War in Ukraine

[hog88]

Well it ain't going to look like WW2. You're right in the fact our active ship Navy is small, but I believe that is due to an over reliance on super carriers. With the drone revolution still in its infancy, we should be building smaller launch and maintenance platforms where the drones are launched, recovered and maintained but you leave the pilots back on land. Not much glory but it disperses assets, requires cheaper ships. Think of all the support personnel that wouldn't be needed. Plus for 100 years now the achilles heel of maritime aviation has been training pilots after a carrier went into battle. Now you might lose the drone, but you won't lose the pilot.

The super carriers suck up so much manpower. 5000 men per carrier at a time when we can't get the volunteers.

By middle of the century the ships will be mostly robotic anyway with little more than maintenance crews. The interesting question is whether the Chinese spend so much money catching up to where we are at now, that they can't afford the next tech jump.

The question is can/will we make the next jump? With the failures of the LCS and Zumwalt class I don't have faith in the Navy making the necessary jump and allowing China to catch up.

I agree with the rest of your post.

 

[AM64]

It’s fundamentally an ethic conflict. They were warring when they were still in the USSR

Ethnic or religious? People who don't mix well or people who don't mix well because of religious intolerance/teaching?

 

[NorthDallas40]

Ethnic or religious? People who don't mix well or people who don't mix well because of religious intolerance/teaching?

I’m fairly sure it’s ethic but could be both. They really just don’t like each other.

 

[AM64]

Well it ain't going to look like WW2. You're right in the fact our active ship Navy is small, but I believe that is due to an over reliance on super carriers. With the drone revolution still in its infancy, we should be building smaller launch and maintenance platforms where the drones are launched, recovered and maintained but you leave the pilots back on land. Not much glory but it disperses assets, requires cheaper ships. Think of all the support personnel that wouldn't be needed. Plus for 100 years now the achilles heel of maritime aviation has been training pilots after a carrier went into battle. Now you might lose the drone, but you won't lose the pilot.

The super carriers suck up so much manpower. 5000 men per carrier at a time when we can't get the volunteers.

By middle of the century the ships will be mostly robotic anyway with little more than maintenance crews. The interesting question is whether the Chinese spend so much money catching up to where we are at now, that they can't afford the next tech jump.

The super carriers are also going to be super magnets for anything an enemy can fire - think Bismarck and Yamamoto Yamato class battleships. If China doesn't go over-expansionist, then we would be flying from carriers and nearby islands while China would be operating from friendly territory. If I were China, I'd forget the carriers and spend the resources on land based aircraft and missiles fired from land, sea, or air.

In the end it looks like a battle of futility; China probably can't threaten us directly, but they can hurt or destroy our nearby allies and thereby destroy life as we know it (gotta have electronics and gadgets ... and cars, etc), and we cannot and should not even try to conquer China. Stalemate as long as we can continue to supply a military presence, and that's all based on whether we can and will rebuild US industry and the necessary power grid. Unless we rebuild our electronics industry from chips up, you can kiss those robotic ships goodbye.

There's also the other really huge factor - logistics, China has the fleet to move goods - we don't; the worst part they would have short supply lines and ours would be very long. Chinese life is cheap and they still have a lot of bodies to throw into a conflict - a big factor unless we can keep them bottled up at home.

 

[tvolsfan]

so any group of people can move anywhere, outnumber everyone and decide this is someone else’s land.
I move my family into your house can I decide it’s mine?

That’s what Russia calls “foreign policy.”

 

[AM64]

I thought it was supposed to be Russia resorting to nukes or dirty bombs. But it is the UK. And where is the Green/environmentalist outrage with regards to depleted uranium in the soil?

You know uranium is a natural element and depleted uranium is naturally occurring uranium with the more fissile isotopes removed for nuclear fuel? Is it safe as mother's milk? Absolutely not, but neither is anything else fired at your body. You know the big thing about uranium is density; in a projectile it packs a real mean wallop - a whole lot of mass in a small package. Don't invade another country and they won't shoot lead or depleted uranium at you; it's pretty simple really. I haven't heard sufficient outrage over Chinese mining and lack of environmental care to produce EVs and feed cell phones either - guess it's just a matter of "priorities".

BTW, I'd take depleted uranium shells over a dirty bomb ... and definitely over a nuke.

 

[AM64]

As always with Middle East

And the Middle East is always all about that "mostly peaceful" Islamic religion ironically.

 

[NorthDallas40]

You know uranium is a natural element and depleted uranium is naturally occurring uranium with the more fissile isotopes removed for nuclear fuel? Is it safe as mother's milk? Absolutely not, but neither is anything else fired at your body. You know the big thing about uranium is density; in a projectile it packs a real mean wallop - a whole lot of mass in a small package. Don't invade another country and they won't shoot lead or depleted uranium at you; it's pretty simple really. I haven't heard sufficient outrage over Chinese mining and lack of environmental care to produce EVs and feed cell phones either - guess it's just a matter of "priorities".

BTW, I'd take depleted uranium shells over a dirty bomb ... and definitely over a nuke.

