Showing posts with label C2. Show all posts
Showing posts with label C2. Show all posts

Monday, March 31, 2025

Why They Are Not Bright.

The US is a fractured nation (or using Huntington's lingo--a torn one) and against the background of a precipitous (always not very high) decline of cognitive abilities of the best of the best the US "elite machine" produces, be them politicians or military, one has to question motives of those so called "elites". Going back to this NYT piece (of shit), Larry did a good write up about it yesterday: 

I can summarize the massive story in one sentence — Ukraine would have destroyed the weak, incompetent Russians if only the Ukrainian generals had followed the guidance from the US military. If you’re looking for a signal that the war in Ukraine is on its last legs, this article is it. This is a ridiculous attempt to burnish the image of the Pentagon and US European Command as strategic and tactical geniuses who could have beaten the Russians if only those damn Ukrainians had followed their advice.

But here is the critical point which is very interesting for Russian General Staff and military academies where, now confirmed by the NYT, intellectual impotence of Pentagon will be studied in astonishment for years to come. Here is this phrase. 

One European intelligence chief recalled being taken aback to learn how deeply enmeshed his N.A.T.O. counterparts had become in Ukrainian operations. “They are part of the kill chain now,” he said.

Let me translate it to you: using one of many definitions (all of them very similar) we define the Kill Chain as: kill chain is the ability of an organization to rapidly and accurately execute all the steps from locating to killing an enemy target. It represents the essential contest in modern warfare. In other words, cretins from NYT confirmed what Russians knew all along--the US was in full command and control of VSU top-bottom. Well, apart from the moral aspect of the story that the US military excelled primarily in attacking civilians and civilian infrastructure, the conclusion is not only warranted but inescapable--US military knows very little about modern warfare, especially in the C2 (Command and Control) field where even modern Comms, Computers and ISR are no match to a much more experienced and technologically advanced opponent with an immense advantage in kinetic means. 

For those who still do not understand the depth of this loss for--now we can openly state it--the US Armed Forces in 404, I want to remind you one thing which has been repeated by Russian military non-stop--Russian Army never lost operational initiative. American generals, however, have been looking, as it is now a pattern, in all the wrong places for planning and, as is always the case, descended into the tactical minutiae and PR-based assessment of the battlefield. The fact that they also bought 404's propaganda about casualties also tells everything you need to know about Pentagon. By the time they started to suspect something--it was too late. And then there was a "counter-offensive". It was planned by the US generals and, naturally, it ended in catastrophe for them and those unlucky 160,000+ VSU who have never reached even the first line of Russian defense and have been slaughtered in the forefield (security zone). This is what I wrote about this disaster for NATO and, naturally, strategic victory for Russia. 

The most stunning factor in this whole situation was the fact of not classifying the so-called “counter-offensive” by AFU, while classifying the assessment which, correctly, forecasted some serious issues for the AFU. This assessment was definitely driven by a common military sense and basic understanding of what is called the Correlation of Forces and Means (COFM). Of course, the problem for the West was that the Russian side was preparing to turn those “shortfalls” into unmitigated military catastrophe for Ukraine and the Biden Administration, who had pushed for this amateurishly planned adventure. But even this “classified” assessment—a marked departure from the Biden administration’s public pronouncements about the vitality of Ukraine’s army—should have given the planners in the White House, State Department and Pentagon a serious pause. But it didn’t. The reason it didn’t lies in both the U.S. military’s lack of expertise with real modern warfare of the 21st century across the board and in a precipitous intellectual decline of the fully “echo-chambered” Washington elite, whose insulation from reality and lack of serious competencies in any matters of military strategies and national governance reached grotesque and deadly proportions for both the remnants of Ukraine and for the United States itself. 

I can go off on a tangent of sorts here (again) while describing a dramatic cultural and institutional difference between American "way" of war and Russian one, but that is just the part of problem--the problem is in incompetence of American elites who are the products of a completely confabulated history and of fragile insecure view of themselves. The US is not the "finest fighting force" and it never has been and because of that, as Michael Brenner astutely noted:

Americanism provides a Unified Field Theory of self-identity, collective enterprise, and the Republic’s enduring meaning. When one element is felt to be in jeopardy, the integrity of the whole edifice becomes vulnerable. In the past, American mythology energized the country in ways that helped it to thrive. Today, it is a dangerous hallucinogen that traps Americans in a time warp more and more distant from reality. There is a muted reflection of this strained condition in the evident truth that Americans have become an insecure people. They grow increasingly anxious about who they are, what they are worth and what life will be like down the road. 

