least one place in the town.
In reference to the previous post
A Ukrainian soldier operating in Kursk Oblast stated that Russian forces advanced south of Sudzha due to support from North Korean forces and Russian forces' "massive" use of first-person view (FPV) drones with fiber optic cables.
Some more info on the US/Ukraine talks (my highlight in the Russian section):
-----
Russia continues to publicly claim that it wants peace while offering no concessions of its own in sharp contrast with the concessions Ukraine has already offered. Reuters reported on March 9 that two US officials stated that the US is planning to use the March 11 US-Ukrainian talks in Saudi Arabia "in part to determine whether Ukraine is willing to make material concessions to Russia to end the war."[1] One US official stated that Ukraine cannot say both "I want peace" and "I refuse to compromise on anything" at the upcoming talks. The other US official stated that the US wants "to see if the Ukrainians are interested not just in peace, but in a realistic [emphasis added] peace." The Financial Times reported on March 9 that unspecified officials briefed on the upcoming US-Ukrainian negotiations stated that Ukraine will propose a partial ceasefire with Russia for long-range drone and missile strikes and combat operations in the Black Sea.[2] Ukrainian outlet Suspilne reported on March 10 that a source familiar with the Ukrainian delegation's position stated that Ukraine will also propose a prisoner of war (POW) exchange.[3] The Ukrainian source noted that these proposals are "realistic to implement quickly" and to "control." Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky first suggested a ceasefire in the air and sea on March 5, and Ukraine is offering the kind of ceasefires that are more straightforward and do not require extended negotiations or a complex monitoring process.[4] A ceasefire along the thousand kilometers of complex front line characterized by multiple “gray zones” where the lines of opposing forces are blurred would be extremely difficult to negotiate and monitor. Zelensky has also indicated several times — including in his February 28 Fox News interview — that he is willing to make concessions on territory, Ukraine's NATO membership, and his own tenure in office in order to secure a just and sustainable peace.[5]
Russian officials, in contrast, continue to reiterate Russian President Vladimir Putin's 2021 and 2022 demands. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov claimed in an interview to "New Regions of Russia" magazine published on March 10 that any future peace settlement must "eradicate" the "root causes" of the war.[6] Lavrov defined the "root causes" of the war as the alleged "threats to Russia's security from the Ukrainian and Western directions in general" that are due to NATO's eastward expansion and the Ukrainian government's alleged "extermination" of everything that is "connected with Russia and the Russian World [Russkiy Mir]," including Russian language, culture, Orthodoxy, and media. Lavrov similarly defined the alleged "root causes" of the war in late December 2024, and the Kremlin's rhetoric on this topic has not changed in the over two months, even after the start of US-Russian bilateral talks in February 2024.[7] Russia's repeated rhetoric about the "root causes" of the war and constant reiteration of its specific unchanged demands contrast sharply with the flexibility Ukraine has shown.[8]
In reply to aircooled :
I've never been able to understand the Kremlin's perceived threats to their security. As far as I know, Ukraine and NATO weren't planning any aggression towards Russia prior to the invasion.
In reply to aircooled :
The attack via the natural gas pipeline sounded like something from a James Bond movie. I read something about them wearing gas masks, but that didn't make a lot of sense unless the news report misunderstood and they were actually wearing SCUBA gear.
stuart in mn said:In reply to aircooled :
I've never been able to understand the Kremlin's perceived threats to their security. As far as I know, Ukraine and NATO weren't planning any aggression towards Russia prior to the invasion.
As others have described it, it's an historical perspective. The vast plains of Russia are open to invaders (of which there are notable examples) and there are no natural boundaries to slow them. It's like an inherited fear.
The US and Ukraine are meeting in Saudi Arabia today for talks on how to start starting the stopping...
Ukraine launched a massive (100's) drone attack in Russia. Not sure if it's related with above. Things were certainly hit, Russia will claim all are shot down of course.
Ukraine-US open talks on ending war with Russia in Saudi Arabia as Kyiv launches huge drone attack
JEDDAH, Saudi Arabia (AP) — Senior officials from Ukraine and the United States opened talks Tuesday focused on ending Moscow’s three-year war against Kyiv, hours after Russia shot down over 300 Ukrainian drones. It was Ukraine’s biggest attack since the Kremlin ordered the full-scale invasion of its neighbor...
As per the AP article referenced in Aircooled's post:
Across the table, Ukrainian officials, including the country’s top diplomat and defense chief, showed no facial expressions as the meeting got underway at a luxury hotel. However, Ukrainian presidential aide Andriy Yermak told reporters that the most important thing was “how to achieve a just and lasting peace in Ukraine.” He said security guarantees were important to prevent Russia from invading again in the future.
It might be a bit dramatic, but maybe these meetings should be held in Ukraine near the front. Just so all involved gets the proper feel for the situation.
