Ukraine is firing thousands of artillery shells each day in its battle to defend the Donbas city of Bakhmut, a pace that US and European officials don’t think is sustainable, The New York Times reported Thursday.
Two unnamed US officials told the Times that the Pentagon has raised the issue of Ukraine’s ammunition use in Bakhmut after a few days of non-stop firing. Ukraine’s war effort is entirely reliant on support from the US, as the Pentagon has shipped millions of artillery shells to the country.
The report is the latest example of Ukraine’s Western backers expressing doubt about Kyiv’s war strategy. The US wants Ukraine to launch a spring counteroffensive, but Western officials think those plans could be jeopardized by the amount of resources Ukraine is using in Bakhmut.
The US and Britain are preparing to ship thousands more artillery rounds and rockets to Ukraine to shore up its supplies for a counteroffensive. A senior Pentagon official described these shipments to the Times as a “last ditch effort” because Ukraine’s Western backers don’t have enough to keep up with Ukraine’s pace.
The US and its NATO allies were not prepared to support such an intense artillery war. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has acknowledged that Ukraine is using munitions at a much faster rate than the entire 30-member alliance can produce. The Western powers have big plans to ramp up the production of artillery rounds, but it will take months before any significant progress is made.
Ukrainian troops fighting in Bakhmut have told the media that they are already fighting with severe ammunition shortages. Ukraine is also losing a lot of people as fresh recruits are being sent into Bakhmut, which has become known as the “meat grinder,” with very little training.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and his top officials have decided to keep defending Bakhmut despite the dire situation for the soldiers on the ground. They say the Russians are also taking heavy casualties, which makes the city worth defending.
God forbid they all sit around and come to a compromise/détente and stop killing each other.
In other news:
$$$$$$$$$$$
The killing will got on until Ukraine is broken. They should be proud of their tenacity, but not their stupidity and hubris in attacking the best armed country on the planet with the support of the state that could not handle the Taliban!!!!!!! Because they did not fulfill their obligations of Minsk, no one should trust anything they promise. They will be sorry for their duplicity for decades and most likely Ukraine will never be able to threaten Russia EVER again. I think they should consider themselves lucky IF they don’t get nuked. before this war ends.
Ukrainian people are fooled, manipulated, brainwashed and abused. There are nothing to be proud of. Step by step they were skillfully placed in this groove and they have no will to get out.
It seems to that there are many similar factors between Ukraine and the citizens of the US, They are both ignorant and greedy and abused
We are the United States of Amnesia. We encourage other nations to follow our lead.
All people are brainwashable but I don’t think such a trick could be possible in US. Neocons have no carrot for luring American people into such a slaughterhouse.
Ukrainians were corralled into this plight because they wanted to join EU and thus improve their economic situation. The entrance to EU is controlled by Americans. No East European country could join EU without joining NATO and accepting Russo-phobic indoctrination as a part of the bargain. Majority of Ukrainians wouldn’t accept this deal. That’s why the coup was necessary. The resistance to the coup wasn’t so active because the idea to join EU was very much attractive to majority of Ukrainians. They were made to believe that it could happen in near future. Thus their will to resist the installation of the fascist regime was paralysed. Then little by little, step by step, the opposition was destroyed and the regime installed. Between 2014 and 2022 a lot of money were invested in this project.
I never saI’d they are something to be proud of. I said “They should be proud of their tenacity, but not their stupidity and hubris in attacking the best armed country on the planet with the support of the state that could not handle the Taliban!!!!!!!”
Ukrainians are good soldiers. I do agree with that.
Que Sera Sera. whatever will be .
will be. I’m anal, I had to finish that line for you.
Anyone for some Ethel Merman?
Loved Doris Day.
Cha-ching!
“Ukraine’s war effort is entirely reliant on support from the US” – Kiev neo-Nazi regime was created and installed by US and from the beginning it entirely reliant on US.
F**k Azov, F**k Zelensky, F**k Biden, Obama and the USA.
That’s how most people of Ukraine feel now.
“US Officials Think Ukraine’s Ammunition Use Is Unsustainable A
Pentagon official described upcoming ammunition shipments as a ‘last
ditch effort’ to help Ukraine since Western stockpiles are low”
Here is a dirty little secret boys and girls: Restocking the American weapons stockpile will cost over $300 Billion and takes years to accomplish.
Ukraine has already used 8 years of Javelin anti-tank missiles and these are not quickly replaced.
300 Billion that could have and should have been spent in the US for the benefit of everyone living in this country.
A stimulus check!
“Money, money money: MONEY!
Or it could have been used to pay down the $32 Trillion national debt.
I always enjoy your sense of humor MM!
Last month, Kim Yo-jong, the sister of Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un, said that war games would force Pyongyang to respond. So, Biden thought this was a good time to call for more live fire military exercises to simulate the invasion of North Korea.
I’m sure he’ll be completely surprised if North Korea gets actively involved in the resupply of 𝑅𝑢𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑎𝑛 ammunition stocks.
The US regime has already claimed that the North Korean regime IS actively involved in the resupply of Russian ammunition stocks.
So perhaps the logic is that if the North Korean regime perceives a real threat of war with the US regime, it will hold on to its ammunition stocks instead of selling them to the Russian regime.
As to whether North Korea is or is not selling ammo to Russia, who knows?
