How should west respond to potential (likely) Russian invasion of Ukraine?

[Ford]

yes, the Ukrainian army is at this point a front for NATO

How so?

Without NATO support Ukraine would have fallen apart a long time ago. They're fed NATO military intel. The importance of that cannot be overstated. They're given cutting edge rockets and missiles defense systems of the sole purpose to deny Russia any edge it might have. NATO countries is giving Ukraine exactly what equipment and strategic support which they need to fight Russia.

I get the impression that this isn't quite true. NATO - and the US in particular - are giving Ukraine weapons that are very good compared to what they had, but it isn't true top of the line hardware. If we sent them our best anti-aircraft systems, Russia wouldn't have to be careful about flying over the country (as they are now)...they wouldn't be able to fly over it at all. There's also the issue of fighter aircraft. IIRC there was a plan to supply Ukraine's air force with NATO planes (again, not the latest F35, but more than a match for the Russians) but the plan was scuttled because Russia would - rightly - view it as crossing a red line.

Zelenskyy has complained about the west being "stingy" with equipment before, and he's not wrong. What's really helping is the combination of better weapons plus training (we helped to revamp their military starting in 2014), plus intel that the Russians can't effectively counter like satellite surveillance. All very helpful, but still short of full support.

Ukraine is playing the hand they've been given very well, but NATO has given them a supply of chips rather than face cards.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Without NATO support Ukraine would have fallen apart a long time ago.

Ukraine stopped Russia's march to Kiev well before the US opened the floodgates of arms.

They got the military intel immediately. That's super valuable. USA and NATO countries already had contingency plans for an eventual Russian attack. An attack all military strategists anywhere could see coming. They had advisors already in place in Ukraine from before the attack started. They had plenty of time to prepare for the Russian attack and used it well.

USA knew in advance exactly what Ukraine needed and made sure they had it ready to be shipped the second Russia attacked.

Sure, things would have looked different, but I'm not sure Ukraine was the pushover everyone thought it was going to be. Nobody was even discussing supplying meaningful amounts of arms until Ukraine showed they actually had a chance of winning - which suggest an innate ability at the very least.

Of course.

And that's not including the occupation element. The US didn't have problems in Iraq until Mission Accomplished occurred. Russia never even got to that stage when the wheels started falling off. And the pre-empt the "Russia would have just genocided Ukraine at the first hint of insurgency", argument - that would have accelerated aid in Ukraine. Too much of the world's grain flows through that nation for governments to be apathetic about it.

Also true.

No, there's no NATO boots on the ground. But Ukraine isn't a small country. They don't need NATO boots on the ground. What they need is equipment and strategic help. Which is what they're getting.

Agreed, but casually dismissing the Ukrainian military as just a cats paw for NATO is pretty inaccurate. It's kinda like saying WWII was just a proxy war between Germany and the US until Pearl Harbour because of Lend Lease. A gross oversimplification that glosses over so many key elements it's far more wrong than right.

Simply put, calling 38 brigades of armour and infantry and a further 9 brigades of artillery a "front army" is not an accurate description. I might have to do some more googling, but I'm pretty certain no other Western European military is even remotely as big.

Another simplification is to say that war is like rock, paper scissors. If your enemy has specific weaponry that negates your edge, that gives them a tremendous edge.

NATO is giving Ukraine the stuff they need to win. They're not giving Ukraine the stuff Ukraine does not need to win.

 

[Hermit]

The Ukraine war is IMHO at this point a proxy war between Russia and USA.

Yes. The US aided the Mujahideen in Afghanistan to the tune of a few billion dollars for the exact same reason. It was not in the least concerned about the welfare of an oppressed population by a foreign power, let alone the cause of Islamic theocracy, which the Mujahideen were fighting for.

It's called Realpolitik.

 

[Jayjay]

I like how Putin gets upset when a bridge is attacked, (a legitimate military target) calls the attackers terrorists (blowing up a bridge during war is NOT an act of terrorism) and responds by shooting a bunch of rockets into civilian areas, which is an act of terrorism. Putin is completely shameless. This guy has to go.

And if those launches are originating in Russia they are legitimate targets and the Ukrainians ought to target them.

I think that's a terrible idea. The last thing we want is NATO attacks (yes, the Ukrainian army is at this point a front for NATO) inside (what the average Russian perceives as) attacks on Russia. We want Russians to keep thinking Putin is the bad guy. We don't want Putin to be able to rally his people in defense of the motherland. It doesn't matter how dirty Putin fights. Ukraine has got to keep it clean.