In reply to Noddaz :
I like that idea, but maybe neutral ground, like Gaza?
No Time said:In reply to Noddaz :
I like that idea, but maybe neutral ground, like Gaza?
Naw, the parties involved have no stake in Gaza. All the meeting should take place in the areas of contest and destruction. Perhaps Donesk or Mariuple. Just set up a folding table and have at the negotiations. Then the next meeting could be in Kursk. Same thing but on the Russian side of the contested border.
Saw news that Ukraine has given its approval to a 30-day ceasefire deal now being offered to Russia:
In reply to GameboyRMH :
From what I've heard, Zelensky wrote a letter to Trump directly, apologizing for the White House episode. That, plus recognizing that the US was not going to maintain support while he dithered, seems to have had the desired effect. I'm quite certain that Rubio and others told him that aid was directly and causally linked to his support for a cease-fire, and that Zelensky did the math and decided to play ball. Aid has, in fact, been restored. Like it or not, things happen a lot faster in the Trump White House; obviously, this has benefits and costs, but it's something that the rest of the world has to adapt to when dealing with the US.
The question now is how Russia reacts. Putin doesn't like this kind of public pressure. Trump and Zelensky have him in a corner; if he signs up, he's the last one to the table, and if he refuses, he's the roadblock and now gets the US stick-over-the-head treatment, probably in the form of heavy sanctions on banking transactions, and possibly a ramping up of aid to Ukraine and/or some form of restricting the Russian shadow fleet of tankers. Trump is impatient, and the longer Putin waits, the worse it gets. Of course, he may just sign up and then fabricate some excuse to break it, but that won't go over well, given that the US has better battlefield awareness than either of the combatants.
To paraphrase Churchill, it's not the beginning of the end, but if Putin gets on board, it is the beginning of the beginning.
I was just going to bring up this idea that the Kremlin probably likes quick decisions when it benefits them, and prefers to draw out its own timeline. Specifically because of that battlefield awareness it knows it lacks, it has more success in fast moving scenarios. Probably also gives more time to Ukraine to build support within the new administration.
Both sides will see the pause as an advantage, but it probably benefits Ukraine more.
I'd be surprised if we don't see some failed negotiation, fighting resume, Russia gets smacked, which brings it back to the table.
I think this brings up some interesting points and potential issues, some that O2 has mentioned. I think he kind of hits both "sides" of what is being said (why there are "sides" I have no idea). The video should start at a few min in to skip some advertisement.
Why is no one seizing the frozen Russian assets? If the Russians reject the cease fire fine them and give the money to Ukraine?
Direct quote from the BBC's live reporting on this:
Sergei Markov, a supporter of and former adviser to Russian President Vladimir Putin, believes the relationship between the Kremlin leader and Donald Trump could itself make a difference during the ongoing Ukraine ceasefire talks.
Markov tells BBC Radio 4's Today programme that the relationship between Putin and the new US administration under Donald Trump is significantly different from the rapport between Putin and former US President Joe Biden.
"Biden was just an enemy, Trump is a rival," he adds.
Markov says the ceasefire proposals give Putin a "dilemma", adding that Russian society "is tired of the war and wants to have peace".
It's an interesting assessment, particularly in the distinction Putin is seen to be maintaining between Biden and Trump, as well as the ever-present issue of Russian domestic sentiment. We don't often get much insight into these things, but I'm sure there is plenty of dissatisfaction beneath the surface. Things like the Ukrainian drone attack on Moscow (clearly timed to influence opinion among average Russians toward the proposed cease-fire) make it impossible to just pretend the war isn't happening, or is going well.
In reply to 02Pilot :
OK, that makes more sense then. I did see that the drone attacks seemed to be mostly toward Moscow, when typically the Ukrainians tend to attack more south east to hit oil refineries etc. The Ukrainians have made it known, they are making a LOT of drones now!
In regards to a cease fire. I highly suspect the Russians, if they are truly interested, will want to delay that a bit until they can get Sudzha under control. The Russians seem willing to sacrifice as many North Koreans(!) as it takes to capture it!
I heard one of the restrictions that the US had re-established was on attacks within Russia. If those restrictions are off (which I suspect they are) the Russian forces near Sudzha might be having a much harder time now (HIMARS a plenty I suspect).
The Ukrainian pocket continues to shrink:
I'm not sure that bombing Moscow is going to turn the Russian populace towards peace. That one could backfire. Those of you who monitor Russian media: How are they spinning peace talks?
This is one of the more useful discussions I've seen on the view of the Russian economy from the inside. You can bet that new sanctions are going to be seen as a real problem in Moscow, and as much as Putin might want to delay things, Trump doesn't seem to be willing to give him much time to make up his mind.
You'll need to log in to post.