I’ve heard the rumors that NK is already supplying ammo. I suspect they are accurate. Your logic about holding on to their ammo is convincing.
But I assume that NK will produce new ammunition rather to replace anything they send to Russia.
https://thediplomat.com/2022/12/is-north-korea-producing-munitions-for-export-to-russia/
Also, Kim has warned that he will use nuclear weapons if his existence is threatened.
I think that NK would value the loyalty of Russia more than WWII artillery ammo much if which is or may be past sell by date.
It is impossible that the US (or the collective west) can develop enough ammunition fast enough to fight an effective ground war?
“it will take months before any significant progress is made”
Ukraine is managing to slow Russian advances with a weapons disadvantage. It is remarkable what can be done with trenches and Kalashnikov’s
You left out dead Ukrainians. You need a lot of them too.
Russian army has no timetable. The goal is to destroy Ukraine/NATO’s capacity for the military resistance. Once Ukraine/NATO armies are destroyed, the territory will fall like a ripe fruit from the tree.
Read Clausewitz, On War, and you will find that any defending army has an abstract and theoretical advantage.
After they buried their grandparents, the young and stupid are in charge of this country now. If only they listened to grandpa instead of playing Nintendo.
Not fair! I think the people in charge of this country are in their 70’s and 80’s. But that will inevitably change in the next few years, and you might be right on target.
Why will that change in the next few years? Gad, we might have 82 vs. 78 in 2024. The first one to spell cat will be declared the winner.
Who is actually in charge? I believe Obama and his inner crew are running the White House. Who pulls their strings?
I think Obama is 1 up on in the pecking order on Biden but the people pulling Obama’s strings are at a much higher level than either Joe or Obama.
Somehow empty suit Obama became the ringleader.
Biden has clearly demonstrated that he is not in charge of anything.
Running out of ammo, quarter of a million bodies, still our “leaders” want to drag us this war. Start the peace talks already!
Too late for “peace talks.” The hole is too deep.
Now it is surrender to the fate decreed by their crimes, take the punishment.
War crimes trials might help too. At the very least, a Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
Well, the International Criminal Court just issued an arrest warrant for one Vladimir Putin, so perhaps you’ll get your wish.
That’s a start. Now for Blinken and Nuland.
…And the rest……………………………………..
That is the end of the ICC. Its a complete joke.
I wish the ICC had treated Bush and his successors in the same way, and for the same reason.
As for what the warrant is “the end” of, it’s the end of Putin’s ability to travel to 123 countries without getting arrested.
The US is not one of those countries for the same reason Russia isn’t. Lawless regimes don’t do law.
In truth he couldn’t travel to those 123 countries anyway.
Russia in all cases has respected international law. International law allows for the protection of people from ethnic cleansing and genocide.
The ICC/UN/OSCE/OPCW/HRC etc etc represents the Rules Based Order. Which is lawlessness.
In truth he couldn’t travel to those 123 countries anyway.
Russia in all cases has respected international law. International law allows for the protection of people from ethnic cleansing and genocide.
The ICC/UN/OSCE/OPCW/HRC etc etc represents the Rules Based Order. Which is lawlessness.
US abused too much the international organizations. That is one of the reasons why the old international order is collapsing.
How about one for Benjamin Nuttinyahoo?
That may be in the works, since the state of Palestine (a Rome Statute regime party) has asked for ICC investigations of war crimes in Palestine.
Thomas, they may ask, and their requests will fall on deaf ears. When has IsraHell ever been held accountable for anything, including the murder of an American journalist!
because the last war not ended by peace talks is when…? Wars end through peace talks, nothing else.
There is a difference between the peace talks and the unconditional surrender.
The several billions of dollars already spent to prevent a banking collapse may force Biden to worry more about our own affairs than his desire to encroach upon Russia and China.
Hopefully, even an aging brain damaged NeoLib can comprehend that his priorities must change.
I would not count on anything progessive like the financial health of the US being acted on by Joe Biden. He has supported enthusiastically every war we entered and lost
He does not have to lift a finger, sign a document. September, 2019, Fed chairman Powell rode to the rescue of big banks, due to their “liquidity problem”. No phone call for help. No meeting. The Open Market Window was flung open for the business of their bailout. Wall Street on Parade: https://wallstreetonparade.com/2022/07/internal-charts-show-treasury-agency-assigned-to-measure-risk-in-u-s-markets-slept-through-the-repo-crisis-of-2019-and-the-feds-19-87-trillion-bailout/
Keep hearing the refrain “Waste deep in the Big Muddy
And the Big Fool say to push on.”
Nothing’s changed.
Pete Seeger, I believe?
On the Smothers Brothers..
US/NATO supports democracy, freedom, and human rights as long as they produce more “meat grinders.” …Well. Sorry. That may not be true. They also support more starving, Napalm burning, and nuclear bombing of civilians. (Sarcasm alert)
Partisans of Ukraine see a source of more ammo. They want to raid the “war reserve” stocks of the US. The US holds back millions as its untouchable reserve for its own war. Neocons in DC see that as something they could give to Ukraine, to keep it going for many more months. Maybe long enough for new production, certainly long enough to avoid the impending near term disaster.
Of course, that leaves not just the US, but the whole Western world defenseless for the years it takes to replace that, all to serve Ukraine.
