Russia Invades Ukraine XIX

[some_al_fan]

Talk about a high risk operation there is (of course) a relevant World War II situation that illustrates the point.
In December 1944, Hitler was losing bad and knew it. He needed to change the game. The Red Army was too massive for a knock-out blow, so he looked west. The Brits and Americans taken together, were too strong, but if he could divide them. This idea was surround Monty's army group, force them to surrender or evacuate by sea, leaving all the heavy equipment, and force the Americans to withdraw and maybe sue for peace. Once free of the threat from the west, the Wehrmacht could turn east and defeat the Red Army.
All of this was fantasy. Just before kickoff, Field Marshal Walter Model gave it a 10% chance of succeeding.

Maybe Putin is trying something spectacularly risky like Wacht-am-Rhein. Call NATO's bluff and maybe even break up NATO as an alliance. But man, that is high stakes poker.

It is possible. And the `Gerbera` image from Poland is actually an interesting indicator.
“Gerbera” drone has no warhead; thus, there is no value for Gerbera to attack Ukraine from the Polish airspace. It is a target drone and a cheaper version of the Shahed/Geran, with the sole purpose of consuming anti-air resources (the ratio of Shahed/Geran to Gerbera in this batch of 23 drones has not been published).

The more information becomes available, it becomes clear that the primary purpose of this attack was not to attack Ukraine via Poland or attack Rzeszów, but really to test NATO and see the response.

Multiple failures by NATO to observe here:
- Poland was not able to shoot down the drones (dutch pilots eventually shot them down as part of the NATO mission)
- One Gerbera drone just fell down on its own on Polish land (i.e., it was not shot down).
- NATO's political response has been weak
- Trump’s response has been pathetic:

 

[Tidewater]

It is possible. And the `Gerbera` image from Poland is actually an interesting indicator.
“Gerbera” drone has no warhead; thus, there is no value for Gerbera to attack Ukraine from the Polish airspace. It is a target drone and a cheaper version of the Shahed/Geran, with the sole purpose of consuming anti-air resources (the ratio of Shahed/Geran to Gerbera in this batch of 23 drones has not been published).

The more information becomes available, it becomes clear that the primary purpose of this attack was not to attack Ukraine via Poland or attack Rzeszów, but really to test NATO and see the response.

Multiple failures by NATO to observe here:
- Poland was not able to shoot down the drones (dutch pilots eventually shot them down as part of the NATO mission)
- One Gerbera drone just fell down on its own on Polish land (i.e., it was not shot down).
- NATO's political response has been weak
- Trump’s response has been pathetic:

View attachment 52768

If the drone was a decoy/waste drone, then even more indication that it was headed towards Ukraine.

 

[Bamaro]

Poland invokes NATO's Article 4 over Russia's drones

Poland said Russia committed a major violation of its airspace. This live blog is now closed.

www.newsweek.com

TACO

 

[Tidewater]

This is interesting.

Poland says Russian drones were deliberately targeted at its territory

The Polish Foreign Minister said, "The assessment of Polish and NATO air forces is that they did not veer off course, but were deliberately targeted."

I don't speak Polish (other than pleasantries and "colorful" language) so I have no idea what the Polish word that was translated as "targeted" was. There may be subtle nuances of meaning.

Personally, from an ocean away, I have no doubt that the drones were deliberately sent into Polish airspace by Russia. Whether the Russians intended to transit Polish airspace en route to targets in Ukraine (which is still a violation of Polish sovereignty) or were intended to strike a target inside Poland (which is an act of war that would probably see Art. 5 invoked), I am not sure.

 

[Tidewater]

TACO

Is NATO really waiting for Trump's response?
Was the US Ambassador to NATO not present at the North Atlantic Council when it met at the behest of Poland? Or, if present, did the U.S,. Ambassador have nothing to say? How would you know that? Before going to the meeting of the NAC, did the U.S. Ambassador not call back to Washington for guidance as to what the U.S. position would be when the NAC met? Did DoS give no guidance? How would you know that?

A more accurate headline would be, "Newsweek does not yet know what the U.S. response was to Poland invoking Art. 4,"

 

[TIDE-HSV]

Is NATO really waiting for Trump's response?
Was the US Ambassador to NATO not present at the North Atlantic Council when it met at the behest of Poland? Or, if present, did the U.S,. Ambassador have nothing to say? How would you know that? Before going to the meeting of the NAC, did the U.S. Ambassador not call back to Washington for guidance as to what the U.S. position would be when the NAC met? Did DoS give no guidance? How would you know that?

A more accurate headline would be, "Newsweek does not yet know what the U.S. response was to Poland invoking Art. 4,"

I've always seen it as Putin's testing Trump...

 

[Tidewater]

I've always seen it as Putin's testing Trump...

Sure, but how and to what end?

 

[some_al_fan]

Putin testing NATO, not just Trump, could be a better explanation

 

[TIDE-HSV]

Putin testing NATO, not just Trump, could be a better explanation

Disagree. As goes Trump, so goes NATO. Sad but true. NATO will never get out ahead of Trump...

