Poo tin... Put@in...

MattFalle

rick_chasey said:

So according to the interviews with some war studies guy on the Rachman Review, mobilisation takes roughly 9 months at the fastest to feed through, and even then the troops are hardly A grade.

standard phase 0 - 3 flash to bang training period across the board if there are no injuries or back squadding

no one is churning out anything useful within 2 years post basic tbh. Specific cap badge/trade time period gets longer.

MattFalle

Putin's just announce partial mobilisation.......

Pross

‘We have lots of weapons to reply with’ he forgot to add ‘if the Ukrainian farmers give them back to us’.

First.Aspect

This is the start of a wider war, because "defending the motherland" will include the bits of Uktraine that will vote to be Russian because they've already voted and don't know it, and in turn this will allow nuclear weapons and chemical weapons to be deployed if Ukraine tries to liberate them.

China will chose a side, eventually, based on territorial integrity of Russia, because as we know China respects the democratic right to self determination in places like the Donbas, Taiwan and Hong Kong.

As soon as Russia uses chemical or nuclear, the US will step in, I believe. And we will be pulled in as well. Germany, and possibly France, will contrive to get all mealy mouthed by then and support Uktraine with some Christmas cards and advice on rebuilding from the Huffhaus people.

MF, if gets cold over there so pack your long johns.

pblakeney

First.Aspect said:

This is the start of a wider war, because "defending the motherland" will include the bits of Uktraine that will vote to be Russian, and in turn allow nuclear weapons to be deployed if Ukraine tries to liberate them.

China will chose a side, eventually, based on territorial integrity of Russia, because as we know China respects the democratic right to self determination. As soon as Russia uses chemical or nuclear, the US will step in, I believe. And we will be pulled in as well.

MF, if gets cold over there so pack your long johns.

Also, Russia is "temporarily" cutting the gas supply to China.
That may be one for the energy thread though.

Pross

Not sure China would side with Russia if push came to shove. They were already distancing themselves a bit last week. They obviously like the cheap gas they can get their hands on but the West is where they make the bulk of their money.

First.Aspect

China is trying to create a self contained financial and energy alternative to the West. Perhaps Putin has moved rather too soon. Who knows. What I do know is that today the war just got years longer and the likelihood of weapons of mass destruction being used just went up hugely.

thegreatdivide

They'll never get near the 300k reserves he's banging on about. They don't exist. And what exactly is he going to purchase with this massive spend on weapons - China isn't giving them the semi conductors they need for anything modern. Maybe they'll start mass producing T-34s again?

pblakeney

Is the parade going to be a bit shorter in May?

briantrumpet

thegreatdivide said:

They'll never get near the 300k reserves he's banging on about. They don't exist. And what exactly is he going to purchase with this massive spend on weapons - China isn't giving them the semi conductors they need for anything modern. Maybe they'll start mass producing T-34s again?

That was my reaction... he's just saying scary-sounding stuff, as he's got little left. Sabre-rattling is tricky when you've run out of sabres and all the swordsmiths have run out of metal.

thegreatdivide

Also, handing a load of guns to people not very happy at being called up isn't the best political move. I would suspect the vast majority wont be too chuffed at being called up after decades away from the army.

rick_chasey

If we assume the Putin gov't is rational and there are rational actors in the "nuke 'em" process (even if Putin isn't), I can't really see it happening as i can't see how a nuke changes anything in Russia's favour.

First.Aspect

rick_chasey said:

If we assume the Putin gov't is rational and there are rational actors in the "nuke 'em" process (even if Putin isn't), I can't really see it happening as i can't see how a nuke changes anything in Russia's favour.

You don't get it. He will cut off his nose to spite his face. Being bad for Russia will factor less than being bad for everyone else.

Also, no one is mentioning chemical weapons. Used before, relatively easy to make, relatively easy to deploy.

First.Aspect

thegreatdivide said:

Also, handing a load of guns to people not very happy at being called up isn't the best political move. I would suspect the vast majority wont be too chuffed at being called up after decades away from the army.

What does political popularity to him in Russia matter to him?

sungod

the saudis, uae etc. are still buying cheap russian oil so that they can sell their own to us at higher prices, also investing heavily in russia to help fund putin's war

good to see all the arms industry's bribes and the pandering by the royals and trump etc. have paid off

should've worked harder to liberalise iran as a counterweight years ago

rick_chasey

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

If we assume the Putin gov't is rational and there are rational actors in the "nuke 'em" process (even if Putin isn't), I can't really see it happening as i can't see how a nuke changes anything in Russia's favour.

You don't get it. He will cut off his nose to spite his face. Being bad for Russia will factor less than being bad for everyone else.

Also, no one is mentioning chemical weapons. Used before, relatively easy to make, relatively easy to deploy.

I get that. I remember reading something, can't remember what, that was discusssing the nuke process in Russia. It's not as centralised as in the US.

If Putin says "nuke 'em" I don't even think it's certain they will follow the order - he might equally be deposed. Obviously don't really want the theory to be tested out.

davidof

briantrumpet said:

thegreatdivide said:

Ivan is an expert in building things on the cheap.

I can't remember if it was a theory at the time that they knew Ivan would be spying on Concord, so they fed in some dodgy figures... though it's more likely that Ivan screwed up the engineering all by himself.

Probably didn't realize the data was imperial not metric

davidof

rick_chasey said:

So according to the interviews with some war studies guy on the Rachman Review, mobilisation takes roughly 9 months at the fastest to feed through, and even then the troops are hardly A grade.

