What happened to Russias Air Force? U.S. officials, experts stumped • Hacker News Board

Re: What happened to Russias Air Force? U.S. officials, experts stumped

#471

Post by jnwatson » Wed, Mar 02, 2022, 8:57 PM UTC

speeder wrote: post #230

gamblor956 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "stumped" is not actually in the article. FTA: the issue is that Russia made a huge show of force at the start of the invasion but has apparently held back from actually using much of it (by air or ground). This war could have been over the day it started if Russia had used maximal force, and the conservative approach their actually using maximizes risks and casualties. And that's what has the experts confused: t…

I don't understand why people just don't believe Russia is being literal with their intentions. They said multiple times they don't want Ukraine, they just don't want NATO to be able to invade them by land. I'd you assume this is true, what they are doing make complete sense.

Russia has had a land border with NATO since 2004 when Latvia joined.

That simply doesn’t compute.

Re: What happened to Russias Air Force? U.S. officials, experts stumped

#472

Post by hutzlibu » Wed, Mar 02, 2022, 8:57 PM UTC

risyachka wrote: post #365

jl6 wrote: post #261

I guess everyone's weighing in with their view, so why not? Firstly, we should be mindful that the fog of war is now in play, and a good amount of what we think we know is unverifiable. With that caveat out of the way... It seems that the Russian soldiers are making efforts to avoid attacking civilians directly. Counterexamples exist and could be explained by rogue units, incompetence, or hot-blooded revenge on local…

>> and the order to avoid targeting civilians implies restraint on use of indiscriminate bombing they do not. Their policy is not pro-civilian at all. These are facts that you can see on the streets, no fog of war here. They are are bombing residential areas for DAYS without stopping. And I know, my best friends are in Kyiv and Kharkiv how. Also there was a missile strike on the railway in Kyiv where people are evacu…

"Not sure why you think they are pro-civilian even on some level. "

It is, when you compare it with syria or chechnya.

Re: What happened to Russias Air Force? U.S. officials, experts stumped

#473

Post by hutzlibu » Wed, Mar 02, 2022, 9:00 PM UTC

LAC-Tech wrote: post #245

standardUser wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Lack of experienced Russian pilot" This one is so hard for me to imagine, given Russia's long history of aerospace pride and massive military budget. The article attributes it to limited flying time compared to US/UK pilots and unfamiliarity with their latest and most advanced jets. Truly hard to comprehend how a military like Russia's could be suffering from lack of training despite a multi-year lead-up to a massiv…

Russias military budget is only slightly higher than that of the UK (61.7 billion vs 59.2 billion), even though Russia has a bit more than twice the UK population. France and Germany aren't far behind - 52.8 billion and 52.7 billion respectively. I believe Germany recently pledged to raise it's military spending to 100 billion (a lot of flashy headlines but couldn't find details), so soon it will far outspend Russia.

Russia has way lower wages on the other hand, meaning for domestic military spending, they get much further with that budget.

Re: What happened to Russias Air Force? U.S. officials, experts stumped

#474

Post by caycep » Wed, Mar 02, 2022, 9:00 PM UTC

danenania wrote: post #352

jl6 wrote: post #261

I guess everyone's weighing in with their view, so why not? Firstly, we should be mindful that the fog of war is now in play, and a good amount of what we think we know is unverifiable. With that caveat out of the way... It seems that the Russian soldiers are making efforts to avoid attacking civilians directly. Counterexamples exist and could be explained by rogue units, incompetence, or hot-blooded revenge on local…

I don't even see how (b) is going to work at this point--with the massive flow of weapons and money that is coming from the West, and NATO safe havens on the borders, Russia will be playing whack-a-mole against insurgency forever no matter how much force they use. Imagine if the Iraq or Afghanistan insurgencies had had access to an endless supply of top-of-the-line weapons, orders of magnitude more funding, and 'safe…

An additional worry is that these things never end well. I have to dig up this book on the downstream costs to all these countries that were allied w/ the west or USSR during the cold war...they all pay the price economically, socially etc for being part of the global great game. Central America, the Middle East, sub-Saharan Africa all took a huge hit, if you think about it.

Say Ukraine survives or becomes an Afghanistan-like insurgency power. But now they are rife with guns, warlords, and no national institution or government to organize everything....

Re: What happened to Russias Air Force? U.S. officials, experts stumped

#475

Post by phtrivier » Wed, Mar 02, 2022, 9:00 PM UTC

Not that I want to play contrariant or anything, but assuming the Russian air force is simply "bad at what it does" feels incredibly short-sighted.

I would like to have the other versions where the air force is simply saving it's might for later, playing the long game, kept in reserve, etc... Rather that. Assuming they're bad.

Or maybe someone in the air force is not fully cooperating with the war effort ? Is there someone in charge that might want to keep a chance to take over negociations with clean hands after Putin is gone ?

I know, Occam's razor and everything ; but the "Russian army, baaaad" theory sounds more far fetched.