The same people in DC also want wars with China, Iran, and Korea. With what ammo? This shows their extreme irresponsibility.
Combants with nukes may not see cordite shells as particularly good when tactical nukes are orders of magnatude more effective.
I am not sure I understand your point.
Nukes are unuseable. They are not any kind of defense, except to deter other nukes. It is like poison gas in WW2.
Perhaps as Caliman says they know there is no threat. But as Donna said, they have behaved so badly they have created problems that could turn violent out of their control, as Ukraine has done.
I am antiwar, but not in favor of making my country defenseless and dependent on the kindness of all others. See Sweden and Switzerland for the method I prefer. Just not shooting all of them all the time in constant paranoid fits, as we have done.
Either their extreme irresponsibility OR reveals that they KNOW there’s simply no real threat from all the boogiemen (Russia, China, Iran N Korea, etc.) they’ve been scaring the american people with over the decades.
Well said. The problem is, after all the years of fear mongering, it seems most of those countries are really pissed at us…
“A senior Pentagon official described these shipments to the Times as a “last ditch effort” because Ukraine’s Western backers don’t have enough to keep up with Ukraine’s pace.”
I always wonder if these people think Russian’s can read. Or Ukrainians for that matter.
The MIC is getting slack?…
And this is undoubtedly the reason that Russia is going so slow in Ukraine. Why not just let NATO disarm itself?
A cheap and cost effective way to destroy military assets, They keep on cinsoling themselves that Russia is lising soldiers. Most soldiers hostorically are lost to artillery. As Russia is outgunning Ukraine approx 10:1, it is clear who is likely to lose more. Russia has in a classical Sun Tzu style leftone corridor to escape. The front can remain static as far as Russia is concerned, as Ukraine must ship in more people just to maintain the line.
NATO must be aware of Russian army of 400,000 sitting on Ukrainian. Eastern, Southern and Northern borders. This is the newly raised force, that has not been deployed yet. And there is no indication that Russia is running out of anything. While newly promised tanks and APC are no good without ammunition.
It is hard to believe anything in the fog of war,
One thing is sure. Ukraine is running out of soldiers. Zelenski and his mentors are reckless fanatics, quite sure that there is an endless supply of Ukrainians to throw at Russian artillery. People willing to fight are always the scarcest resource,
According to a BBC report that has been sited by Alexander Mercouris and others, which uses open source records including funeral and cemetery records, as of March 4th confirmed Russian KIAs total 16,000. Ukraine and US sources have already admitted that over 100,000 Ukrainian soldiers have been killed. From what I’ve heard on various outlets the true number of Ukrainian soldiers that have been killed is much higher. Colonel Douglass Macgregor said 157,000 had been killed several weeks ago. As Russia’s artillery strikes outnumber Ukraine’s by a 10 to 1 ratio, those higher number of Ukrainian soldiers killed makes sense.
You can tell by the desparate recruitment strategies Ukraine has been forced into. Catching teenagers in schools, old people on buses, It cannot be good. Just cannot.
What will be pount of tanks, if there is a shortage of munitions, and soldiers.
For NATO, how to keep presenting this defeat as a victory, Bakhmut may actually serve a purpose. The appearance of capability to defend, while hatching up another dramatic event like Kerch Bridge, Unfortunatelly, such events as satisfying in short tetm, mean nothing. Kerch Bridge is opersting again as normal, and Ukraine is depleting its military.
Since nobody is talking peace, where is escallation goingvto come from?
Chinese 12 point peace is to guarantee Ukrainian sovereignty but no mention ofvterritorial integrity, Thiscmay be the only way to go,
“Sovereignty?” “Territorial integrity”?
I want my land back. 🙂 https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/3e22971603dd82bdd88c5b67348129db30635e071342f247c5259af2effa1710.jpg
Donna,
Do you believe Ukraine has the right to defend itself and fight for their freedom and independence or should they surrender their land to Putin in the name of peace?
You again posting Kremlin propaganda. I thought it was Russia recruiting prisoners, women, elders, and unfit to fight people, but now, turns out, it is Ukraine the one recruiting all of the above, which leads me to my next question, if Ukraine has lost all of its army, why are they still holding your Russian army in the East?
Again, you are a f — ing dishonest human being campaigning on behalf of Putin.
You arecl showing your colors. You are unable to research and use your own head, But most importantly -/ you cannot engage in a civil discusdion, resorting to the worst kind of vulgarities. Do you know that you could lose your rights to publishbin any forum. Your opinion is no more important or valud than any other,
Incidentally, the problems of Ukrainian army are covered recently by NY Times.
I just share the opinion of many around the globe that believe zNATO has already lost. And unless it decides to do something reckless, there is precious little that can be done by and for Ukraine.
I wish you could learn what Bakhmut is all about — but it is too much to hope.
Agreed. Russia right now is fighting in Ukraine with a relatively small force of volunteers – the Wagner mercery – keeping their main forces of conscripts (some 300.000 plus) still in reserve. The Wagners are carrying the brunt of the fighting. That’s a very smart move as it save lives of conscripted soldiers. Once the Ukrainian main army is exhausted/defeated the conscript army may come into play to do the final cleaning up thus saving many young lives. They will probably deployed in the rounding up of Azov and other Nazi affiliates etc.