By getting involved with 404 and trying to destroy Russia, the US and its chihuahuas from European NATO collapsed this edifice and exposed a rather unimpressive structure which convinced itself that it can fight and win a conventional war against military superpower of Russia which has been such a superpower longer than the United States existed as a nation. A few good (and competent) men cannot fix the mechanism which was broken for decades and the SMO confirmed it fully. NYT, however, gave us an ample confirmation that the US ran the whole damn thing from military standpoint, and this is a critical admission. Or as they say on the street--FAFO. I thank you, NYT, for not being bright and exposing, accidently, the truth.     

Monday, June 26, 2023

A Pure Unrefined Military Porn.

There is nothing like this in NATO, period. No, some may have similarities in function but Tor-M2 proved itself an absolute monster of short range AD. Not that others, like S1 Pantsir, did worse. They also performed brilliantly. But here is the combat work of two Tor-M2 systems. 

Another thing about Tors is that they can launch while moving and, as you may have guessed it, they are fully netcentric. Plus, IRIS-T and NASAMS performed in VSU primarily as useless targets for Russia's stand-off weapons thus providing dismal, in fact embarrassing, combat record. This also doesn't mean that VSU doesn't have a leaker here and there--once in a while they get some Storm Shadow hitting children's campground, or HIMARS hitting some bridge, sometimes, very seldom, they score a hit on Russian military. But primarily most of them (90-95% at least) are getting shot down. Tors play a huge role in this combat score. 

So, what's the future for Tors? It is bright, as it is for Buk-M3 and S1 Pantsir--they provided an outstanding shield for Russian forces on and around battlefield, not to mention an immense data which already allows to introduce even more deadly and advanced upgrades. I talk about short to medium range systems. And then there are those monsters such as S-350, S-300s, S-400 and S-500--that is a whole other story of Soviet Union/Russia pursuing non-stop for more than 70 years a complete domination of the air-defense field. The combat performance of Russian Air Defense has been outstanding, to put it mildly and there is very little doubt that the integrated system will continue to evolve and improve with some systems we haven't seen yet going on-line and completely overthrowing NATO air and space operations concepts and making them completely obsolete. This we can already observe today, in real time. 

In the end, even technology savvy people from USAF have to admit:

The need to address all-domain authorities has emerged as a common theme during recent Tier 1 exercises, US Air Force wargames, and experiments. Joint all-domain command and control’s lateral connectivity, where every sensor is connected to every shooter, begs the issue of command and control: Who makes the decision to shoot? When, where, and with what? Today’s C2 construct puts each service component and domain into its own silo where they work in parallel as deconflicted by the Joint combatant or Joint Force commander. Yet this current C2 construct is seen as antiquated and too slow for the anticipated speed, range, and multidomain nature of a future great-power conflict. In an era where all services and domains are connected and speed is a priority, the question becomes, Who gets to command and control all-domain fires? The answer to this question has huge implications for air component Airmen. 

I have news for the author of this piece, USAF Colonel (ret.) Thomas Cantrell--the US has no speed, range nor multidomain experience and only now begins to see what it is when looks at 404 and SMO. In other words--remove Douhet writings and Doolittle experiences into the museum where they belong because modern battlefield "of a future great-power conflict" will look nothing like what they teach in NATO war colleges, and combined NATO will lose advantage in numbers of air power in the first 48-72 hours of such a conflict.  This is not a theorem, it is an axiom now. What will be the situation in Washington when NATO loses 40-50 F-35s and 3-4 E3 Sentry in the first 24 hours? Exactly... Is S-600 coming?

Friday, March 25, 2022

Thanks To Bernhard Or About Losses, Again...

Bernhard of MoA did a great service by providing a link to the article from yesterday which, in this particular case, does provide words from Pentagon man, that is not just some BSer from Reuters or CNN, or  WSJ who make numbers up and then lie that those numbers are from their "sources".  But even this "15,000 Russian troops killed" dude had to cool it on the Ukie BS being used by US media:

The US and NATO disagree over an estimate of 40,000 Russian casualties in Ukraine. "We continue to have low confidence in those estimates" 

But as I stated, even Pentagon's "figure" (7,000-15,000 KIAs), if it was delivered by someone "in the know" shows the absolute lack of even fleeting grasp of what is going on on the ground in Ukraine. I agree with Bernhard's title of his article and its content:

Propaganda Does Not Change The War - The Ukraine Is Still Losing - Updated

That is why I constantly cringe when, yet another, "analyst" begins to weep about Russia "losing the information war". Russia couldn't have "won" such a war abroad, because it is the only field in which US excels--creation of virtual reality by means of non-stop lies in every single field US media cover, be it elections, health, war (especially war), science, education, you name it. They lie, that's what they do.  Part of this lie serves political agenda of non-stop elections shell game, which passes for "democracy", a euphemism of substituting one incompetent amoral ignoramus for another. The other part is a genuine ignorance, no more so than in the field of warfare. For every truth Russia delivers, there are 10 respective insane lies. 