The moment Russian public opinion swings to support for the war, then Ukraine will truly be fucked. And most of Europe = WW3

Russian public opinion has been in support of the war from day one. And it hasn't much changed even when Ukraine has hit targets in Crimea, Belogorod or Kursk. I'm more concerned about the public opinion of Ukraine's supporters in the west.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Russian public opinion has been in support of the war from day one. And it hasn't much changed even when Ukraine has hit targets in Crimea, Belogorod or Kursk. I'm more concerned about the public opinion of Ukraine's supporters in the west.

Agreed. Which means Ukraine ought to go after military targets across the border. Public opinion within Russia is not what you'd have if it were a free society so there isn't much can be done about that. So Ukraine ought to be free to attack military targets which are supporting their enemy.

 

[Jayjay]

Russian public opinion has been in support of the war from day one. And it hasn't much changed even when Ukraine has hit targets in Crimea, Belogorod or Kursk. I'm more concerned about the public opinion of Ukraine's supporters in the west.

Agreed. Which means Ukraine ought to go after military targets across the border.

Ukraine has already been doing that. But it's a slippery slope. Civilians were killed in Belgorod when a Russian SAM shot down an Ukrainian Tochka targeted towards military base, and it fell into the city. Accidents always happen. If Ukraine started destroying railway stations and bridges across the border, civilians would be bound to become collateral damage at some point, and that's why Ukraine needs to continue to choose its targets carefully.

There's also the issue of capability. Ukraine can't use HIMARS for attacks in Russian territory, for example, because it has promised USA that it won't. It will also not be able to get satellite targeting data or other NATO intel from Russian side of the border.

Public opinion within Russia is not what you'd have if it were a free society so there isn't much can be done about that. So Ukraine ought to be free to attack military targets which are supporting their enemy.

I interpreted the issue to be about civilian or dual use infrastructure like power plants. Russia has no qualms striking such targets in Ukraine, but Ukraine needs to show restraint or it will risk losing its funding.

 

[DrZoidberg]

...

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Engineering wise, I think the solution to solving what happened is located in the circled portion because it implies a certain type of impact on the structure.

 

[Copernicus]

Russian public opinion has been in support of the war from day one. And it hasn't much changed even when Ukraine has hit targets in Crimea, Belogorod or Kursk. I'm more concerned about the public opinion of Ukraine's supporters in the west.

That's really something that is impossible to say. How does one measure public opinion in a dictatorship that suppresses all forms of public protest? From day one, there were demonstrations in urban areas that were swiftly brought under control by mass arrests. In Russia, people have returned to the old practice in Soviet times of being cautious about expressing opposition of the regime, especially to strangers. So polls are not necessarily going to reflect popular attitudes. Now we have a mass exodus of thousands of young men trying to avoid being drafted into the war. Once they get out of the country, they are still reluctant to speak with reporters, but those who do express no support for the war. I think that most Russians are confused about why Putin decided to invade Ukraine in February, and they don't see the war as clearly justifiable. They don't want to sacrifice their children to attack another country. If Russia had been attacked and invaded, then I think that public opinion would be clearly in favor of the war. Right now, they realize that the government has been covering up the true situation in Ukraine. Putin has gone from being a "benevolent tsar" to a "malevolent tsar" in the minds of many, especially now that they realize their military is being decimated in Ukraine.

 

[steve_bank]

There were polls done a ways back by wester media that showed popular support for the war. But then it was not called a war, a special operation.

Recent street interviews shows there is still support. Who knows how much.

Trump's grass rots supporters have not changed much. Russian nationalists are not going to give up. Putin has pushed Make Russia Great Agian for 20 yeear through a govt controlled media.

 

[Jayjay]

Engineering wise, I think the solution to solving what happened is located in the circled portion because it implies a certain type of impact on the structure.

View attachment 40665

I think when the bridge collapsed, it pulled the entire road section behind it a little bit, which dislodged it in the circled portion. Shitty engineering and corrupt subcontractors who did a shoddy job might also have something to do with it.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Engineering wise, I think the solution to solving what happened is located in the circled portion because it implies a certain type of impact on the structure.

View attachment 40665

I believe that was a separation at an expansion joint. Should be a steel finger type on bridge decking. So it moved or got pulled perhaps as much as 600mm or as little as 150mm if that's the type used.

