Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

RheagarTargaryen t1_j1zh71l wrote

Reply to comment by frizzykid in Lithuania defense minister is leery that Russia will run out of ammo by KimCureAll

Director of National Intelligence (USA) was the one saying that Russia is running out.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna59847

4

whiskey__wizard t1_j1zxs02 wrote

Never said they are “running out.” She said they are not capable of indigenously producing what they are expending. That says nothing about how much they may have stockpiled (because we can’t know for sure) or how much they are capable of getting from other allied nations.

You could say the same thing about the ukraine, but they have a steady stream of western support to keep their ammo flowing. No one is running out anytime soon.

18

Mob1lis_in_mobil1 t1_j200cbz wrote

They may be running low compared to pre-conflict stockpile levels, and they totally could be scouring countries like NK and Belarus for ammunition; but to pretend they aren’t capable of pumping out more is foolish.

Russia has a large defense industry, they have been selling (and giving) weapons to other countries for decades.

Unless the munitions factories themselves are hit, waiting for Russia to run out of ammo is foolish.

12

frizzykid t1_j1zijkm wrote

Yeah but he also says tied to that they already have found external aid and will continue to look for it to help keep up with their military output. He doesn't say they are going to run out of stuff to shoot at Ukraine anytime soon. This is just another example of what I said in my comment, where the headlines make it seem much worse than it is.

6

meacri t1_j1zzgv7 wrote

If all they have is artillery it really limits what targets they can hit. Their long range method is now iranian drones. If they can only shell the border, it isn't that useful. Ukraine can also re-establish air superiority then enemy arty's become an easy target.

So how do suppose Russia will try to hit Kyiv hospitals?

7

frizzykid t1_j200g3v wrote

> If they can only shell the border, it isn't that useful

This is really way to simple. Targeted long range munitions are important, but if you have enough shells to fire off you will eventually hit something of value. During WW1 they fired off like a billion shells in the first year alone and I'm sure you've seen the pictures of what the western front looked like during WW1. Russia may not be able to strike Kyiv accurately for much longer but they can still strike areas of logistical importance and make it hard for Ukraine to reinforce their troops.

Attacking the Ukrainian cities deep in Ukraine were mostly for morale purposes. These were operations to continue to try and get people living in Ukraine to leave. Regular less accurate artillery has been vital to the Russians ability to strike Ukrainian front line positions since the beginning of the war.

1

meacri t1_j201e67 wrote

Arty can easily be taken out by drones. This is why Ukraine is buying drones and gaining air superiority.

You can't fight WW1 style against a military with tech, it just won't last.

3

frizzykid t1_j201qfd wrote

>Arty can easily be taken out by drones

And it can be reproduced as quickly as it's taken out. Also drones themselves can be targeted by artillery or other drones which Russia has.

As it is now Russia appears to have everything they need to drag out this conflict as long as possible. They are very skilled at creating unending conflict.

−6

The_Redoubtable_Dane t1_j2141zp wrote

The fact that this appears to be the Russian's strategy is dumbfounding, since it is exactly what NATO would want Russia to do.

That is, to drag out the war for so long that Russia depletes its ENTIRE advanced arsenal, and for so long that hundreds of thousands of young Russians will die in the process, which will permanently weaken Russia from a demographic point of view.

The only logical conclusion for why Russia is currently doing what it is doing is that continuing down this path is in Vladimir Putin's personal interest, but with the probable end-game in sight, I fail to see how the status quo of dragging out the war is really that advantageous to him personally.

So more likely, the current strategy that Russia is pursuing is probably what Vladimir Putin thinks is in it own best interests based on the incorrect information he is being fed about the situation on the ground.

4

meacri t1_j2114sp wrote

No, Russia has suicide drones, artillery isn't anti-air and drones are smaller targets. Russia definitely cannot refine steel and reproduce artillery cannons "as quickly as they are taken out". Russia is complete ass in logistics alone. This is why their front line fighters do not have enough small arms or ammo.

As it is now, I'm coming to the conclusion you're trying to use propaganda, or you're just talking out your ass trying to disprove me because you don't like being wrong.

2

Mirathecat22 t1_j22w7m8 wrote

They don’t have everything though, Russia might have more but Ukraine has longer arms that hit their supply dumps that really constrain Russias ability to maintain those lines and continue lobbing those shells towards Ukraine. This has been Russias biggest problem ever since Ukraine got their hands on HIMARS, they haven’t been able to have reliable supply lines, ammo dumps or consistent positioning.

2