Wagner is fighting in Bakhmut area. It is important but the length of the whole frontline is much longer than Bakhmut. It is over 1000 km. At the moment all the frontline is well defended by Russian army and in many places it is progressively shifting westward. Wagner is somewhat between 5% and 10% of Russian troops which are engaged in the fighting.
It is a shame that the second largest ground force in the world cannot take Bakhmut a year into this war.
Ukraine has lost millions of soldiers and all of their western weapons have been destroyed by Russia. the few 300 of Ukrainians left in the battlefield are fighting with sticks and stones… and still holding the mighty Russia army.
Is it that Putin’s army is mediocre or that the 300 Ukraine soldiers left are incredibly awesome?
Or could be that all the BS you have been posting for the last year is just pure Kremlin Propaganda.
The U.S. military has warned Ukraine about their ridiculous use of artillery shells and equipment before.
And that’s not to mention all the equipment stolen before it gets to the front. A U.S. nurse said she had to hide medicine under bandages, because the Ukie guards and soldiers steal them.
She held a class teaching first aid, and the first-aid kits got stolen. Later she saw them being sold openly. That’s Ukraine. The most corrupt country in Europe, on the level of the average African country.
Jon, did you know Russia is more corrupted than Ukraine?
Why are you dishonest?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index
Are you antiwar? Do you support Russia taking land from Ukraine?
The Russian MOD is fighting a very successful war of attrition disarming NATO (Ukraine was disarmed in March), tank by tank, artillery by artillery, air defense by air defense.
NATO overall has accumulated the following equipment losses;
402 Aircraft, 221 helicopters, 3448 UAV’s, 414 Anti Aircraft systems, 8326 tanks inc. APC’s, 1064 multiple rocket launchers, 4377 rocket launchers and 8985 military automotive equipment.
What the empire looses in the Ukraine, they loose for the final Russian attack on NATO. Remember Russia attacked Ukraine just as NATO was about to unleash in the Donbass. Russia has shown they will pre-emptively attack to defend the Motherland when the time is dictated by events on the ground.
You only have to read a few lines of stuff like this and realize the extent of the moral rot in Washington DC.
NATO is drafting Ukrainian citizens at gun point. Sending them to the front untrained with no support and no means of defending themselves.
If they flee they get shot by NATO anti-retreat Nazi battalions. This is pure evil.
Ukrainian people got in an awful trap. Poland could be a next pawn in this bloody game.
This should have all been known. Our own use of munitions in the fabled “100 hour war” in Iraq back in 1991 was incredible; and it took us months to build up those stocks, which we fired off in incredible volume and which would have been depleted had the war gone on much longer (I read the after-action reports in 1993, while still a staff officer in the army, so can attest that this is a FACT). VII Corps alone was supported by an “all-MLRS” field artillery brigade, ostensibly of three battalions with 18 launchers each (each of which fires double the missiles a HIMARS launcher does) as well as several other independent FA brigades, plus the organic FA brigades of VIIth Corps 4 heavy divisions. So we KNOW what the ammunition drain for corps-sized forces in a major conventional conflict would be (it’s DETAILED, by weight and volume, in what used to be called “battle books” provided to logisticians for planning).
Only an imbecile, (or a US general, or US politician – errr, much the same thing) would believe that the ammo we were providing Ukraine was going to be sufficient for a prolonged shooting war against a major enemy along a 1200 km front.
Russia was ALWAYS going to have the firepower advantage, having amassed immense munitions stocks during the cold war (enough to support over 100 mechanized or tank divisions in a prolonged conflict, while in Ukraine they are using maybe the equivalent of 10), most of it stored in their western military districts so close to the fighting.
Commenting on my own comment; but I wanted to add, before all the arm chair warriors start venting their spleens; here is the conclusion drawn in the 1994 Army War College study on the state of ammunition stocks, drawing on the experience of the Gulf War and projecting forward:
Conclusion: Avoiding the Mistakes of the Past
“The Defense Department’s present approach to ammunition planning and procurement is short-sighted and risks disaster in a future conflict. The existing ammunition stockpile is not adequate to sustain US forces in two nearly
simultaneous major regional conflicts, and the industrial base is being allowed to deteriorate to a point where it cannot cover shortages in a timely manner”
And, even if it WERE adequate, the sheer mass of such required stocks would make the shipping of it in a timely manner, to the battle zones, virtually impossible if the enemy were capable of any sort of interdictory action.
That study can be found on line for anyone interested in actually researching the issue.
Ok, your BS point is taken. You got Red Douglas in support so your BS statement must be dead on. Great analysis I will reference for record in a few months.
“Only an imbecile, (or a US general, or US politician – errr, much the same thing) would believe that the ammo we were providing Ukraine was going to be sufficient for a prolonged shooting war against a major enemy along a 1200 km front. ”
Are you still making this kind of statements here?
Aren’t you the HIMARS HIMARS HIMARS are only a western hype and Ukraine will never take Kherson City, guy?
How can I even take your comments seriously? GTFOH with your BS. Your military analyses are worthless.
Go fluff your Pro Putin buddies here and get some upvotes which is what you are doing, you phony.
