Live Conflict Ukraine-Russia War

[Relic]

Ah, you seems to think Chinese navy can't sail.

China's Navy can sail just fine. It's a serious threat. It's biggest problem is that it's not yet a great blue water Navy in structure, nor experience. It's largely designed to operate around coastal China / Taiwan and be able to project power slightly beyond the South China Sea. It's largely a regional Navy at this point.

I agree that a full naval blockade of China would be damn near impossible, especially with its land based missile and air force assets able to help significantly, but I do think the Chinese economy could be crippled and the standard of living for the Chinese people would fall off a cliff if they ever got into a hot war with the U.S. and suddenly had the full weight of the U.S. Navy, Japanese Navy, South Korean Navy and Australian Navy working in unison to form a loose blockade (especially of food and fuel imports), backed up by a plethora of air assets from USA , Taiwan , Japan , South Korea and Australia ... Let alone the fact that inevitably, the Navy's and air forces of countries like Britain , France , Italy , Canada Spain and Germany would also enter the conflict in a reinforcement role. Heck, in a broader conflict you would also see countries like Norway , Sweden , Finland and the Netherlands use their modern assets to support Carrier Battlegroups, especially integrated in air defense and attack rolls. It would be an incredibly tall task for the Chinese to handle over the long term, with a deeply damaged economy and a finite Navy and Air Force.

Full blockade? I highly doubt it. A loose blockade by a coalition of as many as 12-15+ countries? I think that's plausible.

 

[contricusc]

Ah, you seems to think Chinese navy can't sail.

They can sail, but how far off from China will they dare to venture if the US and its allies are hunting them?

I don’t think the Chinese navy would even try to go far from home in an open war with the US, as it would be an easy victim for US submarines and naval airforces.

It is one thing to do area denial near their home ports, and another thing to venture in the open ocean when US subs and carrier groups are coming for you, while US satellites follow all your moves.

And don’t forget the plethora of allies the US has, many of them with very advanced navies and a lot of experience in naval combat (much more than the Chinese).

 

[Relic]

They can sail, but how far off from China will they dare to venture if the US and its allies are hunting them?

I don’t think the Chinese navy would even try to go far from home in an open war with the US, as it would be an easy victim for US submarines and naval airforces.

It is one thing to do area denial near their home ports, and another thing to venture in the open ocean when US subs and carrier groups are coming for you, while US satellites follow all your moves.

And don’t forget the plethora of allies the US has, many of them with very advanced navies and a lot of experience in naval combat (much more than the Chinese).

That's the biggest challenge. When the U.S. and 15+ allied Navy's and air forces can use Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, The Phillipines, Australia, New Zealand, Guam, Hawaii, The Northern Mariana Islands, etc as ports and airfields, they can easily resupply and keep the pressure on China.

Would China be able to handle 2/3 of the American Navy and 1/2 of the American Air Force fs it was forward positioned for war, backed up by the entire Japanese Navy and Air Force, South Korean Navy and Air Force and Australian Navy and Air Force?... What would then happen when Britain, France, Spain, Germany, Canada and Italy formed a flotilla centered around Britain, France and Italy's carriers and brought 50+ additional warships, several dozen more submarines and hundreds of modern carrier and land based aircraft into the theatre as backup to core allies opposing the Chinese in the Pacific?

Surely it would be a bloodbath on all sides, but I just can't see how the Chinese prevail in that conflict.

 

[Afif]

China's Navy can sail just fine. It's a serious threat. It's biggest problem is that it's not yet a great blue water Navy in structure, nor experience. It's largely designed to operate around coastal China / Taiwan and be able to project power slightly beyond the South China Sea. It's largely a regional Navy at this point.

No it's being actively designed for blue water power projection. Type 55 destroyer is exactly meant for that.

I agree that a full naval blockade of China would be damn near impossible, especially with its land based missile and air force assets able to help significantly, but I do think the Chinese economy could be crippled and the standard of living for the Chinese people would fall off a cliff if they ever got into a hot war with the U.S. and suddenly had the full weight of the U.S. Navy, Japanese Navy, South Korean Navy and Australian Navy working in unison to form a loose blockade (especially of food and fuel imports), backed up by a plethora of air assets from USA , Taiwan , Japan , South Korea and Australia ... Let alone the fact that inevitably, the Navy's and air forces of countries like Britain , France , Italy , Canada Spain and Germany would also enter the conflict in a reinforcement role. Heck, in a broader conflict you would also see countries like Norway , Sweden , Finland and the Netherlands use their modern assets to support Carrier Battlegroups, especially integrated in air defense and attack rolls. It would be an incredibly tall task for the Chinese to handle over the long term, with a deeply damaged economy and a finite Navy and Air Force.