 

[Tidewater]

Disagree. As goes Trump, so goes NATO. Sad but true. NATO will never get out ahead of Trump...

Four years ago, I might've agreed with you. I think it is dawning on the Europeans that the cavalry may not be coming over the hill to save them and they have to save themselves. This is especially true for Friedrich Merz.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

Four years ago, I might've agreed with you. I think it is daunting on the Europeans that the cavalry may not be coming over the hill to save them and they have to save themselves. This is especially true for Friedrich Merz.

I can't see that you're disagreeing. Maybe there's been a sea change in European attitudes. I doubt it...

 

[some_al_fan]

Yes, Merz has been a positive force in Ukrainian support ( https://www.defensenews.com/global/...f-pledges-10-billion-in-ukraine-aid-for-2025/ ) and is trying to increase his influence over NATO to fill the vacuum left by Trump.

 

[some_al_fan]

Bloomberg:

–––––
But the concerns are out there and becoming more urgent with every news cycle. Consider those military drones that Russia just sent into Poland, where NATO jets shot them down. It appears that Russian President Vladimir Putin was testing NATO’s air defenses, crisis procedures and resolve, feeling increasingly confident — especially after that cuddly Alaska summit — that Trump is as wobbly on NATO’s mutual-defense commitment as he is indulgent toward his strongman BFF in the Kremlin.
–––––

America’s Friends Will Never Trust the US Again

Trump keeps treating the nation’s allies with such contempt that the consequences will be lasting and ugly.

www.bloomberg.com

 

[Tidewater]

Well, it is Zapad ("West") time again. This was the exercise that got the troops in the position to invade Ukraine in 2022.
For a window into Putin’s next move, look just across the border
Last time there were 200,000 Russian troops involved in the exercise. This time there are only 40,000 that tells me two things:.
1. The Ukraine war has had a significant impact on Russia's ability to mobilize troops beyond what are needed for Ukraine.
2. They're still able to spare 40,000 troops for a weeks long exercise so they are not totally out of Schlitz.

 

[Tidewater]

Bloomberg:

–––––
But the concerns are out there and becoming more urgent with every news cycle. Consider those military drones that Russia just sent into Poland, where NATO jets shot them down. It appears that Russian President Vladimir Putin was testing NATO’s air defenses, crisis procedures and resolve, feeling increasingly confident — especially after that cuddly Alaska summit — that Trump is as wobbly on NATO’s mutual-defense commitment as he is indulgent toward his strongman BFF in the Kremlin.
–––––

America’s Friends Will Never Trust the US Again

Trump keeps treating the nation’s allies with such contempt that the consequences will be lasting and ugly.

www.bloomberg.com

I do not know who Andreas Kluth is, but I think he's incorrect. Unless he was in the room with the NAC met and he knows what the Polish asked for and what the Americans turned down then he's just churning.
I do believe he is correct about one thing. Putin. Did this to see what the NATO reaction would be. That sounds like Putin.

 

[arthurdawg]

Well, it is Zapad ("West") time again. This was the exercise that got the troops in the position to invade Ukraine in 2022.
For a window into Putin’s next move, look just across the border
Last time there were 200,000 Russian troops involved in the exercise. This time there are only 40,000 that tells me two things:.
1. The Ukraine war has had a significant impact on Russia's ability to mobilize troops beyond what are needed for Ukraine.
2. They're still able to spare 40,000 troops for a weeks long exercise so they are not totally out of Schlitz.

Any word on the composition of those troops? And that there were 40,000 of them for sure?

I've long thought we should support Ukraine to bleed Russia and Putin dry if nothing else. Russia's men and materials are almost certainly not as deep and well stocked as they like to portray to the world...

 

[Tidewater]

Any word on the composition of those troops? And that there were 40,000 of them for sure?

I've long thought we should support Ukraine to bleed Russia and Putin dry if nothing else. Russia's men and materials are almost certainly not as deep and well stocked as they like to portray to the world...

I'm sure that the troops are a few maneuver brigades (Infantry and armor) plus support troops. The Russians have a tradition of cannibalizing several brigades to field one capable brigade.
I'm not sure about the numbers, since the Russians have been known to overcount and undercount. 40,000 is probably their upper limit for something like an exercise.

It is difficult for a smaller country to attrit away the army of a larger country. Possible, but difficult. I think Ukraine would need to inflict probably five, maybe seven, casualties for every one Ukraine suffers. I am not sure they are trading casualties at that rate.

 

[Huckleberry]

 

[Bamaro]

TACO

 

[Tidewater]

View attachment 52862

This is an example of why we do not engage in public diplomacy on social media. Using social media is immediate, without the aid of an editor/advisor.
He is however, correct. If Europe stopped buying Russian gas and Russian secondary oil, Russia would run out of money and have to end the war very soon.
As it is, Europe is sending more money to Moscow (in the form of profits from energy sales) than it is to Kyiv in the form of military and economic aid.