Just to demonstrate what kind of fraud this "journalism" is, we may go to Columbia University Journo "Program" and partake in the most difficult (in involves some calculations) part of this pseudo-profession and it is Data Journalism. As the title implies, the future "journo" will be taught how to handle data. Just get the load of this from curriculum:

Data Journalism students begin their program in the fall taking foundational computational and data courses as well as courses on the fundamentals of reporting. In the second semester, they continue honing their journalistic skills with Writing with Data and the Data, Computation, Innovation workshop, where they will explore cutting-edge storytelling using data and computation, and take a 15‐week seminar and production course with the Master of Science students. In the final semester, students work on the Master’s Project, a substantive piece of data-driven journalism. They also join the Master of Science students in taking a suite of courses called Journalism Essentials, which covers the business, historical, legal and ethical issues of the field. They also take Storytelling with Data and Data, Computation, Innovation II. 

So, in other words, they teach those "students" some Python, maybe some statistics and "data handling" with application to exactly what? A-ha, here is the issue, assuming, of course, with a very high probability of those students trying to get their M.S. (yes, Master of fvcking Science) in this "field" having no serious math and physics fundamental education crucial for any field of the modern technology-infused world, and that is why no matter what grade they get in this Hodgepodge collection of intro level programming, multi-media and some basic data-handling, they will remain as ignorant on the realities of engineering and design practices, real physical economy or science. But they also will not get even in the most basic form real warfare, ranging from tactics and operational art to more complex issues of sensors, weapon systems integration and combat control--it is a completely different world which is fully obscured by fanboys on YouTube who wouldn't know the difference between math.expectation and probability of hitting the target, and, incidentally, is precisely completely obfuscated by these very "journalism" and "communications" graduates who do not know shit from shinola and have zero background in warfare.

I don't need to really expose here such "wonderful" examples of military "journalism" such as David Axe or Michael Peck, among many others who grace the pages of innumerable US publications on war and military porn, but they are not there to "report". They are there to spin. I do appreciate and I know there are real American (and Russian) military reporters out there who have seen some shit and they try to report honestly (including by risking their lives) on war issues, but that is still--reporting. It gives some touch to the reality on the ground, but the essential thing which runs modern war: strategic and operational planning, combat command and control--these are very different animals and anyone wouldn't even get close to those without graduating serious military higher learning institution and having serious tactical let alone operational planning experience at least at the level of regiment and its staff. Brigade and division staff level is still preferred. And it is this level at which one begins to learn to handle immense arrays of data of which fanboys who discuss how one or another tank looks like or why F-16 is sexier than MiG-29 (which, actually, is true) have no clue about, as are the graduates of this Data Journalism courses. 

That is why such a BS about 15,000 Russian KIAs makes it to Western media, spun, of course, for the sake of the agenda of powers that be and really, any claims by American or European journos about "freedom of press" are met today in Russia and elsewhere with a Homeric laughter. But even factoring all those PR-"professionals" and propaganda pushers one still doesn't get the problem resolved. Professionals, especially serious professionals, and my blog allows many of them to speak here, such as Larry Johnson, or, by references such as Colonel Vladimir Trukhan, or Scott Ritter or Colonel Macgregor, no matter how one tries to convey a complexity of a modern C2 (Command and Control) on the modern and very complex battlefield, Hollywood will always win, as will those "unnamed" Pentagon officials who would be "leaking" a complete BS and non-sense to ignoramuses from media, who exist only for sensation and not for honest reporting. Some of them, as you all know, are downright war criminals. 

It is not that Western journos spread lies, it is the fact that with each passing day their BS becomes so outlandish that one has to ask the question: do they even know what basic arithmetic is? I begin to doubt it. I can try to explain to some moron from NYT or WSJ (not that they will be interested in it) how the combat tasks are set and how planning develops from there, how to approximately calculate the force size for a company, even battalion to accomplish the task, where the reserves will come and how, but I cannot help in cases when their parents and schools didn't teach them basic adding and subtraction, not to speak of multiplication and division (ooh, boy those stochastic coefficients, you have to multiply there). So, that is why General Patton is America's main WW II "hero", because BS sells and no matter how one may hate (and they deserve it fully) Erick Von Manstein, Heinz Guderian or Walter Model, should these people be alive today, as would have been Zhukov, Tolbukhin or Rokossovsky, they all would have come to an agreement that the US learned all the wrong lessons from WW II and that explains why the US lost all of its wars which followed. Goebbels would have loved to have Anglo-American MSM journos in his org in Hell. They would fit right in. 

In related news. New anecdote from Russia, Madeleine Albright gets to the Charon the ferryman at the river Styx and offers him a coin (one sixth of a Drachma) for crossing the river. Charon shakes his head in disagreement and replies to her: "I accept only Rubles".