Europe getting involed militarily except UK is far fetched. NATO is transaltantic not indo pasific. And USA can't invoke article 5th either. Also there is good chance South Korea would stay out of it due to North Korea contingency.

 

[contricusc]

Surely it would be a bloodbath on all sides, but I just can't see how the Chinese prevail in that conflict.

I don’t think the Chinese would even dare to adventure far from their shores because of that. And the US and its allies would not nead to get close to China, as this would be too dangerous. Instead, they would simply focus on denying trade, as China would be cut off from Middle Eastern, Australian, US and South American imports, basically being starved off resources and food.

China would collapse by itself if trade is blocked.

 

[Afif]

They can sail, but how far off from China will they dare to venture if the US and its allies are hunting them?

I don’t think the Chinese navy would even try to go far from home in an open war with the US, as it would be an easy victim for US submarines and naval airforces.

It is one thing to do area denial near their home ports, and another thing to venture in the open ocean when US subs and carrier groups are coming for you, while US satellites follow all your moves.

And don’t forget the plethora of allies the US has, many of them with very advanced navies and a lot of experience in naval combat (much more than the Chinese).

You are underestimating PLAN capabilities backed up by PLA rocket forces. It isn't a Middle East scenario.

You are making it sound like it's another walk in the park for USN.

 

[Relic]

No it's being actively designed for blue water power projection. Type 55 destroyer is exactly meant for that.



Europe getting involed militarily except UK is far fetched. NATO is transaltantic not indo pasific. And USA can't invoke article 5th either. Also there is good chance South Korea would stay out of it due to North Korea contingency.

Type 55 looks like an awesome ship, with top notch capabilities, but China has a total of 8 of them right now. If war broke out tomorrow, 8 Warships of that capability would be nowhere near enough to lead the charge in breaking a seige led by 2/3 of the U.S. Navy, the entirety of the Japanese Navy, Australian Navy, South Korean Navy and at the very least, the British Royal Navy and all of the naval air wings and air force assets the countries could collectively bring to the fight in the defense of Taiwan and their own assets.

More than half of China's fleet is incapable of sailing more than a couple hundred kilometers from mainland China and sustaining any kind of combat operations. Their submarine fleet is also significantly outclassed by their U.S. rivals.

I maintain that a committed USA , backed by Japan, Australia, South Korea and Britain could definitely enforce a loose embargo around China. They couldn't stop all ships from making it to Chinese ports, but even if they cut Chinese seaborn trade by 50%, it would be devastating given how much the Chinese rely on essential food and fuel from abroad.

 

[Gary]

Israel is in the process of retiring all of their Patriot Batteries. They've fully switched their air defense to Iron Dome, David's Sling, Arrow-3 and they are working on Iron Beam. Israel's HAWK and Patriot Battries have been / are in the process of being moved into reserve and will eventually be sold off all together.

The United States will not be focused on sending Israel PAC-2 and / or PAC-3 Patriot interceptors. Rather, they will be sending them missiles for their other systems.

Ukraine very much is the priority for Patriot missiles right now. Germany and the United States are building 500 PAC-2 and PAC-3 missiles every year at moment and they are in the process of increasing that number to 650 missiles per year by the end of 2025. Meanwhile, Japan is now building PAC-2 missiles under license, at an undisclosed rate (I've seen 200-300 per year suggested) which will be used to backfill U.S. inventories in the same way South Korea backfills U.S. 155mm artillery shell inventories.

With 7 Patriot Batteries now committed to Ukraine, there will be no shortage of PAC-2 and / PAC-3 missiles in the near future. They just received another 100 missiles from a collection of European countries, followed by a seperate delivery from Spain . Meanwhile, the U.S. has been sending them by the dozens for quite some time.

Understand that Patriot will only be used going forward for the following, due to Ukraine's ever increasing tier 2 and Tier 3 air defense, plenty capable of taking down drones and cruise missiles.

1. Cruise missiles used in saturation attacks that overwhelm other systems and threaten the critical civilian / military infrastructure that Patriot is defending

2. Ballistic missiles that travel too fast and / or attack from trajectories that other western donated air defense systems can't handle.

3. To ambush Russian fighter / bomber aircraft thaylt stray inside Patriot's envelope.

The problem is Iran's proxies simply have more missiles than the Israelis have their stock of David Sling and Arrow.

