Ukraine weapon and war tactics testing?

[Nimos]

As most people know that have followed along with the war in Ukraine, the western countries at least in the beginning were very concerned about only sending defensive weapons to Ukraine.

And it didn't really take long before the boundaries got pushed.

Now I just saw that Britain and the US together have send these:

and these

Personally I think its fine, I don't think we should follow Putins demands. But also one can't help thinking that Ukraine is escalating slowly into a battlefield where testing equipment is also a goal, we have seen a lot of advanced things being used.

I think what is happening in Ukraine now is going to change a lot of things about how wars are going to be fought in the future to be honest.

One thing is to fight terrorists with limited weapon capabilities, compared to testing them against the Russians.

 

[Revoltingest]

I see the significant between defensive vs offensive
weapons being about where the damage is done, ie,
if used within the country being defended, then it's
defensive. However, attacks weapons inside Russia
that rain down destruction over the border into Ukraine
would also be defensive.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Well, yes. That is what happens in war. Weapons are build to suit tactics as envisioned by a given military. But the tactics and thus weapons are only really tested in a war.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I see the significant between defensive vs offensive
weapons being about where the damage is done, ie,
if used within the country being defended, then it's
defensive. However, attacks weapons inside Russia
that rain down destruction over the border into Ukraine
would also be defensive.

Well, yes. But the best defense can be to destroy the enemy's ability to fight and that can be an offense to capture the enemy's land.

 

[Revoltingest]

Well, yes. But the best defense can be to destroy the enemy's ability to fight and that can be an offense to capture the enemy's land.

That blurs the line between offense & defense though.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

That blurs the line between offense & defense though.

Well, in the end any war where to parties fight over more that just raw power, the politics/ideology/religion tends to require some sort of offensive on the side of the part winning. Even WW1 which was about power more than anything else and mostly attritional required an offensive at the end.

 

[HonestJoe]

Personally I think its fine, I don't think we should follow Putins demands. But also one can't help thinking that Ukraine is escalating slowly into a battlefield where testing equipment is also a goal, we have seen a lot of advanced things being used.

I don't see any evidence of that. Everything sent to Ukraine has been established equipment with known capabilities. In this case, there is a clear and specific reason for their requesting and receiving this medium-range weaponry.

If anything, Ukraine hasn't been able to receive the most advanced weaponry that could be available due to the level of training and force integration it would require. I don't think it'd be an effective environment for testing anything new.

 

[Mock Turtle]

It's just so unfair! (stamps feet) I mean, what does it mean to be a superpower (hahahaha) if one can't attack a neighbouring country with impunity and then threaten any others who might support them with nuclear annihilation!! What is the world coming to?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I don't see any evidence of that. Everything sent to Ukraine has been established equipment with known capabilities. In this case, there is a clear and specific reason for their requesting and receiving this medium-range weaponry.

If anything, Ukraine hasn't been able to receive the most advanced weaponry that could be available due to the level of training and force integration it would require. I don't think it'd be an effective environment for testing anything new.

There are at least 2 levels to testing equipment. How it works as itself as a piece of hardware. How it works on the battlefield integrated into a military and how the enemy can counter it if possible.

 

[Stevicus]

As most people know that have followed along with the war in Ukraine, the western countries at least in the beginning were very concerned about only sending defensive weapons to Ukraine.

And it didn't really take long before the boundaries got pushed.

Now I just saw that Britain and the US together have send these:

and these

Personally I think its fine, I don't think we should follow Putins demands. But also one can't help thinking that Ukraine is escalating slowly into a battlefield where testing equipment is also a goal, we have seen a lot of advanced things being used.

I think what is happening in Ukraine now is going to change a lot of things about how wars are going to be fought in the future to be honest.

One thing is to fight terrorists with limited weapon capabilities, compared to testing them against the Russians.

It could be for testing purposes, I'm not sure.

But I also wonder about the logistics of all of this and what might happen if Russia attacks weapons convoys bound for Ukraine? How are they getting all this equipment to Ukraine, and could Russia conceivably attack key delivery points to prevent the weapons from being transferred to the Ukrainians? What if they attack border checkpoints where Ukraine borders NATO countries? What if a stray bomb or missile falls on the territory of a NATO country? Could NATO use that as an excuse to join in the fray?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

It could be for testing purposes, I'm not sure.

But I also wonder about the logistics of all of this and what might happen if Russia attacks weapons convoys bound for Ukraine? How are they getting all this equipment to Ukraine, and could Russia conceivably attack key delivery points to prevent the weapons from being transferred to the Ukrainians? What if they attack border checkpoints where Ukraine borders NATO countries? What if a stray bomb or missile falls on the territory of a NATO country? Could NATO use that as an excuse to join in the fray?

They don't have to. They can achieve enough damage within Ukraine. The problem with attacking Nato territory, is that it can escalate.

As for how they get it to Ukraine into, that is simple. Depending on what is at play, ships to Europe, trains/trucks to Poland to the border or plains to Poland and then trains/trucks to the border. Then trucks/trains within Ukraine.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

What if a stray bomb or missile falls on the territory of a NATO country? Could NATO use that as an excuse to join in the fray?

