Presentation and Narration is intentionally dry: This is not a channel to make entertainment of the war in Ukraine. I present facts as far as I can judge them, and my assessments regarding what is happening.
As long as the war in Ukraine continues, I will post videos covering that war. When that is over I will get back to making videos regarding World War 2. I am from Sweden, and I do live in Romania
Fair warning, any comments not on topic, or pure Russian propaganda will be deleted. Please contest any assessment I have made, or my sources, and explain why. If you just give a crying face, that is not contesting anything, I will just remove such comments, or block the person. I want this channel to bring us closer to knowing what is happening, and why.
NOT A REPLY just my current thinking on ATMS type systems I always appreciate you reports and hold your assessment in high regards. Ukraine's domestic production of long range systems seems to have outpaced US ATCMs low production of 6/month It seems to me that Allied nations are investing in Ukraine's R&D giving them many advanced systems that come with "technical support" staff, not in their own long range ground launch tech. Ukraine has all Soviet tech plus western tech along with world leading rocket/missile/aircraft design and production firms for the past sixty years. Ukraine can produce better cheaper long range system in a greater quantity than western suppliers if we are talking ground launch systems. Also Ukraine's small drone production of 2 million in 2024 with claims to be on tract to produce 4 mil in 2025 will help with 155mm shell disparity that may still exist. I feel these are trends that will continue if 155mm shells cost $4k/per shell and drones are $1k each, and ATCMs are $1 mil compared to a $80k Jet drone made in Ukraine. Western systems have a greater cost, weigh more, and need a expensive launch vehicle or aircraft to use. Maybe I am wrong and ATCM's is the future for all military's due to a factor I am not seeing, but right now it is a overpriced delivery system that Ukraine is wise not to waste money on in my opinion. I do not consider the warheads in this calculation as those can be attached to drones of suitable size. Ukraine can have all 1200 ATCMS one time for $1.2bil or invest that in production of long range attack drones as I see it. War has a tendency to change what we produce and this war is showing us that drones are the future and everyone is chasing Ukraine in this tech race. Ukraine's future relies more on its domestic production than buying systems from outside, they will never be economically able to buy all the system needed to defend themselves in the long term. Ukraine will win and then what happens to their defense when they have to return or buy all those HIMARS systems, tanks, M103s,Patriots systems? Ukraine will likely join NATO yes, but they will still need to keep their military forces equipped for decades. Ukraine is doing the right thing in my opinion and will have a domestic military industry that sells more per year than they purchase abroad at the end of this war, thus reducing the time needed to rebuild as they will not have to focus on mass military R&D and production chains from scratch, but use them for income.
I agree, Ukraine has a good solid defence industry, and they have some very capable long-range missiles, with more on the way. They lack funding, and likely it is cheaper, and better, to fund Ukraine directly for that category. It takes time to ramp up production, and being in a war zone, it is likely expensive to secure production. Sub-component production could likely be done outside Ukraine, to help speed things along. Western systems are needed now, especially considering what the situation looks like, as we can expect Ukraine is lacking in volume. ATACMS have proven very effective, so cost vs damage is likely in favour of that system. How it compares to the Ukrainian Neptune missile, is hard to say. At least I have not seen any comparison. Price seems to be about the same. regarding jet drones, not sure what the cost vs performance would be. Likely cheaper, but probably does not really have the same capability even in greater numbers, but that is a guess. I would like to see the Swedish RBS-15 sent to Ukraine. Some inertial guidance for GLSDB could maybe avoid Russian GPS countermeasures, and again make that a viable weapon system. But I agree, in the long term, Ukraine will need to at least in part produce for their military. Artillery shells they will likely never be able to come close to produce what they need, but everything helps right now. Production in peacetime over 10 years could probably replenish Ukrainian needs, so for the future that is very good. I have not actually checked what will happen to US equipment after the end of hostilities. Is it to be returned or bought? As far as I know, Swedish donations are permanent, but that would be a very interesting area to research
Publicly available information makes it difficult, and I try not to state what I can not back up to some degree. I think my assessment, in general still holds water, Russia can not play for time much longer, likely not past next year. So Ukraine needs to hold out this year, then much is possible, if aid remains.
As an American I see huge inflation and some people in my own country unable to get help or relief. Can you explain why you, some random foreigner, expect me to support a corrupt country fight their own war? Why should I accept the chance of escalation? You only ever say fluff like its a moral reason, easy for an unimportant country to say. Only ones I see doing well in America are military contractors and thats a small club. It is always infuriating when you are so gleeful to speak about how others should spend their money and effort.
Interesting, I never mention US money at all in this video. Your attempt at triggering me I do find amusing. I have made my position clear, you have made your position clear. You have a vote in the US election, why not work on that, just some friendly advice.
@@jmsww2 "western weapon limitations" is an American limitation mostly at this point, to mention that is to say America needs to lift the restriction, even the ones it's putting on other countries since they use American parts. You are clearly talking about America in funding as well, sure not exclusively but still including it, if not you would say Europe and not "western partners" or something like that.