We're talking about missiles, not only fired from Lebanon, but from Yemen, Syria, and Iraq or even better... from Iran themselves. At some point, they will be low on interceptors and use the existing Patriot system as well as asking the US (in a typical Zionist lobby manner) to divert munitions to israel rather than Ukraine.

And then there's the problem of artillery munition, which the israelis will likely fire in such numbers to try to do something about the vast Hezbollah underground bunkers on those hills facing israel. At some point, they will be low on ammo, and as the war in Gaza shows, israel isn't great when it comes to ammo expenditure efficiency. In fact, I would put the shells issue at a greater necessity than air defense.

At the end of the day, I view that escalation as necessary to imbalance the US war effort in Ukraine and make it easier for Putin to accelerate the current land-grabbing pace. War the Middle East doesn't end in a matter of weeks, but years and decades. war with Lebanon means israel is on track to put itself and the Americans on another decades-long adventure in the Middle East (something that the Americans have tried so hard to divest themselves from), enough to disturb the American effort of:

1. Arming Ukraine
2. American forces buildup in Asia Pacific where I believe the final showdown will occur.

The less ready the Americans, the better.

 

[Spitfire9]

Quite possible that the US will boost weapons supply to Israel to Ukraine's detriment.

I am tempted to agree with the view that the US sees the war in Ukraine as a means of weakening Russia militarily and financially - the longer it lasts, the better. That would explain what looks like a deep reluctance to provide Ukraine with the unrestricted means to make serious progress in the war.

The military and financial cost of transferring existing US arms to Ukraine is trivial by US standards. Mostly existing stock. For example, the US has large stocks of cluster munitions that it will never use. I believe that it may actually be cheaper to transfer them to Ukraine than to decommission them in the US.

 

[contricusc]

You are underestimating PLAN capabilities backed up by PLA rocket forces. It isn't a Middle East scenario.

You are making it sound like it's another walk in the park for USN.

I am not underestimating them. I am just pointing out the obvious fact that the US has the capability to restrict maritime trade if it wants to, first by putting pressure on exporting countries and companies, and second by using its navy to stop ships from getting close to China. They don’t even need to do it in China’s proximity, as they can do it near the exporting countries shores.

Take iron ore for example, a vital material for China’s economy. China imports almost all its iron from four big public companies: BHP, Rio Tinto and Fortescue (all three Australian) and Vale (Brazil). If the US prohibits Australia (an ally) to trade with China, three of the big four suppliers are gone just by decree. They can also threaten Vale with sanctions, and if they don’t comply they can simply sieze their bulk carriers, a few very large ships that cannot hide from the US navy. Once the ships are seized, the capability to send iron ore to China is gone.

The same tactics can be applied for oil and food exports. The US can simply seize the big ships or sanction the exporting companies, and trade will plummet.

 

[Slayer]

Looks like a timber storing site to me

That's what Putin said.

 

[Slayer]

Any information about how many "flight hours" Ukrainian/Russian FPV operators have on average?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1805620845684965429

amazing skills

 

[Afif]

I am not underestimating them. I am just pointing out the obvious fact that the US has the capability to restrict maritime trade if it wants to, first by putting pressure on exporting countries and companies, and second by using its navy to stop ships from getting close to China. They don’t even need to do it in China’s proximity, as they can do it near the exporting countries shores.

Take iron ore for example, a vital material for China’s economy. China imports almost all its iron from four big public companies: BHP, Rio Tinto and Fortescue (all three Australian) and Vale (Brazil). If the US prohibits Australia (an ally) to trade with China, three of the big four suppliers are gone just by decree. They can also threaten Vale with sanctions, and if they don’t comply they can simply sieze their bulk carriers, a few very large ships that cannot hide from the US navy. Once the ships are seized, the capability to send iron ore to China is gone.

The same tactics can be applied for oil and food exports. The US can simply seize the big ships or sanction the exporting companies, and trade will plummet.

Do you see that such actions would results in an all out shooting war?

You seems to think US Navy will impose a blockade and just stay away from China in open ocean and simply win the war, except for the fact that 100k US soldiers and large numbers of us military assets are within teeth of PLA. To protect them USN has to get within Chinese A2A/AD bubblenand put up a massive fight. Otherwise, US need to sacrifice them.

Also, abandoning Taiwan would simply stop the industries in Europe and USA as 90% high end of chips comes form there.

 

[UkroTurk]

Zelensky: “Ukraine does not want to prolong the war”

JUNE 27, 2024



According to the president, he instructed to “quickly prepare a settlement plan with Russia.”