They DIDN’T “take” Kherson city; Russia made a tactical decision to defend the east bank and leave the city to the Ukrainians, which makes sense, although fanatics like you consider that some sort of “victory” – meanwhile, even wikipedia acknowledges that the Ukrainians suffered higher casualties in that effort than the Russians did, so what did they “win”? A ruined city and a dead end? And since then, what? Ukraine has largely evacuated the west bank to escape the constant russian shelling, and your fetish “HIMARS” is adding exactly what to the outcome? Oh that’s right…nothing. Meanwhile, what has “HIMARS” added to the Bakhmut fight? again, nothing. And what does that have to do with the overall ammunition shortage, that the US ARMY itself acknowledged and warned about after the problems became known during the Gulf War? oh right…again, nothing. You have nothing except vitriol; so go choke on it.
Still Ukrainian offensive in Kharkov, which happened before the capture of Kherson, was successful. Russian forces were overstretched and not ready for the defense. Russians retreated hastily abandoning the loyal civil population which got under awful repressions. It was a very bad story for Russian army. As I remember, Prigozhin, Kadyrov and some others were outraged. They demanded the punishment of those who allowed it to happen. The retreat from Kherson was accepted with the understanding by Russian generals and Russian military experts.
I do get the repercussions on the civilians; that’s not good; but as you say, the Russians were way overstretched; they had two choices, withdraw to defensible positions, or stand and die, so they withdrew to fight again. Militarily, that’s the right move, and it did at least save the civil population from facing the sort of destruction now going on in Bakhmut.
That the Russians didn’t see that attack coming and take actions to reinforce the northern forces beforehand is more disturbing, and people should have been punished for that. But once the attack started, hard to see what else the Russians could do. I’m not defending their military leadership; but as a decision, it’s pretty cut and dry.
“even wikipedia acknowledges that the Ukrainians suffered higher casualties in that effort than the Russians did”
And the Russians suffered higher casualties at Stalingrad than the Germans did. So was Stalingrad a defeat for the Soviet Union? No, it wasn’t. They achieved their objectives.
I wouldn’t classify Kherson as some kind of “great Ukrainian victory “– in fact, at the time I thought that the Russians were just hoping the Ukrainians would over-extend themselves and present an opportunity for a real beatdown — but the simple fact is that the Russians had it, and then the Ukrainians took it back.
The ammunition situation is interesting vis a vis the Gulf War “shortage” thing. My last job over there was guarding a large ammo supply point. They were blowing stuff up in place rather than bother shipping it home. In one case, 11,000 tons of it about 10 miles away without warning, knocking a recessed GP tent down on me and causing me to suspect there had been an accident at the ASP and that my men on post were all dead. One day some of us with the day off wanted to go do some shooting. They gave us 100,000 rounds of small arms ammo and 400 LAAWS and told us not to bring any of it back.
The Pentagon is always complaining about ammo shortages — and encourages every unit to fire every round of its training allotment, lest that allotment be decreased the following year.
Could that have resulted in actual shortages? Sure. On the other hand, believing DoD claims about it isn’t something one should automatically do. For all we know, they’re flush with munitions and just want to keep the Russians firing at a high rate in a false belief that countries with many times the production capacity of Russia will run out before the Russians do.
Well, Stalingrad was a “win” in that it forced the surrender of an entire German Army; nothing remotely like that happened at Kherson; so it’s hardly a valid comparison. You can say “took it back”, or “gave it back”, depending on how you look at it. The Russians certainly didn’t “fight for it”; they withdrew instead of holding out. Which was, no matter how you look at it, the correct military decision, as the city itself was a liability; the “asset” is the defensibility of the east bank of the river, which the Russians still have, and which I see no possible chance of the Ukrainians crossing. That the Ukrainians suffered disproportionate losses in what ended up improving the Russian’s defensive posture mitigates anything but the “propaganda value” of reoccupying the city.
Understand your comments about the aftermath of the Gulf; that is par for the course; much of it is not worth the cost or hazard of shipping back home; but the after action reports were clear; we fired much of what took months to stock, in an environment where we had unlimited shipping access with no possible enemy threat, in 100 hours or so, and would have fired it all if real fighting had gone on for much longer. It’s why we will sometimes impose a “CSR” (controlled supply rate) instead of the “RSR” (required supply rate) for big bulk items like howitzer ammunition, artillery rockets, AT missiles and tank rounds which limits what units can fire per day. The Ukrainians aren’t abiding by anything like that though (and reasonably can;t be expected to, since the Russians badly outgun them) and we simply cannot resupply at the rate of expenditure (we can;t support thr RSR, and they won’t or can’t adhere to a CSR). That’s what the War College study concluded as well after the Gulf War; the Army cannot support their own actual firing requirement for more than a short period even in the BEST of circumstances; and all army logisticians know this.
Small arms munitions are another story; much smaller bulk, much easier to transport, and much easier to manufacture, so you can shoot all of that you want; I can easily see them telling you to shoot off (or bury, just don’t bring it back) 40,000 rounds of 5.56.
I don’t see the Russians “running out”; the Cold War soviets had ammunition stocks to support well over 100 mechanized divisions, and their current army is a tiny fraction of that; if they maintained those stocks, as seems likely, they should be able to keep firing for years. All that stuff was located in the western military districts, Belarus, and (of course) in Ukraine itself. Why Ukraine is running out of soviet-era munitions (122mm & 152mm howitzer, and 130mm artillery shells) when the soviets left massive stockpiles there too is a mystery; presumably they sold much of it off for cash over the last 30 years? Regardless, their transition to NATO artillery makes their old soviet stocks useless anyway.