No strand of pearls is out of reach for our stooges to fret over. Even when it’s obviously the wrong strand of pearls

 

[AM64]

Russia doesnt target civilians. That is ridiculous. I agree, you dont invade a Country then blame them for escalation, but that isnt what is happening. This is why I say many of you live in the upside down. Your view of this conflict is warped and likely warped due to you viewing it through the filter of western propaganda.

So you're saying Russia is the gang who can't shoot straight? And you expect them to win a war they created?

 

[volgr]

The Budapest Memo... removing nukes on Ukrainian soil that the Ukrainians never had control of anyways. So to say that the nukes would have been a deterrent or protecting Ukraine from anything is dishonest.

Exxactly, the US knew Ukraine didn't have command or control of those remaining Russian nukes. Russia still had command and control and even if Ukraine were to get command and control, they didn't have the money or expertise to maintain the nukes. The whole Budapest Memo is a red herring.

 

[Hunerwadel]

Per the CNO on 60 Minutes this past Sunday we are down to about 300 deployable ships in the Navy, that includes ships In maintenance, an average of +/- 3000 delay days in ship maintenance per year and down to 4 or 5 shipyards capable of working on Navy ships. How can we expect to fight the next Pacific war with a chitshow like that?

Our only real military threat is China, not Russia.

That's what I tell my wife when I want a new toy. "honey how do you expect me to bring home any meat with just 7 rifles, and one of them needs a new scope." Sadly it doesn't work anymore.

I do agree that China is the greater threat though perhaps not the most immediate.

 

[volgr]

so any group of people can move anywhere, outnumber everyone and decide this is someone else’s land.
I move my family into your house can I decide it’s mine?

The native Americans have entered the chat...

Again, most of you people must have missed history class.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Exxactly, the US knew Ukraine didn't have command or control of those remaining Russian nukes. Russia still had command and control and even if Ukraine were to get command and control, they didn't have the money or expertise to maintain the nukes. The whole Budapest Memo is a red herring.

Then why did Russia sign it Larry?

 

[MG1968]

Is this supposed to be ridiculing the Russians? That they are (allegedly) bringing out old tanks and yet gaining ground on the NATO armed and trained Ukrainians?

What does that say about NATO weapons?

That they’re so effective at obliterating high-end, “modern” Russian garbage that the Russians have been forced to deploy old Soviet-Era garbage to be obliterated.

 

[Paper_Towel]

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

so any group of people can move anywhere, outnumber everyone and decide this is someone else’s land.
I move my family into your house can I decide it’s mine?

Again, Palestine...

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

It says they are destroying their tanks at higher speed than they can produce.

So? Look at the map and count the casualties.

 

[KB5252]

China is the big winner in all of this. Russia is vulnerable and dependant. Russia needs China. Russia wants China's backing. China will help in a limited capacity because they still need the economic ties with the west to remain in good standing.

Personally I think China wants Russia to back off, but Putin is vulnerable, more vulnerable than I imagined. I never realized until recently how segmented and tribal their state is. Power is brokered differently there. China wants Russia to back off some but I don't think Putin can afford to. I think Russia wants more backing but China simply can't afford to at this point.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Oh yeah I understand that 300 years ago, just not understanding how that would work today. If Mexicans moved to Mexico then they didn’t want to live in Mexico no more. So Mexico doesn’t get a say if new Mexico is now Mexico or not.

The problem is that Crimea and Donbas have been populated by Russia/Soviets for 200+ years.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Now you've done it. Even though only 33K of the 500K Ukrainian military had some NATO training, you've given proof that NATO built the Ukrainian military.

Don't take my word for it. Simply as Francois Holland or Angela Merkel.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Would that stand up? Could Ukrainians move to Russia openly and freely before the wars? This one and 2014 I believe.

Davey Crockett in San Antonio...

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Most of all, the US needs to become self reliant again. That was what won WW2, and we gave it up to the country that would be our future enemy ... a very stupid state of affairs.

Then your enemy is not any foreign power. Your first enemy should be the ones here at home that sold us out.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

More like the Saudis cut oil production to keep prices high and dipped below Russian output. Saudis don't need more revenue; Russia needs all it can get.

OK.... So?

Sounds like the KSA is coordinating with the Russians on oil production.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Ukraine has gotten really good at delivering (dropping) things by drone - most of them are designed to go boom though. It's been interesting watching the drone delivery and eyes in the sky over Ukraine, and we best hope our military is learning for the future what Russians in trenches and in the open are learning daily.

Drones killing 3-5 soldiers here or there isn't a realistic long term strategy.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Doesn't seem that Ukraine was the first domino that Russia has subverted or annexed; Ukraine has just been an extraordinarily stubborn domino that's blocking the chain. The domino theory is alive, well, and in working order; it just applies to Russian rather than communist expansionism these days. Bullies tend to keep taking unless they get slapped down - just like one domino falling tics the next one unless something is misaligned. I guess we could call it the potato chip theory which would be an even better model ... you can't eat just one; the domino theory suggests that the fall of one thing prompts the fall of another rather than a successful aggressor is encouraged to go after more when the first victims fall. Dominoes would describe a natural progression; potato chips describe an insatiable appetite which is probably more accurate; but both adequately describe a land grabbing aggressor.

The domino theory didn't even apply in 1965, much less now.