Granor — Steel Finger Expansion Joints – Series “SFEJ” https://granor.com.au/expansion-joints-large-movements/steel-finger-expansion-joints-series-sfej/

 

[Copernicus]

There were polls done a ways back by wester media that showed popular support for the war. But then it was not called a war, a special operation.

Recent street interviews shows there is still support. Who knows how much.

Trump's grass rots supporters have not changed much. Russian nationalists are not going to give up. Putin has pushed Make Russia Great Agian for 20 yeear through a govt controlled media.

I don't know of any polling organization that is allowed to operate freely in Russia other than the  Levada Center. They used to have a fairly decent reputation before Putin, but his regime seems to have brought it firmly under government control. They are going to say what Putin needs them to say about public opinion. Street interviews in front of cameras are not likely to be welcomed by ordinary people, and people will tend to say what they think will keep them safe. Western reporters cannot operate freely in Russia. There is a reason for that. Information available to the public is carefully managed in Russia. It isn't like the US, where polling organizations and street interviews do a better job of getting candid reactions.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Engineering wise, I think the solution to solving what happened is located in the circled portion because it implies a certain type of impact on the structure.

View attachment 40665

I think when the bridge collapsed, it pulled the entire road section behind it a little bit, which dislodged it in the circled portion. Shitty engineering and corrupt subcontractors who did a shoddy job might also have something to do with it.

I have been reading some other discussions--that might not be a shoddy job, but rather gaps allowed for thermal expansion. Big things like that have to have some play.

 

[lpetrich]

Following the war by searching for "Svatove" and "Kherson" in Twitter.

NOËL on Twitter: "The AFU continues their offensive in Kherson. Russia is struggling with supplies as they have been being targetted heavily. Battles are now fought in Kostromka, Borozenskhe, Mylove area.
There is also progress on the M14 road (Kyselivka-Chornobaivka). (pic link)" / Twitter

A week or two ago, Ukraine advanced some 10 - 30 kilometers southward at the NE end of Russia's Kherson occupation zone. I'm now seeing unconfirmed reports that Ukraine has advanced some 20 km further. It's still 90 km to Kherson, however.

Here's something that can help in stopping Russian missiles.

Bojan Pancevski on Twitter: "Game changer: ..." / Twitter

Game changer: Germany has delivered its cutting edge aerial defence system Iris-T SLM to Ukraine. The €140m system can protect an entire city the size of Kyiv from any aerial attack, including missiles, drones etc. Three more will be delivered soon

Earlier delivery was not possible: the system, which was originally purchased by Egypt, had to be manufactured first. Egypt agreed to give way to Ukraine. Germany itself doesn’t have these systems - because they are too expensive

Ukraine hat deutsches Luftabwehrsystem erhalten IRIS-T - DER SPIEGEL

Übergabe nahe der polnisch-ukrainischen Grenze:

Ukraine hat deutsches Luftabwehrsystem erhalten

Seit Monaten stellt die Bundesregierung der Ukraine ein modernes Luftverteidigungssystem in Aussicht. Jetzt wurde die deutsche Flugabwehrwaffe Iris-T nach SPIEGEL-Informationen an das ukrainische Militär übergeben.

Google Translate:

Handover near the Polish-Ukrainian border:

Ukraine received German air defense system

For months, the federal government has been promising Ukraine a modern air defense system. According to SPIEGEL information, the German Iris-T anti-aircraft weapon has now been handed over to the Ukrainian military.

 

[ZiprHead]

I don't think that's going to buff out.

 

[Jayjay]

I don't think that's going to buff out.

It's still not very hard to repair, once they remove the remaining fuel cart. Just lay in some new rails. Unless there is some invisible damage to the bridge support underneath.

The road bridge though is going to be limited to one lane and light traffic for a while.

 

[bilby]

Engineering wise, I think the solution to solving what happened is located in the circled portion because it implies a certain type of impact on the structure.

View attachment 40665

To my completely unqualified eye, it looks like the result of an explosion on the pile cap (rather than on the water) that has lifted the roadway off the pier cap bearers.

That lifting motion has pulled the roadway sections towards the targeted pier, with the section on the right having sheared off at the expansion joint on the next pier along, while that on the right has pulled three pier spans before finding the next expansion joint in the roadway.

The impact of falling back onto the piers has then snapped the roadway roughly halfway between the target pier and the next pier to the left (and, of course, at the piers themselves).