It’s not a “production issue” in the short term; it’s a “stocks on hand in proximity to the front” issue; and in that, the Russians have a huge advantage.
“presumably they sold much of it for cash over the last 30 years?” – yes, they did, but in the years 2015-2022 they prepared their army well for the war. Of course, they didn’t planned the war may last that long.
Directly to your final point:
“It’s not a ‘production issue’ in the short term; it’s a ‘stocks on hand in proximity to the front’ issue; and in that, the Russians have a huge advantage.”
In that the Russians HAD a huge advantage.
If they’d finished this thing off in two weeks or even six, they’d have retained that advantage.
But the US/EU/NATO empire has made it clear that it’s willing to do whatever it has to do to make it a non-“short term” matter. Which means that every day the balance tips toward the empire that has the greater productive capacity.
While no two wars are anything like directly analogous, look at how the North beat the South in the Civil War.
If the South had been able to successfully advance on and invest Washington after Manassas or during Lee’s first invasion (in which he came up against McClellan at Sharpsburg after a copy of his plans fell into Union hands), it could have won the war.
But by 1863, it’s not obvious that even a victory at Gettysburg would have done the job — because the North was able to out-produce the South.
PART of that was the dramatic population difference from which troops could be conscripted, but it was more about being able to produce small arms, cannon, ammunition, wagons, rations, etc. at a much faster rate. The North could make up its losses on that stuff easily. The South couldn’t.
On the manpower end, manpower is just less important these days than it was back then. Back then, a single soldier could fire three rounds a minute from a muzzle-loading musket (although repeaters increasingly came into play later in the war). Today an infantry squad puts out the small arms firepower of a company back then, not even considering the faster, longer-range, and more effective firing of larger weapons, the air factor, etc.
The forces arrayed against the Russians would enjoy a manpower advantage if they threw in with “boots on the ground,” but that would entail its own problems. Absent that, what this war is going to come down to is logistics. The forces arrayed against the Russians out-class them in production by a full order of magnitude. The only question is whether they can get the products to the front in a reliable and timely manner. And the longer the war lasts, the more advantaged they’ll be in that regard.
I think that’s an assumption (balance tipping) that remains to be seen. I don’t believe the Russians are near depletion of their munitions stocks; only very pro-Ukrainian sources have been making that claim in the press.
I don’t have any faith in the “North Korea is providing munitions” allegation; that sounds too much like the “Iranians are supplying Al Qaeda in Iraq” allegation from 2005, made over and over again, and never documented with any proof; it’s just something we do whenever things don;t turn out as we like; blame “someone else” for tipping the balance.
As to “manpower” being less important, I put a big distinction between “trained” manpower and simply “warm bodies”; and the reporting, even from very pro-Ukrainian sources, is now suggesting Ukraine is running out of that. So, we’ll see; in my assessment, the war tilts more in Russia’s favor each day.
“Russians suffered higher casualties at Stalingrad than the Germans did” – you are forgetting about Italians, Romanians and others participants of the battle at Stalingrad. After Stalingrad, for example, Romanian army stopped to exit.
“There is a lie, big lie and statistics”. According to BBC, Russian casualties at Bakhmut five times higher than Ukrainian. According to the independent American experts as Scott Ritter and Douglas Macgregor, Ukrainian casualties are about ten times higher than Russians. I think, it was Macgregor who said recently that in bad days, Ukrainian casualties are 16 time higher than Russian, in good days – 8 times higher.
I’m not “forgetting” the Italians, Romanians, etc. I just looked up total casualties on each “side.” The Soviets lost more than all their opponents combined in that battle. But won it.
As for Bakhmut and the war in Ukraine in general, it will be a long time if ever before we know what the casualty numbers on each side. It’s two opaque authoritarian regimes downplaying their own casualties and over-hyping their opponent’s casualties. And as with Stalingrad, the number of casualties on either side isn’t necessarily the criterion of victory for either side. The number of Russian casualties — making the Russians pay dearly for the place — MAY be a Ukrainian criterion of victory, along with playing for time. For the Russians, Bakhmut is a key to control of Donetsk and might be an inflection point after which they hope to return to a general offensive.
I looked just now in Wikipedia.
English version: Germany and allies casualties 747K – 868K. USSR 1300K
Russian version Wikipedia: Germany and allies 1500K. USSR 1300K.
It is Wikipedia. Not a particular reliable source. The others not much better.
What is more reliable, it is the forces which participated in the battle. Here Wikipedia English version: at the beginning of the battle: Germany and allies 270K. USSR 187K. At the time of Soviet counteroffensive: Germany and allies 1040K. USSR 1143K.
So, according to English version of Wikipedia, at the time of Soviet offensive, USSR had 103K more than the enemy and when the battle was over, the forces of USSR became much less than enemy because USSR lost about 500K more. How it is possible? The forces were nearly the same. USSR lost about half million more than enemy and won the battle?
“USSR lost about half million more than enemy and won the battle?”
Winning a battle is a question of accomplishing or not accomplishing an objective, not of mutual casualty ratios.
The Soviets accomplished their objective and won the battle, in part because they were both able and willing to sacrifice more troops to accomplishing that objective.