Yes, yes they could.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Yes, yes they could.

But they would properly try to try to do it with direct military attacks as first if possible.

 

[Nimos]

It could be for testing purposes, I'm not sure.

But I also wonder about the logistics of all of this and what might happen if Russia attacks weapons convoys bound for Ukraine? How are they getting all this equipment to Ukraine, and could Russia conceivably attack key delivery points to prevent the weapons from being transferred to the Ukrainians? What if they attack border checkpoints where Ukraine borders NATO countries? What if a stray bomb or missile falls on the territory of a NATO country? Could NATO use that as an excuse to join in the fray?

Weird as it might sound I do think there is a "gentlemen's" agreement from both sides, the US have made it clear that these weapons are not to be used to attack across the border. Equally I think Putin knows that if he start bombing stuff in Poland etc. that he is potentially starting WW3 and I don't think even he is interested in that. But the moment these supplies cross the border to Ukraine they are fair game for the Russians.

I don't think NATO is interested in a war with Russia at all, first of all it would require a logistic operation that would be impossible to hide and besides that, I don't think anyone find an escalation of war to be beneficial for anyone.

 

[Stevicus]

They don't have to. They can achieve enough damage within Ukraine. The problem with attacking Nato territory, is that it can escalate.

As for how they get it to Ukraine into, that is simple. Depending on what is at play, ships to Europe, trains/trucks to Poland to the border or plains to Poland and then trains/trucks to the border. Then trucks/trains within Ukraine.

That's what I figured, but I still wonder though, especially if Russia feels compelled to attack points close to the border to destroy weapons coming over before they're even used. They wouldn't have to directly or intentionally attack any NATO territory, but they could conceivably destroy the roads, buildings, and other infrastructure close to the border, which would disrupt traffic and impede weapons shipments.

But if they do that, they'd have to be extra careful to make sure it doesn't hit anything on the NATO side of the border. There was an incident back in WW2 where US bombers accidentally bombed a Swiss town, thinking it was Germany. It was an accident, an honest mistake, so the Swiss didn't see it as an act of war, but the US did have to pay financial reparations.

Another aspect is getting all this equipment over the Atlantic, and Russia still has a viable submarine fleet out there. Germany used submarines to interdict and destroy Allied shipping across the Atlantic. And they did a lot of damage. It was no small feat to find and eliminate those undersea terrors.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

That's what I figured, but I still wonder though, especially if Russia feels compelled to attack points close to the border to destroy weapons coming over before they're even used. They wouldn't have to directly or intentionally attack any NATO territory, but they could conceivably destroy the roads, buildings, and other infrastructure close to the border, which would disrupt traffic and impede weapons shipments.

But if they do that, they'd have to be extra careful to make sure it doesn't hit anything on the NATO side of the border. There was an incident back in WW2 where US bombers accidentally bombed a Swiss town, thinking it was Germany. It was an accident, an honest mistake, so the Swiss didn't see it as an act of war, but the US did have to pay financial reparations.

Another aspect is getting all this equipment over the Atlantic, and Russia still has a viable submarine fleet out there. Germany used submarines to interdict and destroy Allied shipping across the Atlantic. And they did a lot of damage. It was no small feat to find and eliminate those undersea terrors.

Don't worry about WW3, as it is not likely, because Putin can't start it on his own. If you really have to worry, then worry what could happen if Russia breaks down and what it could mean for all the nukes in Russia.

 

[sun rise]

Weird as it might sound I do think there is a "gentlemen's" agreement from both sides,

It sure seems that way to me.

 

[Twilight Hue]

As most people know that have followed along with the war in Ukraine, the western countries at least in the beginning were very concerned about only sending defensive weapons to Ukraine.

And it didn't really take long before the boundaries got pushed.

Now I just saw that Britain and the US together have send these:

and these

Personally I think its fine, I don't think we should follow Putins demands. But also one can't help thinking that Ukraine is escalating slowly into a battlefield where testing equipment is also a goal, we have seen a lot of advanced things being used.

I think what is happening in Ukraine now is going to change a lot of things about how wars are going to be fought in the future to be honest.

One thing is to fight terrorists with limited weapon capabilities, compared to testing them against the Russians.

I wonder how it will fare against the partially automated Russian T14? Far as I know, Russia hasn't deployed any in the Ukraine.

I think your right. It's an opportunity for testing war technology in real battlefield conditions. With automation and ai, it's going to be a very frightening future ahead as it's only going to get worse this point foreword I think.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I wonder how it will fare against the partially automated Russian T14? Far as I know, Russia hasn't deployed any in the Ukraine.

I think your right. It's an opportunity for testing war technology in real battlefield conditions. With automation and ai, it's going to be a very frightening future ahead as it's only going to get worse this point foreword I think.

What do you mean by that?

 

[Twilight Hue]

What do you mean by that?

Advances in ai is just going to get better and better. That's includes lethal applications in the equation.