The more people the Soviets put in the field, the less gear to go around. They couldn't do the logistics for their current force, let alone 300K drunk Ivans demanding Vodka on tap.

shirley_basso

And, as the saying goes, winter is coming.

Pross

Calling up the masses under an authoritarian regime might work defensively as in 1942 but it's a different thing to send them on the offensive. Of course, Putin is arguing this is a defensive measure which I guess it is in a way as he is frantically trying to hold onto what's left of the land taken in the initial invasion and avoid losing the bits he previously held pretty much uncontested. It's going to be hard for him to claim a win at home if less of the Ukraine is under Russian control at the end than it was at the beginning.

surrey_commuter

First.Aspect said:

China will chose a side, eventually, based on territorial integrity of Russia, because as we know China respects the democratic right to self determination in places like the Donbas, Taiwan and Hong Kong.

I know this is beside the point but the analysis of China needs more critical thought as that will help understand their thought processes and likely actions.

Under our rule HK had no democratic right to self-determination.

Compared to the times they have been invaded and terrible things done to the population their "war mongering" is relatively low rent.

They are surrounded by enemy forces and the likes of the UK steam warships down their coast to send them a message. When did you see a Chinese warship in the English Channel?

They have a far better claim to Taiwan than we do to most of our overseas posessions.

Only the US has a navy capable of projecting overseas power.

My own hunch is that the threat from China is economic and not military.

MattFalle

They're quoting 300,000 with "a military backgtound"

break it down:

That's a minimum of 900,000 basic sets of kit (boots, shirts
trousers, pants, t shirts, gloves, etc) 600,000 personal weapons, then add on specific to trade personal kit, vehicles, rations travel, accomodation, training mmunition, fuel logistics.....

its blimmin' massive and not something they will have kicking around. To put into perspective, the British Army hasn't got enough kit to supply its incoming recruit stream which is well below required numbers anyway, let alone supply existing troops.

Then, we're not talking 300,000 combat front line troops ready to rock n roll and go for a scrap. We're talking a big mix of infanteers, engineers,mechanics, cooks, pan bashers, knockers, medics, loggies, admin bods.... most of whom won't actually want to be there otherwise they would still be in not living normal lives with their families so not exactly motivated.

Then some of these will be on a biff chit, so can't fight. All of them will need training and intergrating into their new units.

Then they have to pay them all and their employers have to cover their absence which will start to affect the economy as a whole.

Then when they start not coming home/coming home with bits missing you'll start to get more public feeling turning against the war, a la US in 'Nam.

Its not just as simple as getting a letter through the door and off ya go fella.

emanresu

First.Aspect said:

This is the start of a wider war, because "defending the motherland" will include the bits of Uktraine that will vote to be Russian because they've already voted and don't know it, and in turn this will allow nuclear weapons and chemical weapons to be deployed if Ukraine tries to liberate them.

Remember Russia threatening "doomsday" if the Ukraine attacked Crimea? I do and I also remember what happened when Ukraine attacked Crimea.

If Putin uses tactical nuclear weapons or chemical weapons in Ukraine it will not force the Ukraine to surrender, Nato might get involved and he'll lose the 'support' of China and India, it's a losing hand and he knows it.

He's just sabre rattling and he sabre rattles to scare his own country in order to get get public opinion behind him.

thegreatdivide

^ spot on

First.Aspect

Everyone is focussing on tactical nuclear, and doing three blind monkeys on chemical and "dirty" warfare via the nuclear power stations.

briantrumpet

davidof said:

briantrumpet said:

thegreatdivide said:

Ivan is an expert in building things on the cheap.

I can't remember if it was a theory at the time that they knew Ivan would be spying on Concord, so they fed in some dodgy figures... though it's more likely that Ivan screwed up the engineering all by himself.

Probably didn't realize the data was imperial not metric

Haha, I'm not sure if it was just a rumour, or I'm misremembering, but I thought that the UK part of the team did the real Concorde in imperial, and the French in metric.

imposter2.0

briantrumpet said:

Haha, I'm not sure if it was just a rumour, or I'm misremembering, but I thought that the UK part of the team did the real Concorde in imperial, and the French in metric.

Taken from the Concorde history site:

One technical question frequently asked is: What happens about the two standards of measurements in France and Britain? The simple solution to this problem was to allow both sides to work in the scales to which they are accustomed. A common system of numbering engineering drawings was established before manufacture of the prototype aircraft began. French drawings were dimensioned in metric measurements, and British drawings in feet and inches. At interface points in the structure, the relevant drawings were dimensioned in both scales.

MattFalle

it was NASA who jeffed up with measurements, no?

briantrumpet

imposter2.0 said:

briantrumpet said:

Haha, I'm not sure if it was just a rumour, or I'm misremembering, but I thought that the UK part of the team did the real Concorde in imperial, and the French in metric.

Taken from the Concorde history site:

One technical question frequently asked is: What happens about the two standards of measurements in France and Britain? The simple solution to this problem was to allow both sides to work in the scales to which they are accustomed. A common system of numbering engineering drawings was established before manufacture of the prototype aircraft began. French drawings were dimensioned in metric measurements, and British drawings in feet and inches. At interface points in the structure, the relevant drawings were dimensioned in both scales.

Haha, thanks.

sungod

MattFalle said:

it was NASA who jeffed up with measurements, no?

yes, nasa and a subcontractor used different ones on a mars orbiter

british 'imperial' measures are derived from metric, an inch is legally 25.4mm, been that way a long long time, using imperial measures just adds complexity and opportunity for error

there's still a lingering issue in the usa, the foot they use for geodetic survey is not quite the same as the foot defined by 12*25.4mm used for everything else, one day they'll fix it