Of course the casualties do matter. If Russian casualties, as English version of Wikipedia claims, were 3 soldiers to 2 Germans, and the number of soldiers at the beginning of Russian offensive was about the same, it is obvious that Russians would be defeated. So Russian version of Wikipedia definitely is nearer to the truth. According to that version, number of German casualties were more than 20% higher than number of Russian casualties, so by the end of the battle, there were much less Germans capable to fight than Russians. Germans were outnumbered and surrendered.
Some ten years later you may as well rely upon BBC statistic about Bakhmut battle where according to BBC, Russia lost five times more soldiers than Ukraine.
Nothing new here.
To keep this war going and killing thousands of young men is a war crime in itself . And what for? To keep a thoroughly corrupt regime in the saddle?
It’s kind of a rock and a hard place situation.
If the thoroughly corrupt regime had managed a quick, Georgia-style operation when it invaded Ukraine, remaining in the saddle would have been a given.
But once it bollocksed things up and allowed the invasion to become a protracted and costly war requiring “partial mobilization,” etc, giving up and admitting the mistake developed negative saddle implications.
Bigotry at its best……”thoroughly corrupt regime” really? that is the hill the West is dying on. Projection much?
“Georgia-style operation” Russia is fighting a war of attrition. NATO expected a Georgia style operation. NATO was always sitting in the wings waiting to step in. The war of attrition is what has kept NATO at arms length.
“bollocksed things up” In March a peace was negotiated, it was a very successful operation. NATO however undid the agreement and here we are.
“partial mobilization,” was required after March as NATO was now at war with Russia. Russia is mobilasing another 300k – 500k. This will give Russia a total force of 1.5 million under arms.
I’d ask you to name a regime that isn’t thoroughly corrupt. But I already know you can’t. At least not any regime larger than, say, Andorra’s, if even that.
Yes, Russia is attempting to fight a war of attrition. Not very well, and only after sh*tting the bed on the kind of war it tried to fight initially.
Repeating the strictly laundered version all over western press…
I stopped listening to the MSM with the invasion of Iraq, with all the USA USA! BS coverage, along with glowing accounts of our mighty military machine, etc etc ad nauseam.
Based on the accounts coming from both sides, and having few illusions about the degree to which the Ukrainian regime has been and remains thoroughly corrupt over the past twenty years, I would say that Erdogan’s account of the content of the cease-fire talks begun last year, and Zelensky’s coincidental change of heart immediately after Johnson’s visit last year is true and my government’s version is pure unadulterated crap.
I would name Russia, Iran, China. Basically all the countries attacked by the Lawless “Rules Based Order”
How can you say fighting a war of attrition “not very well”? They are all over NATO (collective 50 countries).
There is still only about 300k Russian troops in the SMO. The 800-900k troops are positioned for a NATO attack.
Is NATO stupid enough to attack, time will tell.
Repeating the strictly laundered version all over western press…
I stopped listening to the MSM with the invasion of Iraq, with all the USA USA! BS coverage, along with glowing accounts of our mighty military machine, etc etc ad nauseam.
Based on the accounts coming from both sides, and having few illusions about the degree to which the Ukrainian regime has been and remains thoroughly corrupt over the past twenty years, I would say that Erdogan’s account of the content of the cease-fire talks begun last year, and Zelensky’s coincidental change of heart immediately after Johnson’s visit last year is true and my government’s version is pure unadulterated crap.
I’m pretty sure you are not stupid. We are talking about Ukraine of course, fighting for its independence and freedom. Is it wrong for them to want to fight for their land or do you just want them to surrender to Russia?
Ukraine is not a democracy by any stretch of the imagination. It’s ruled by a small clique of Neo fascists. The Zovs . They have been killing their own people in the east for the last nine years taking the lives of some 16000 innocent people. The regime was created by a US engineered coup in February 2014. First get your self informed about the Maidan coup. A democratically elected government as recognised by the UN was subsequently ousted. The biggest pro Russian party was not allowed anymore. The government was chosen by US Secr of State Victorian Nuland and other US dignatories as recorded on video in a telephone conversation between Nuland and the Ukrainian US embassador at the time. Journalists were murdered, free speech. not allowed, the biggest Russian Orthodox Church forbidden to operate. And so I could go on endlessly.
A lot of people in The West are pathologically Russo-phobic. For them, everything which is against Russians and Russian Orthodox Church, is good. There are no crime which they wouldn’t encourage and support, if it is done against Russians.
The level of ignorance you display here is just staggering –
https://ukraine.un.org/sites/default/files/2022-02/Conflict-related%20civilian%20casualties%20as%20of%2031%20December%202021%20%28rev%2027%20January%202022%29%20corr%20EN_0.pdf
So not 16000 innocent people, but only 3404 and the fraction of those innocent killed, by the Ukrainian forces is at about 80% – so about 2725 innocent people killed by an insurrection very much helped and kept alive by Russian support.
As for the so far 4 different administrations that have been in Ukraine since the Maidan, you could possibly argue that the first was influenced by outside support, though that is in conflict with them actually agreeing to Viktor Yanukovych plan before having parties that never got their hands on the levers of power nix that agreement and cause Viktor Yanukovych to flee the country.