Zelensky said that Ukraine “does not want to prolong the war and intends to prepare a peace plan for the second summit.” He announced this at a press conference with President of the European Council Charles Michel.

“Ukraine does not want to prolong the war, we do not want it to continue for years,” Zelensky emphasized. According to him, the settlement plan should be ready within several months, since Kyiv has “many wounded and killed.”

Zelensky noted that Ukraine did not contact Russia after the peace summit in Switzerland. “I had no dialogue with them during this time. If this happens in the shadows, in secret, then this is not about us. We want to do this openly,” he added.

The head of the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry Dmitry Kuleba previously said that Russia’s participation in the second peace summit is possible through intermediaries, since Kyiv does not seek direct contacts with Moscow. He cited as an example the successful experience of negotiations on the Black Sea Grain Initiative, when Ukraine negotiated with Turkey and the UN, and they, in turn, with Russia.

Swiss Foreign Minister Ignazio Cassis suggested that a second peace summit on Ukraine could be held this fall, but before the US presidential elections scheduled for November. He noted that negotiations to end the war in Ukraine cannot take place without Russia and expressed hope that it will join them in the future.

Earlier, Zelensky did not rule out Moscow’s participation in the upcoming summit, noting that the presence of the Russian Federation would mean that “they want peace and are ready to end the war.”

 

[Gary]

Kherson is impossible for at least a year, Zaporizhia even longer, but Chasovy Yar is expected to fall in 3-4 months depending on Ukrainian willingness to contest the town.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1806303762740388011

 

[Gary]

Please note that this kind of attack, simply force Ukrainian leadership to reinforce the line. The men required to do that will either be :

A. Dragged from the street
B. Taken from troops on rotation behind
C. Redeployment of front line troops

Kharkiv is simply such an important city that no one in the AFU is willing to lose their job trying to gamble on its safety from a possible Russian breakthrough. Russia knows this and use it to its full advantage.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1806248785191780853

 

[Gary]

Not related, but whenever Western influence wane, normality comes. Ukraine needs to be normalized like Georgia.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1806352298739642530

 

[contricusc]

You seems to think US Navy will impose a blockade and just stay away from China in open ocean and simply win the war, except for the fact that 100k US soldiers and large numbers of us military assets are within teeth of PLA. To protect them USN has to get within Chinese A2A/AD bubblenand put up a massive fight. Otherwise, US need to sacrifice them.

I am pointing out the fact that the US can severely cripple China’s economy from far away and without engaging them directly. This means that it is up to China how much it wants to escalate when it retaliates. If China attacks US ships first, then the US will have a much easier time to mobilize its allies and population for a full blown war, which would mean the end of China as we know it.

Also, abandoning Taiwan would simply stop the industries in Europe and USA as 90% high end of chips comes form there.

They won’t abandon Taiwan for the reasons you mention. The thing is, Taiwan can defend itself while the US cuts the maritime trade of China and sends weapons to Taiwan. If China engages the US first, then the US has the “Pearl Harbor“ excuse to start a full war against China, together with its allies.

If China doesn’t engage the US directly out of fear of escalating the situation, their economy will be ruined by the trade blockade while Taiwan defends itself.

I don’t think a war between China and Taiwan will start as a full scale war between China and the US, because none of the two wants this, and none of the two wants to be seen by the rest of the world as the aggressor. This means that the ability to hurt the other without attacking it directly is extremely important.

 

[Relic]

Per the Financial Times, Israel , The United States and Ukraine have entered negotiations for the transfer of some / all of Israel's 8 Patriot Missile Batteries to Ukraine. Israel recently started the process of decommissioning their Pac-2 Patriot systems in favour of newer technology.... A couple things here.

1. Negotiations aren't an agreement. Israel is likely to want guarantees from the Biden administration of certain levels of support from the United States against the pending conflict with Hezbollah, before it's willing to give anything the quality of a Patriot Battery from its reserve.

2. It's unlikely that Israel will simply transfer any of the systems and corresponding missiles, rather, Ukraine, The United States or another third party is going to have to buy the systems, or trade other weapons for them.

3. Even if Israel agrees, I don't see a reality in which they send all of their systems right away, with a pending war on their border. I could see them willing to send 1 or 2 batteries initially and the rest over time.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1806383737841627388

 

[blackjack]

Well, I guess even everyone on this thread has an agreement that the debate this night was interesting to point that we can agree that Zelensky will deal with Trump next year. The guy that seemed upset about billions being thrown into Ukraine.