@@GoldenChallanger Why are you harassing someone who is doing what he believes in? Nobody is forcing you to watch his videos. Go to see something to your liking and be happy. "Some random foreigner" and "unimportant country" explains a lot. A lot of hot air.
@@zdenekzdenek3589 What he believes in is escalating a war by trying to drag America into it. He always plays fast and loose when its another nations neck on the line. Also "go find something you like" is a good way to end up in an echo chamber, I hope for your own well being, you listen to people you disagree with.
Very good report. Depressing situation for ukraine with the population soon having to struggle with winter. Terrible. I've never understood why putin just keeps fighting. He's got some serious issues with himself
Agree, this is a totally pointless war, that just brings suffering, we need to help Ukraine end it. If not, China will take a cue, and who knows where it will end. Ukraine will struggle this winter, it will very hard for the civilian population.
I am glad mate! Should give a better zoom in view. Still updating how much the cameras are zoomed in, so one does not miss the general situation in this sector, but still get the details.
Thank you for your report today. There is a report in US media today, which quotes news reports out of Poland and London, that Ukraine's Army is in bad shape, and that new conscripts are poorly trained and don't last long when sent to front line positions. Couple this report with previous reports that the Ukrainians are having difficulties just finding people to fight, it seems both sides are close to exhaustion. Looking ahead to the "bad weather" months, will either side be able to effectively mount and sustain offensive combat? Perhaps a better question is, what is required by both sides to launch and sustain an offensive operation in the coming months? Or do you expect both sides to reduce attacks in the coming months in order to replenish their depleted resources? It feels like we are in the 15th round of a boxing match and both boxers are near collapse.
It is true, that the Ukrainian army is tired, with several units having had no rotation, as a unit, for years. Some of the newly mobilized have had poor training, as reported by Ukrainian commanders. What the casualty rates are among replacements I could not say. I have also seen interviews that they tend to become casualties quicker, but hard to extrapolate that into a general conclusion. The main problem Ukraine has, as I see it, is they have not trained replacements for long enough, probably because they simply have not had enough time. That comes down to lack of time, and lack of firepower, but will talk about that tomorrow. Regarding offensives during the rainy season. We can expect that fighting will continue, but if we are talking about offensives in the Western sense, neither side would aim for that. An offensive in the Western sense would be what Ukraine did at Kursk. Assemble forces, break through the front line, and exploit. That depends on speed. When it is rainy, or poor road conditions that becomes very hard. That does not exclude an offensive, but the conditions are poor for it. For Russia, which simply aims to exert pressure, with the aim of taking smaller terrain, weather plays a smaller role. But they still have to move forces forward and supply them, and that goes slower in poor weather. I expect the level of fight to decrease, from the weather, but probably also because both sides are running low on forces. I will do a strategic assessment, and hopefully that will explain what I assess are the problems, and what we can expect. But as always, be critical to all information, including mine.
It’s good you mention weather as most channels skip it Might be useful if you give a count down to tge expected beginning of seasonal bad weather as it gives context to what is being tried now For example it may be better not to redeploy if that would take those units out of action until the weather changes
It is important, even when it is good weather. It is difficult to assess when the bad weather season will come. Changes in the climate are pushing that later in the year. Last year it really came in November. It can of course come earlier this year. So 20-40 days from today would be a best guess. Too vague to draw any conclusions today.
It will be interesting to see what effect todays strike really had Surely they must be trying hard to improve ammunition handling especially when trains come in
Extremes are fruit of mismanaged democracy. Democracy needs self-imposed order to function properly. If people can't achieve that, law and order break down and people look for alternative. Fringe elements can utilize that, and dictators are born. It's easy to slip into this trap but hard to get out of it. So, democratic countries should look inward and right the ship, before it's too late. Democracy isn't anarchy without order it fails.
Well in addition to learning about military warfare I'm also expanding my musical horizons beyond classical romance genre. Thank you for today's frontline update.
My eyes are fine - but still a good update! And, as usual, thanks for the report! After saying you didn't know if you could keep this up, strategic assessments and an update to the layout, quite a bit of work, it seems! Thanks :)
@whatisdisname335 Thanks mate. All part of the program I am running, to see the viability, and at what level the reporting will be at. In general I should have 15000 -30000 views per video to make daily reports viable. Now I am on average 500-700, so I expect them to decrease to a couple of times per week. But will try to get as much done before I have to make a final decision.
@jmsww2 yeah, those aren't numbers you'll see without the usual attention grabbing, I suspect. All the channels I know that have a larger audience go through day to day stuff, and have clickbait titles
Thanks again . Greese on their F-35 deal also bought additional Bradleys. (60) As a sweetener the US through in an additional Bradleys again about 60. These were early models Greeks rejected these as not worth it. Even though they were free. Somewhere in Europe these Brads have been lost Wonder where they went?
