The War in the Ukraine

Russia has said that German Leopard 2 tanks are equipped with sub-calibre armour-piercing shells with uranium cores, and Moscow will consider their use in Ukraine against Russians as the use of "dirty bombs".

Source: Konstantin Gavrilov, Head of the Russian delegation in Vienna at the OSCE Forum on Military Security and Arms Control; Kremlin-aligned news outlet RIA Novosti and Russian BBC editorial office

Quote from Gavrilov: "We warn the Western sponsors of the Kyiv military machine against encouraging nuclear provocations and blackmail."

"We are aware that the Leopard 2 tank, as well as the Bradley and Marder infantry fighting vehicles, are armed with sub-calibre armour-piercing shells with uranium cores, the use of which leads to contamination of the area, as it happened in Yugoslavia and Iraq.

If Kyiv is supplied with such shells for NATO heavy military equipment, we will consider it to be the use of dirty nuclear bombs against Russia with all the ensuing consequences."

kokole said:

sub-calibre armour-piercing shells with uranium cores

Click to expand...

So in other word, Depleted Uranium (DU) Armour-Piercing Fin-Stabilized Discarding-Sabot (APFSDS) shell? Isn't that more-or-less standard in modern tank shell? Or are the Russians still stuck with wolfram AP shells for some reason?

kokole said:

If Kyiv is supplied with such shells for NATO heavy military equipment, we will consider it to be the use of dirty nuclear bombs against Russia with all the ensuing consequences.

Click to expand...

I guess they are using that as an excuse to drop nukes now?

ZeEa5KPul said:

Quick question: Is all the NATO equipment entering and projected to enter Ukraine sufficient to alter the battlefield to where Russia must resort to nuclear weapons to prevent catastrophic defeat?

If yes, we know how this is going to end. If no, we're making a mountain out of a molehill and dancing to the West's tune.

Click to expand...

I think many of us deep down know where this is heading but how it ends that is the part that is the most unpredictable. When Russia invaded I predicted this war would drag in some NATO nations and now with new weapons coming in with offensive capabilities at some point Russia is going to have to take a risk and hit the Eastern part of Poland where all these heavy weapons are transiting from because if Russia continues to do nothing and these new heavy offensive weapons starts pushing Russians out from their lines, like they did in Kherson, Lyman and Izium, it may be too late for Russia in Ukraine conventionally.

I guarantee you NATO isn't as united as they look and Russia needs to call their bluff by hitting these places with conventional cruise missiles. If they were to take action in Eastern Poland I see two nations, France and Germany, not wanting any part of any retaliation and more than likely their citizens would demand their nation to take no part in any retaliation. A somewhat fracturing may start to take place.

Tactically speaking it's frustrating seeing Russia do nothing except bark and I'm pro-Ukraine. At least take out the roads in western Ukraine close to Polish border where these weapons travel to make a point/warning that Poland is next. At least that's what I would do if I was supreme commander of Russian forces.

Many NATO nations are scared of this escalating but that fear diminishes as time goes by when they see Russia not taking any action when giving Ukraine weapons.

SolarWarden said:

Russia continues to do nothing and these new heavy offensive weapons starts pushing Russians out from their lines, like they did in Kherson, Lyman and Izium, it may be too late for Russia in Ukraine conventionally.

Click to expand...

That was pre-mobilization though... I think ascribing Russian retreat to purely Ukrainian prowess with NATO equipment somewhat obscures Russia's own incompetence, namely spreading themselves over 5 attack vectors with an undermanned force and undersupplied force. We will see how Ukrainian troops fare against a 500K consolidated and freshly supplied force in the spring. I'm betting on Russian breakthroughs in Donbass.

SolarWarden said:

I guarantee you NATO isn't as united as they look and Russia needs to call their bluff by hitting these places with conventional cruise missiles. If they were to take action in Eastern Poland I see two nations, France and Germany, not wanting any part of any retaliation and more than likely their citizens would demand their nation to take no part in any retaliation. A somewhat fracturing may start to take place.

Click to expand...

NATO can also re-supply via Slovakia, Hungary, and Romanian borders, not just Poland. So do you suggest to also attack those countries too? Only an enduring troop presence can regulate trans-border movements, you can't solely rely on conventional cruise missiles to stymie the flow of goods, aid, equipment across a massive border. Plus, NATO (namely USA) can respond by shooting conventional missiles at Crimea as a tit-for-tat, so then what?

SolarWarden said:

Tactically speaking it's frustrating seeing Russia do nothing except bark and I'm pro-Ukraine. At least take out the roads in western Ukraine close to Polish border where these weapons travel to make a point/warning that Poland is next. At least that's what I would do if I was supreme commander of Russian forces.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure how cost-effective is to use a $1M USD Kalibr cruise missile to make pot-holes in roads that can be repaired for under $5K USD overnight?

Why hasn't Russia taken out the tunnels linking Poland to Western Ukraine though? That shouldn't be easy to repair.

Phead128 said:

That was pre-mobilization though... I think ascribing Russian retreat to purely Ukrainian prowess with NATO equipment somewhat obscures Russia's own incompetence, namely spreading themselves over 5 attack vectors with an undermanned force and undersupplied force. We will see how Ukrainian troops fare against a 500K consolidated and freshly supplied force in the spring. I'm betting on Russian breakthroughs in Donbass.

Click to expand...

There is nothing fresh about this force. Russia had a severe manpower shortage at the beginning of this war. Some troops still probably haven't been rotated out for rest. This is an exhausted force, that addressed some of their manpower issues, not solved them.

Listening to Kofman's podcast, supposedly half of the mobilized (150,000) have been used to patch up decimated units and plug holes in Russia's defences, while the other 150,000 are still on their training ranges. The equipment quality visible on the front and in training, is of mixed quality. So there may still be some lingering equipment shortages.

I wouldn't expect any massive offensives. I think it's much more realistic to expect localized offensives like the ones we saw in the Battle of Severedonetsk, Liman, and Bakhmut.

Looks like Russia is in very bad shape when it has to face the whole NATO block alone. When NATO and the US decide to send their most modern tanks to Ukraine, the war is escalated, and it may eventually go out of control. China cannot do anything to help Russia (or oppose to the West).

Personally, I don't support Russia to invade Ukraine, but I just don't want the West to win and Russia to collapse. China maybe the next country to come into the crosshair.

SteelBird said:

Looks like Russia is in very bad shape when it has to face the whole NATO block alone. When NATO and the US decide to send their most modern tanks to Ukraine, the war is escalated, and it may eventually go out of control. China cannot do anything to help Russia (or oppose to the West).

Personally, I don't support Russia to invade Ukraine, but I just don't want the West to win and Russia to collapse. China maybe the next country to come into the crosshair.

Click to expand...

Tanks aren't going to decisively change this conflict. But I might be wrong, I just don't think how small numbers of a relatively simple armored vehicle, even if it is better or worse, would qualitatively change this conflict.

Surplus reserves and end-of-life weapons returned to the manufacturer are now being delivered to Ukraine. At the same time, armaments production is ramped up.

Because if Ukraine has to surrender, the Cold War will reign again and the Iron Curtain will be raised again. Armaments production is required, regardless of whether the new weapons are on a Ukrainian, Polish, Finnish or Baltic border. Nobody trusts Russia anymore. Russia invades other countries.

BMUFL said:

So in other word, Depleted Uranium (DU) Armour-Piercing Fin-Stabilized Discarding-Sabot (APFSDS) shell? Isn't that more-or-less standard in modern tank shell? Or are the Russians still stuck with wolfram AP shells for some reason?

Click to expand...

PLA uses tungsten i believe