The following 3 administrations were elected in free elections – the best proof of this being the way the far right gradually lost more and more members of parliament until they had none after the 2019 election of Zelenskyy – who was elected on a platform of trying to wind down the conflict in the Donbas a thing that he clearly managed – see the OSCE source in case you doubt it.
Correct but only after the Russians had attacked Ukraine – so pretty standard even for democracies.
In this conversation Nuland only spoke about the preferences of the US – the persons she mentioned were the top leaders of the opposition as it was known then so hardly a big surprise that one of them became a leader of the transition government – which for the record only lasted about ½ a year – so even if these people were influenced by Nuland – they did their level best to make sure the people got a free choice to appoint other leaders ASAP.
Could you list the journalists the Ukrainian government has killed? As for free speech not being allowed – again this is pretty standard for war time democracies and while it may get you in trouble it is not likely going to get you killed – as for the Russian Orthodox Church has that should be of little surprise since they have been arguing for actions against Ukraine – and blessing Putin and his SMO.
This all shows how vacuous Team Biden has been. They had no idea of Russian capabilities. They should be paraded in front of Congress and asked hard questions because as a result of their venomous hatred for Russia they have destroyed the entire house of cards on which liberal democracy is built. let’s Go Brandon!
Their “venomous hatred for Russia” deprived them of the rational thinking. The image of a weak degenerated Russia with the economy in tatters and dying out population was promoted by the corporate media from the last decade of 20th century. This propaganda had the goal to convince the world that American hegemony is the only possible future for the humankind. In the end American elite became the victim of it’s own propaganda. They became convinced that if they cut Russia from the western financial system and from the possibility to sell Russian gas and oil to EU, Russian economy will collapse together with Russian government. That’s why until recently they were carrying on with their fairy tales about victorious Ukrainian army and depleted Russian war reserve stock. Only now some of them begun to see the real situation.
Are you truly antiwar or just pro Russia?
Do you support Ukraine’s fight for its independence and freedom? Should Ukraine surrender its occupied land to Putin?
Why antiwar should be necessary anti-Russian?
In this particular conflict Russia is right and USA and Kiev neo-Nazi regime are wrong.
If Ukraine had a fight for it’s independence in 1991, I would support Ukraine. But there are were no such wars. Russia gave independence to Ukraine unconditionally. Yeltsin gave even Crimea and Sebastopol (which was always under direct rule of Moscow) to Ukraine despite the fact that in Crimea and Sebastopol the overwhelming majority of people confirmed on referendum in January 1991 their wish to remain under the rule of Moscow. But when, after the unconstitutional change of power in Kiev, parliament of Crimea, which by the way, was elected before the coup, announced the new referendum, the illegal new Kiev regime with support of USA refused to recognize Crimean referendum as legal. For any unprejudiced person it is clear that the justice is on the side of the people of Crimea and not on the side of Kiev illegal neo-Nazi regime and it’s sponsors. Independence of Donbas was also decided on the referendum. Bakhmut is part of Donetsk People Republic; in 1991 Bakhmut was illegally occupied by Kiev regime army.
If you bother about the peace, you should condemn those who sabotaged Minsk Agreements. It was neither Russia nor Donbass republics.
Not in 1991, of course. Kiev new regime army occupied Bakhmut in the spring 2014.
Isn’t “unsustainable” just another way of sharing Ukraine is not winning?
If all the arms was pushing Russia back, there would be talk of winning not that we can’t keep throwing stuff at them.
Better question is: why can’t the 2 largest ground force in the world take Bakhmut? Hmm.
Do you take the account of two unnamed US officials are real?
Can I take unnamed Kremlin official’s statements as real?
The lines have been static for month’s now and with, “China’s leader Xi Jinping will meet with Russia’s Vladimir Putin in Moscow next week” https://www.npr.org/2023/03/17/1164154995/chinas-xi-jinping-to-meet-vladimir-putin-in-moscow
It appears the fat lady (or Chris Christy) are getting to ready to sing.
You know his next stop will be to dangle a huge aid package at Ukraine (larger than anything Congress will allow) to get them to agree to a seize fire and negotiate.
You’re too much man. You parrot everything the US says but now you question this. Anyone else questioning US officials would be immediately labeled as being anti-US. By you.
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/the-gathering-storm/
The Gathering Storm. Authored by Douglas Macgregor.
Yes, Ukraine is going to cost dear for American Empire. When the war is over, we will see a different world.
Yes, most likely a world without Putin.
Still getting drunk on your own brand I see.
Russia won`t have that problem after all they where selling the yanks tons of ammo before the US COUP in Ukraine .
Where did you get that Idea from? AFAIK the Russian calibers are incompatible with US equipment.
The US was buying and stockpiling a certain amount of Russian ammo — for Russian weapons. The logic was two-fold.
One reason was so that US troops fighting forces armed with Russian weapons could capture and use those weapons if necessary, and have ammo for them.
Another was so that the US could supply ammo for Russian weapons used by forces it was supporting elsewhere that happened to be equipped with e.g. AK-47s rather than with NATO calibers small arms.
As for Russia selling ammo for US weapons to the US, I didn’t come across anything about that, but I suppose it’s possible. What Russia (and China) were selling to the US were precursors for ammo manufacture here, such as antimony.
The Russians are running out of ammo too. That is what “war of attrition” means. The victor is the side that runs out of men and material last.
So, use some clout to stop the f*cking war, assholes.