It's possible that the explosive was on a boat very close to the target pier, or was affixed to the pile cap; But just from looking at various pictures of the damage, my bet would be on a bomb or missile coming in from the opposite side of the bridge from the parallel rail bridge.

A boat or fixed mine would, in my not at all humble opinion, have been placed or targeted at the rail bridge side of the road bridge structure to maximise damage to both. A missile or guided munition coming from the North (Azov Sea) side would seem a more likely explanation for the damage we are seeing. Or a boat bomb that was detonated prematurely before it got all the way under the road bridge.

Without a view showing cratering (or its absence) on the pile cap, it's not certain either way. Unfortunately the collapsed roadway conceals that detail.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Engineering wise, I think the solution to solving what happened is located in the circled portion because it implies a certain type of impact on the structure.

View attachment 40665

To my completely unqualified eye, it looks like the result of an explosion on the pile cap (rather than on the water) that has lifted the roadway off the pier cap bearers.

That lifting motion has pulled the roadway sections towards the targeted pier, with the section on the right having sheared off at the expansion joint on the next pier along, while that on the right has pulled three pier spans before finding the next expansion joint in the roadway.

The impact of falling back onto the piers has then snapped the roadway roughly halfway between the target pier and the next pier to the left (and, of course, at the piers themselves).

It's possible that the explosive was on a boat very close to the target pier, or was affixed to the pile cap; But just from looking at various pictures of the damage, my bet would be on a bomb or missile coming in from the opposite side of the bridge from the parallel rail bridge.

A boat or fixed mine would, in my not at all humble opinion, have been placed or targeted at the rail bridge side of the road bridge structure to maximise damage to both. A missile or guided munition coming from the North (Azov Sea) side would seem a more likely explanation for the damage we are seeing. Or a boat bomb that was detonated prematurely before it got all the way under the road bridge.

Without a view showing cratering (or its absence) on the pile cap, it's not certain either way. Unfortunately the collapsed roadway conceals that detail.

Watch the water in the video. Note that it doesn't react appreciably. Look at the picture here: https://news.yahoo.com/us-battleships-fired-guns-last-163655963.html

Note that the boom is well above the waterline and not pointed towards the water but see what happens anyway. From this I conclude the boom was above something solid and from the video and the damage pattern that something is the road. I believe all the rail damage is simply fire from the train eating shrapnel.

How the boom got to that point I do not know but that truck looks like a likely suspect.

 

[bilby]

Engineering wise, I think the solution to solving what happened is located in the circled portion because it implies a certain type of impact on the structure.

View attachment 40665

To my completely unqualified eye, it looks like the result of an explosion on the pile cap (rather than on the water) that has lifted the roadway off the pier cap bearers.

That lifting motion has pulled the roadway sections towards the targeted pier, with the section on the right having sheared off at the expansion joint on the next pier along, while that on the right has pulled three pier spans before finding the next expansion joint in the roadway.

The impact of falling back onto the piers has then snapped the roadway roughly halfway between the target pier and the next pier to the left (and, of course, at the piers themselves).

It's possible that the explosive was on a boat very close to the target pier, or was affixed to the pile cap; But just from looking at various pictures of the damage, my bet would be on a bomb or missile coming in from the opposite side of the bridge from the parallel rail bridge.

A boat or fixed mine would, in my not at all humble opinion, have been placed or targeted at the rail bridge side of the road bridge structure to maximise damage to both. A missile or guided munition coming from the North (Azov Sea) side would seem a more likely explanation for the damage we are seeing. Or a boat bomb that was detonated prematurely before it got all the way under the road bridge.

Without a view showing cratering (or its absence) on the pile cap, it's not certain either way. Unfortunately the collapsed roadway conceals that detail.

Watch the water in the video. Note that it doesn't react appreciably. Look at the picture here: https://news.yahoo.com/us-battleships-fired-guns-last-163655963.html

Note that the boom is well above the waterline and not pointed towards the water but see what happens anyway. From this I conclude the boom was above something solid and from the video and the damage pattern that something is the road. I believe all the rail damage is simply fire from the train eating shrapnel.

How the boom got to that point I do not know but that truck looks like a likely suspect.

A bomb sitting or landing on the solid concrete pile cap wouldn't appreciably affect the water either. And a bomb on the bridge deck doesn't explain the apparent lifting damage to the roadway - it would have just blown a hole straight through the deck, without pulling the sections inwards, and there would be only one downward pointing break, not two.