Re: What happened to Russias Air Force? U.S. officials, experts stumped

#476

Post by redisman » Wed, Mar 02, 2022, 9:00 PM UTC

dathinab wrote: post #340

Before realizing that there is natural Gas west of Crimea I thought: Why is a Ukrain NATO membership a risk for Russia, there is no change that in Europe NATO would attack Russia, as European NATO members would not allow it. That is except if Russia expects to be in a war against NATO in the not to long future. (Not necessary start the war though). This behaviour could also fit into this argument, i.e. losing a lot b…

> Putin hoping to get an excuse to wage war against NATO

This would be the most delusional thing anyone has ever hoped for. If Putin is that far gone, we’re all doomed

Re: What happened to Russias Air Force? U.S. officials, experts stumped

#477

Post by etempleton » Wed, Mar 02, 2022, 9:01 PM UTC

My best guess would be that a few things are happening:

1. Russian Military Leadership is unwilling to risk their best equipment / personnel

This is a pretty radical war in that, yes, Ukraine is overmatched in almost every way, but they also have been provided some of the most advanced and modern anti air and anti tank weaponry by NATO countries. And it may not even be clear to Russia exactly what they have been provided.

2. Dissent Among Ranks

While we probably won’t know, at least not any time soon. Some of the reported incompetence of the Russian war effort seems too great to be true. I would not be suprised if there was some intentional stalling in the hope that Putin comes to reason.

3. Morale is Low

The Russian military waited a long time at the border. Were sent in, purportedly, without really knowing why or to what end, and then asked to kill people who they see as basically their own countrymen. Hard to fight when you don’t know what for, to what end, and geez, kind of seems like we are the bad guys here.

This war is going to test even the most nationalistic of the Russian military. I don’t know how much longer this can go on without a military coup.

Re: What happened to Russias Air Force? U.S. officials, experts stumped

#478

Post by anothernewdude » Wed, Mar 02, 2022, 9:02 PM UTC

jl6 wrote: post #261

I guess everyone's weighing in with their view, so why not? Firstly, we should be mindful that the fog of war is now in play, and a good amount of what we think we know is unverifiable. With that caveat out of the way... It seems that the Russian soldiers are making efforts to avoid attacking civilians directly. Counterexamples exist and could be explained by rogue units, incompetence, or hot-blooded revenge on local…

> It seems that the Russian soldiers are making efforts to avoid attacking civilians directly. Counterexamples exist and could be explained by rogue units, incompetence, or hot-blooded revenge on local resistance.

They're hitting a lot of hospitals and civilian infrastructure. As per their typical operating procedures, c.f. Syria.

Re: What happened to Russias Air Force? U.S. officials, experts stumped

#479

Post by pyuser583 » Wed, Mar 02, 2022, 9:02 PM UTC

Cd00d wrote: post #353

jl6 wrote: post #261

I guess everyone's weighing in with their view, so why not? Firstly, we should be mindful that the fog of war is now in play, and a good amount of what we think we know is unverifiable. With that caveat out of the way... It seems that the Russian soldiers are making efforts to avoid attacking civilians directly. Counterexamples exist and could be explained by rogue units, incompetence, or hot-blooded revenge on local…

suzerainty You can't just lob a hundred dollar word out like that! I spent several moments trying to figure out what your typo was before allowing the possibility that you didn't have one. a relationship in which one state or other polity controls the foreign policy and relations of a tributary state, while allowing the tributary state to have internal autonomy

In foreign relations, the word is ambiguous.

For example, in early 20th (late 19th?) century, the UK recognized the suzerainty of China over Tibet.

It basically meant “British India’s borders end at the Tibetan border, and we won’t do business with anyone in the Tibetan side of the border without running it by the Chinese first.”

Then in the early 21st Century the UK recognized the sovereignty of China over Tibet in exchange for Chinese money to some international orgs.

But all that happened was the British position became more precise.

It’s a compromise word to recognize the reality in the ground, while kicking diplomatic issues down the road.

Parts of the modern day Indian/China border are referred to as the “line of actual control.”

Re: What happened to Russias Air Force? U.S. officials, experts stumped

#480

Post by rodgerd » Wed, Mar 02, 2022, 9:02 PM UTC

speeder wrote: post #230

gamblor956 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "stumped" is not actually in the article. FTA: the issue is that Russia made a huge show of force at the start of the invasion but has apparently held back from actually using much of it (by air or ground). This war could have been over the day it started if Russia had used maximal force, and the conservative approach their actually using maximizes risks and casualties. And that's what has the experts confused: t…

I don't understand why people just don't believe Russia is being literal with their intentions. They said multiple times they don't want Ukraine, they just don't want NATO to be able to invade them by land. I'd you assume this is true, what they are doing make complete sense.

I guess you also missed Putin characterising Lenin's actions post-revolution as a mistake, and that the Russian Empire should move back to its pre-USSR borders? Or the prepared article that was mistakenly published crowing about the "final solution to the Ukrainian problem"?

Your selection of what to believe as the honest truth is pretty telling.