Saw that also. It seems in total it was 164, some for free (62), some to be bought for a low price (102), but needed significant resources to modernize and bring back into shape. Not impossible they would be going to Ukraine. If they are refurbished now, they should be available for next summer. I think the US wanted to replace some of the Greek M113 and all of the BMP, and likely ship them to Ukraine.
I made a choice of how I would narrate this, or any other war, a long time ago. A driving force is not to make it into entertainment, too much suffering for that. It is up to people what channel they want to follow if they stay informed, that is really the main aim, which does not necessarily have to be this channel.
I read the Russian army lost 2 brigades at Vuledar since the 155th Guard Naval brigade started with a frontal assault which failed spectacularly. This will be a post war case study on Russian command willingness to throw the kitchen sink at the possibility of a minor tactical victory as the importance of the village as overwatch of enemy supply lines isn't as big of a deal as it was with Ukraine forces holding another town nearby which still gives them fire control over that specific section of the Ru LOCs.
True, Russia has taken a lot of losses previously around Vuhledar. We have to wait and see how this battle develops. We can not really know the impact until then.
Love the weather report and engagement graph One suggestion- try to work on the monotone speech I know it is difficult and a bit insulting to hear that but to an English listener it is a little of putting. Work on it and get those American likes !
Your welcome mate. Read about this channel and you find out why the narration is the way it is. Worth keeping in mind, in general. If you think it is a bit insulting and still say it, is that less insulting.
@Querulously Not a problem mate, I do not take it personally. I made my decision on how to narrate it a long time ago. As is obvious, I don't chase viewers, even if I probably should. I just don't want to make this into entertainment, or anywhere near that, too much suffering for that. If I ever come close to doing that, I rather shut down the reporting.
Great video. You are spot on. Russian gains are steady but modest and , above all, they come to a huge cost, both in terms of human and material losses. I think that, even if Trump ( if elected) will stop the american support, Ukraine could still count on a boost of EU military help sufficient to win the war on the long run.
Maybe. EU struggles to provide the capabilities that Ukraine needs. And EU has its own agenda, which makes it reluctant to buy weapons outside the EU, even if some of the money is available, which it is. They could probably support Ukraine so they remain in the fight, but it is hard to see them having the equipment to give Ukraine a good chance to win. We should not underestimate how important US aid is. What if Trump simply lifted US sanctions? The dynamic would totally change, and suddenly this assessment is irrelevant. The question would in such a case be, how long can we keep Ukraine in the fight, not how long will it take before Russia can not afford to be in the fight?
A somewhat reassuring assessment, thanks. The terms winning and losing probably require definition. For Ukraine victory would be a restoration of the 1991 border. Anything less would be a defeat to a greater or lesser extent, though the continued existence of a viable independent state would be an achievement in itself given the prospects the country faced in February 2022. For Russia, victory seems to be somewhat more nebulous. I guess it would be anything Putin could sell to an increasingly restless population as an outcome worth the sacrifice. The point about the crucial significance of the crude oil price going forward is well made. Zero profit from crude oil production was a major factor in sinking the Soviet Union. With regard to resources, much also depends on the extent to which China is prepared to assist Russia in avoiding a defeat.
I agree with many points. 100 %, what China does will dictate much. It will not solve the Russian manpower problem, but they could supply Russia almost indefinitely. Does not look like they want to, but that is a real possibility. Would be a risky move for China, but it is a dictatorship planning decades into the future, so they might think such a gamble would be worth it. For Russia, I suppose if they kept what they have gained so far, and got sanctions lifted that would be a victory for them. Likely they would try and keep Ukraine out of NATO, but not sure they have the time to play for that. I agree, that Putin will have a hard sell in any realistic case. He can not simply try and freeze the conflict, don't think he can afford that. Regarding Ukraine, only Ukraine can state what a victory looks like, as they should. They want to fight, so I support that. If, or rather when, they want to negotiate, I will support that. The best outcome for a lasting peace would get back to the 1991 borders, and get into NATO. NATO will always be key, anything else, simply pushing renewed fighting into the not too distant future. I could imagine some scenario where Ukraine probably would see it as a victory without reaching that goal. Get back all of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia (must have unimpeded access to the black sea), and put Crimea under international rule. Establish some easily defended lines along Luhansk and Donetsk Oblast, but do not require all of them back, and becoming a NATO member, that would probably be seen as a victory for Ukraine. I support anything that sees Ukraine as a viable state. with guaranteed peace for the coming 30 years would be a victory. All in the eyes of the beholder. Victory or defeat is a tricky thing to define. We could say that the Franco-Prussian War war of 1870 was a German Victory. But if we think about it, that was a least part of the reasons for World War 1, which definitely was a reason for World War 2. So one could argue that there were no victors in 1870, and that conflict only really ended in 1945, when Germany and France stopped fighting.
JMS with Russia printing money at an insane inflated rate like you said, can you see the Russian ruble being irrelevant by next year? I would think they would be using another currency all together
It is hard to see them giving up on the ruble. Would be like the US giving up on the dollar, much prestige in your own currency. The oil price will be well worth watching, that could decide this war, so fingers crossed for increased production.
