Ukraine Invasion: Part 32

[MagicFox]

Gosh, that last one filled up quick! Welcome to 32, all 🇺🇦

Someone said up thread that if he had the backing of his gwnerals for a nuclear strike then he isn't in position at the moment where he needs to use them.

Sorry, nothing personal, but I have to be honest and say my eyebrows raise when I see claims like that...here's why and I apologise beforehand because I know the following won't help some anxiety levels.

There are some correspondents/analysts in the western media who like to claim "Putin can't do X without the agreement of Y"..., or similar, and then try to impress the readership with supposed detail of how the Russian version of nuclear release works, the workings of Cheget (the Russian version of the US nuclear football) etc. I'm not convinced at the accuracy of a lot of that comment.

Reason being if you look at the western parallels you'll find anybody who had any connection with what I'll call the nuclear line of work (and over the years I had a few colleague who have) keep absolutely and very impressively buttoned up about pretty much any aspect of that day job, even years or even decades after they have ceased to be active in the role.

Yes you do see snippets in the MSM about some aspects of the western systems, so we know about the US Presidents "football", we know about the UK Trident Commanders Letters of last resort, but we do not see the full details. We don't know all the workings.

The reality is if anybody in the west knows every exact detail of how the Russian release would work, both practically, politically and the various options and permissions that might be needed they won't be writing about it or blabbing on open sources....so treat anything on the subject you read or see with caution (yes, including this post).

Personally IMHO our best line of thought ATM is that the Russians, up to and including Putin, have been made fully aware of what NATO/US will do with conventional ordnance to Russian armed forces if a single strike is ordered, and believe what they have been told.

All they need to do is re-register if they get banned or laughed at too hard. I used to admin forums and saw it. Different name, provably (for an admin) same person, same way of presenting themselves,

But surely we don't need to know the exact details. It is, however, reasonable to assume that there is a procedure which involves multiple people. And as long as multiple people are involved, there are opportunities for disobeying Putin's mad orders.

Mb76 · Today 07:00

^ScrollingLeaves · Yesterday 23:29
Re:the false referendum. Look how Ukraine voted 1991 in regard to leaving the Soviet Union. Even Crimea voted to be independent with a bigger majority than got us Brexit or than would put a party in power here.^

^twitter.com/carlbildt/status/1576472432445095938?s=20&t=FIpSBsbxWBbaJE5ItkP0Cw

And what a joyous day it was! I remember it well, even though I was only 15

I also remember being strangely relieved that now I would not have to apply for the USSR passport at 16 (this was a legal requirement) but instead I my first passport would be a Ukrainian one

It is special that you are on this thread Mb76, able to remember and hi e witness these real events that we can only read about.

We may not know the procedure but I can almost garuntee its more than Putin just pressing a big red button from his sad looking fax machine thing everytime he wants to shoot a nuke out.

I see that I spoke too soon.

The ‘peace’ talk / anti war brigade Russian shills whether consciously or not may well have their legitimate concerns, don’t we all, but what Russia has done and is doing cannot be accepted. Appeasement has never worked with despots.

MagicFox · Today 07:05
Just going to move on from what's happened overnight except to say nobody on this thread supports or wants this war. We are horrified by it and we are supporting each other to understand it by collating information and trying to analyse/discount disinformation by sharing it with each other.

To start the morning (and following on from discussion yesterday) here's a thread on nuclear signalling worth reading. I'll copy as it can't be unrolled

Thank you for your wise words to start the day.

Thank you too for the guidance from the Lookout about what would be routine manoeuvres and what might be more worrying re nuclear threats from Russia.
That is certainly helpful.

. It is, however, reasonable to assume that there is a procedure which involves multiple people.

I don't we can assume much anything on this particular topic TBH.

Fundamentally I'm simply cautioning many of the assumptions that have made it into the MSM, including the popular one that a single "reasonable" very senior officer can put a stop to Putin.... that may be the case, OTOH it may not be..problem some sources are trying to claim that is the case

I think this partly stems from there being a precedent for a single, sensible, individual breaking the chain of command and preventing a nuclear strike. It has happened more than once in the past and therefore its a reasonable assumption that it could happen again in the future.

.

Ukraine are pushing hard into these new Russian areas .. but what then for Putin?

Its a very risky strategy to rely on someone way down the chain of command not to carry out out an order.

I think the only thing that we can do is to make it clear to the Russians any nuclear use will result in a full nuclear war, which it is rumoured the USA has done? .... if we have a policy where he can use a low yield weapon, what then? use two? use 20 ?

I think we are at a crucial turning point in the war, one that could go either way.

@Alexandra2001

But has the US promised nuclear retaliation against Russia in the event of any nuclear strike on Ukranian soil? I think we need to remember democratic government's first duty is the security and preservation of life of its people and the risk of nuclear war between superpowers presents massive risks to the peoples of both Russia and the US.

I think there is a thorny problem about the response of NATO to a low yield device used in an unpopulated area or against a troop position which could be argued is just a small escalation in terms of life loss in a continuing brutal war.

The Ukranian government may then have to consider whether further nuclear strikes were likely to occur and adjust tactics accordingly as well as reassuring their people. I think Ukraine would be hawkish about the need for a devastating NATO response as they could see continued nuclear attack as an existential threat. NATO itself though possibly have responses in place that won't bring Russia and NATO directly into conflict (for above reasons) which may include a relaxation of the type and frequency of weapon supply to Ukraine, extreme economic sanction, cyber warfare and other unknown but effective measures.

