Posted on 02/24/2015 2:57:00 PM PST by dynachrome
Britain was pulled closer towards a renewed cold war with Russia when David Cameron announced UK military trainers are to be deployed to help Ukraine forces stave off further Russian backed incursions into its sovereign territory.
The decision announced on Tuesday but under consideration by the UK national security council since before Christmas represents the first deployment of British troops to the country since the near civil war in eastern Ukraine began more than a year ago.
Downing Street said the deployment was not just a practical bilateral response to a request for support, but a signal to the Russians that Britain will not countenance further large scale annexations of towns in Ukraine.
(Excerpt) Read more at theguardian.com ...
This war is already started as the Russians killed ten British subjects on the Malaysian airliner they shot down.
Send 1,000 hunting rifles with mil-dot scope, 500 rounds each, and 1,000 mil-dot reticle spotting scopes. Teach 2,000 people how to shoot (3 weeks), how to hide (2 weeks), how to navigate (1 week) and basic first aid (1 week). Assume one week to in-process. In 8 weeks, you can field 1,000 basic sniper teams.
In 6 months, you would have somewhere in the neighborhood of 2,500 sniper teams (assuming some losses). If these sniper teams took 1 shot and wounded or killed 1 combatant per day, in 1 month the losses to the Russian / separatist forces would be enormous. I am of the opinion that after 2 months, the Ukrainians would be running out of targets.
Interesting
Is your complaint that we need a stronger reaction from the rest of NATO?
That seems to be what you are saying.
Feeling nostalgic?
"Ho, Ho, Ho Chi Minh! The NLF is going to win!"
"Make love, not war"
advisors are going to make such a huge difference between Russia and an under-equipped nation
/sarc
I don’t know, what British advisers started a war?
Sending advisers doesn’t get anyone involved in a war.
The Russians must be enjoying a good laugh.
If the British prime minister were serious about helping the Ukrainians defeat the Russians, which is the only way the Ukrainians will ever be able to live normal lives again, he would be sending large tanks, artillery, etc., into Ukraine instead of mere advisors.
In fact, if the British prime minister were actually serious about sending advisors, he would have kept silent about his plans and secretly infiltrated the advisors into Ukraine so that the Russians wouldn’t be alerted to their presence. All the Russians have to do now is wait until the new British Ukrainian Advisory Headquarters is set up near Kiev or wherever and bomb it to smithereens before a single shred of advice can be received by the poor Ukrainians.
Why would they hide the fact that they are sending advisers to a friendly nation that Russia is supposedly not invading?
It was only months ago that we were conducting our own military exercises with our friends inside of Ukraine.
Interestingly, artillery has so far played the dominant role in Ukraine, killing more soldiers and destroying far more tanks and vehicles (all types) than my beloved infantry. We used to believe that the old Soviet firing tables were overly optimistic in their estimated effects against armor, but concentrated artillery fire with conventional rounds has proven to be absolutely devastating against Ukrainian tanks and other armored vehicles. (In other words, direct hits are not required since shards bursting at 20m+ are penetrating tanks' top and side armor.) And as a side note, tactical air power has thus far been virtually nonexistent.
Neither side in Ukraine is suffering any shortage of weapons, ammunition or military training. Ukraine is filled with vast stores of Soviet era everything and is itself a major arms manufacturer and exporter. And its population has a high percentage of military veterans dating back to the old days of universal conscription. So far, it appears the key difference on the battlefield has been motivation, leadership and will. Kiev's conscript army is not faring well, and its rates of draft avoidance and desertion are high and growing.
The Brits send tanks? They have a grand total of 227 Tanks now. That’s IT. The Russians have 15,000.
Britain literally has more horses, and more Generals than they do tanks.
“Interestingly, artillery has so far played the dominant role in Ukraine, killing more soldiers and destroying far more tanks and vehicles (all types) than my beloved infantry”
Artillery is more vicious than any other battle field weapon. Not as sexy, but its still the bad boy. Even better than air.
Sorta like the cargo moving by sea blows away airlift.
Good analysis.
Trip wire?
No, they are merely friends helping friends against an invasion that Putin’s defenders tell us isn’t taking place.
“Ukraine is filled with vast stores of Soviet era everything”
Probably why the supply of Mosin Nagant rifles has dried up pretty much. Most of the WW2 refurbs were from the Ukraine. Might be being used by the Ukraine 2nd line forces now.
A recent report from the Atlantic Council, the Brookings Institution, the Center for a New American Security, and the Chicago Council on Global Affairs listed what they think Ukraine needs.
http://www.thechicagocouncil.org/ukraine
“Additional non-lethal assistance should include: counterbattery
radars, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs),
electronic counter-measures for use against opposing
UAVs, secure communications capabilities, armored
Humvees and medical support equipment.
Lethal defensive military assistance should include light
anti-armor missiles, given the large numbers of armored
vehicles that the Russians have deployed in Donetsk and
Luhansk and the abysmal condition of the Ukrainian
militarys light anti-armor weapons.”
British troops in the Crimea, looking a lot like 1853.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.