I think the West has to have a sober judgment on this and currently our leaders have been non impulsive but absolutely resolved. I am actually hopeful for a non nuclear end to this conflict but I think there are choppy waters ahead.

@Alexandra2001 a nuclear response would be an extremely bad idea. As distasteful as it is, a TNW used in Ukraine is still ‘containable’ with a hefty conventional reply.

@Greenshake

a conventional response may be appropriate but by whom? Is this going to be a NATO led operation and how do you calibrate the response to prevent global escaltion?

I think it is apparent that NATO conventional forces are far superior to Russian forces and are perfectly capable of a 'shock and awe' destruction of Russian forces/equipment but in way does this mean Russia has only WMD to rely on?

Both Russian and US statements are sombre and there is a feel that threats are being taken seriously but for obvious reasons the subject is not talked about in depth. Russia has aid it will take an objective view of nuclear weapons use (not ruling it out or in). There are going to be nuclear weapons exercises held near the Ukranian border by Russia in a significant test of Western constraint and I personally feel it is a time of vigilance if not concern.

I feel our leaders are making us gradually more aware we could see nuclear weapons use in our lifetimes but this is certainly not a time to panic or act impulsively. It is a time for utter resolve and an enduring commitment to Ukranian sovereignty independent of time frame of weapons used.

Reminds me of that old soviet joke:

Bloke goes into a newsagent, buys a paper, looks at the front page and throws it in the bin.

Next day he does the same, buys a paper, looks at the front page and throws it in the bin.

Third day when he does it the newsagen asks him what he's doing. 'Looking for an obituary' says the man. 'But the obituaries aren't on the front page' says the newsagent. 'The one I'm waiting for will be' says the man.

@mids2019 its going to to be a US/West/NATO reply, or any combination of them. Thankfully the calibration of response is being discussed by experienced, qualified and sensible people. I totally agree that it is time to hold firm and show resolve. There is also the question of China to add to the mix.

I think China have been very quiet about the annexations. Only country to recognise Russia’s claim is North Korea.

No surprise that good ole Kim has got in on the act. The real question will be China’s reaction to serious nuclear preparation, or God forbid, launch.

It's concerning that NK has sent a rocket over Japan

www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-63126534

It’s concerning but unsurprising, they do that sort of thing from time to time.

Illia Ponomarenko AT IAPonomarenko
Good lord, Russian front is apparently collapsing in the south.
I just can’t keep up with reports on newly-liberated towns coming every other hour.

Sounds like the Ukr offensive continues apace:

twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1577211443845685248?s=12

Rob Lee AT RALee85
A Russian channel gives 3 reasons why Russian forces are retreating in Kherson:
1) A lack of rotation/exhaustion (he mentions the 126th Coastal Defense Brigade)
2) Because of a lack of infantry, Russian forces stay in strongpoints in towns. Ukrainian forces push between them.
He says Ukraine conducted reconnaissance and found the weak spots in the lines and that Russia didn't have the mobile reserves to plug the holes. He also says that the weather prevented air support and neither side used artillery particularly heavily.
3) He says Ukrainian units painted "V" and "Z" markers on their vehicles which confused Russian forces. He suggests this means Ukraine has a C2/tracking system in all of their vehicles.

Shashank Joshi AT shashj
Western official comments on the war on October 4th, covering nuclear indicators & warnings, Russian mobilisation potential and battlefield changes in Luhansk and Kherson.

Western official on nuclear indicators: "We have not seen any indicators or activities that we would think are out of ... the norm". Repeats: "no indicators of further concerning movements of Russian equip, or units that might give rise to a higher concern [of] nuclear readiness"

Western official: "this week...we are seeing a Ukrainian military who are well and truly inside the OODA loop of Russia at the operational level...Ukr commanders in south & east are creating problems for Russian chain of command faster than the Russians can effectively respond"

Western official says that in Kharkiv "troops there received an order to cede the territory". But in Lyman, "we think that Russian troops retreated despite orders to defend and remain". Also "suffer[ed] high casualties from artillery fire as they attempted to leave the town."

Western official: "we think it unlikely the Russian leadership would sanction a full pullout from Kherson for political reasons. So this situation in the south could become increasingly messy with potentially a more desperate Russian force with their backs to the river Dnipro"

Western official cautious about Ukraine pace of progress in Kherson: Ukrainian forces "potentially at risk from Russian forces in the area, but also the potential for artillery fire onto their positions". So "this won't be ... an easy rush through unconstrained territory".

Western official: "operationally, the picture is complex and dynamic. And I think we can trace the general pattern—that is Ukraine dictating the operational tempo at the moment ... the real challenge is trying to determine the implications at the strategic level."

Western official: Russian "aspiration will be to do more than simply defend lines. But "we are not seeing a change in our confidence that this will be a huge challenge for the Russians to mobilise, to equip & then to have forces that actually could go further on the offensive."

Western official points to importance of warm weather, clothing and logistics. "Currently...you've seen videos of Russian recruits in fields lighting fires in fields at minus five degrees at night—that is not going to be a situation where you have high morale over the winter."

Onwards in Kherson oblast. Good gains in the last few days. It's a different landscape to Donbas and is probably hard to hold once a collapse sets in (should be near flat steppe, arable farming with big fields outside the settlements, some mini-ravines, not much in the way of settlements overall and hardly any dispersed building inbetween). We'll soon get to a state where some third of the land gained by Russian forces north of the Dnipro has been retaken.

Am off (mostly) visiting relatives on the Spanish side of the family. I'll post anything that catches my eye that has a different perspective.