Ukraine

argee
Full Member
The aid that the Ukraine have been given is defensive, as there’s a fine line that the west can dance on to support Ukraine, offensive weaponry is, in my opinion, beyond that line and would have Russia escalating in some manner.

The defensive equipment supplied has helped Ukraine, but the reality is that Russia are not utilising smart weapons, or doing what you’d expect in a conflict like this,, there was no ‘shock and awe’ about this at the start, they are still doing what they were doing in WW2, throwing ill equipped and trained troops at the problem.

agreed, the last 8 years on steroids is probably the likely outcome of this war. I just don't see there being the outright defeat of Russia, unless something internal happens that causes a withdrawal or Ukraine are given more offensive options to push them out.

the reality is that Russia are not utilising smart weapons,

That's fairly obviously because they don't have any. They're repurposing anti-ship missiles to attack land targets. That's a sign of desperation. They're using their best attack aircraft to deliver unguided bombs, another sign of desperation. They basically just don't have much in the way of smart weapons.

Yep - even early on during the conflict, we’ve seen Russian attack helicopters popping up to lob unguided rockets in the vague direction of their targets and then hitting the deck ejecting flares to avoid being hit by SAMs. Clearly Russia doesn’t have air superiority.

theres no way Putin would be able to do that, he has nothing like the grip on power stalin had

If he hasnt mobilized now its too late for this war

At the moment I can only assume that he is still willing to put more boots on ground but how many I don't know. Perhaps he has reserved them for the "real war" is my assumption.

If I understand what you’re trying to say correctly, to assert that Russia will mobilise millions of soldiers, support them logistically, arm them, train them and deploy them is extremely fanciful.

I don't know how they will mobilise but all I know is that there seem to be still boots on ground for sometimes even with their WWII equipment now.

The reality is that the Russian military is weak and is unable to conquer Ukraine. They’ve been at war for less than two months and they’ve lost about 30% of their fighting capacity without achieving any of their major objectives. They got routed in the north and have made little progress anywhere else. The idea that they can win this war is a fantasy.

I see no sign of Russia military retreating yet apart from perhaps reassigned etc. What operational capacity they have I don't know but they are sure determine that's all I can say.

Your man Beau has and interesting take on the motivations for assistance.

I feel like Beau should be showing me how to build a timber framed cabin, rather than explaining geopolitical consequences of this war

I don’t think it’s been proven that it’s a busted flush yet

How would you characterise it's performance so far?

It’s been proven that the help Ukraine has been given has been enough to stop Russia advancing

The Ukrainian army has already defeated the invasion forces sent to Kyiv, it has, at the same time, prevented the Russians in the south and east from establishing any sort of room for maneuvere, and prevented a breakout, The Ukrainian forces are now free to concentrate all their forces to this battle, what do you think the outcome given their prior performances and lack of resources the Russians can bring to bear is going to be?

 so far. Have they been given enough offensive options? Dunno we’ll see.

What would you say are the defining differentail characteristics of defensive vs offensive weaponry and tactics? Can you expand on your take on the differences of Ukrainian doctrine vs the Russain in offensive warfare? what weaponry will they deploy, forward battery fire? Air strikes ? What formations of heavy or faster light infantry do the Ukrainians use? Can you see a use of armoured units given the weather forecasts for the next couple of weeks in Donbas? How d'you think that will that effect the ground conditions? morale? ability to mount accurate artillary or air ops?

I see no sign of Russia military retreating yet apart from perhaps reassigned etc. What operational capacity they have I don’t know but they are sure determine that’s all I can say.

1000s of russian troops were forced to retreat over 100km after their attack on Kyiv failed
1000s died trying to achieve it

those BTGs arent beig reassigned as much as rebuilt

https://twitter.com/War_Mapper/status/1510772214739705860

meanwhile

in Russia

https://twitter.com/DmitryOpines/status/1517134712325648390

https://twitter.com/Joyce_Karam/status/1517118119784951808

nickc
Full Member
Are the ommissions significant in terms of the argument being put forward?

I really haven’t got time to write the long form response it requires. Go to the article and read chapter 3 – it’s a potted history of Ukraines relationship with Russia which is a somewhat rose-tinted view Then go this this line in chapter 4

The December 1991 referendum on independence produced a 91 percent ‘Yes’ vote

It doesn’t take much reading (wikipedia will do, hell you can even watch Michael palin’s “Round the world” documentary/drama where he meets a fervently nationalist citizen in Ukraine) about the history of the tensions between these two countries to understand that the Ukrainians have always understood themselves to be subject to an invading country.

I think whole point of that paragraph is to highlight the internal divisions within Ukraine and the push Westward and how that's developed into what happened in 2014. Ukrainians may have had tensions with Russia for years, but the look westwards is a modern development.

1000s of russian troops were forced to retreat over 100km after their attack on Kyiv failed
1000s died trying to achieve it

those BTGs arent beig reassigned as much as rebuilt

That's a retreat but not the retreat I am referring to. Not Retreat as in Russia stopping the war because of the losses they suffered. They lost the battle but the war is still ongoing.

I see no sign of Russia military retreating yet apart from perhaps reassigned etc

They got utterly routed in the north. They fled leaving their dead soldiers rotting in the streets and fields.

I don’t know how they will mobilise but all I know is that they will continue to put boots on ground for sometimes even with their WWII equipment now.

They've thrown their best soldiers and equipment in already. They don't have any reserves. They have huge stocks of rusty old Soviet era equipment, but it would take years to pull that out of mothballs and make it combat ready. They can conscript fresh soldiers, but they'll need months of training to prepare them for combat. Russia is not able to conquer Ukraine, the only thing they can hope for now is to consolidate the territory they have now.

nickc
Full Member
How would you characterise it’s performance so far?

Russia attempted to take Kyiv and it petered out against fierce Ukrainian resistance that was backed by NATO equipment and tactics/strategy. When that proved futile and losses became too much, they withdrew, quickly. And from a large area, which suggests a strategic change in Russia thinking, they now understand they'd over-stretched and underestimated NATO assistance.

The Ukrainian army has already defeated the invasion forces sent to Kyiv, it has, at the same time, prevented the Russians in the south and east from establishing any sort of room for maneuvere, and prevented a breakout, The Ukrainian forces are now free to concentrate all their forces to this battle, what do you think the outcome given their prior performances and lack of resources the Russians can bring to bear is going to be?

I'm not sure they are free to commit all their forces East, they'll still have to protect Kyiv and have a standing force in Odessa and other places for example. Same as Russia can't commit all it's forces in Ukraine, it needs to have standing armies elsewhere too.

What would you say are the defining differentail characteristics of defensive vs offensive weaponry and tactics? Can you expand on your take on the differences of Ukrainian doctrine vs the Russain in offensive warfare? what weaponry will they deploy, forward battery fire? Air strikes ? What formations of heavy or faster light infantry do the Ukrainians use? Can you see a use of armoured units given the weather forecasts for the next couple of weeks in Donbas? How d’you think that will that effect the ground conditions? morale? ability to mount accurate artillary or air ops?

I don't know, I'm basing it on territorial gains and loses so far. They haven't been pushed back, they came up against a defence they couldn't break and withdrew. Ukraine hasn't gone on the offensive yet. I don't need to know the specifics to see that.

Russia is not able to conquer Ukraine, the only thing they can hope for now is to consolidate the territory they have now.

Assuming that is the case, will that end the war?

At the moment I can only assume that he is still willing to put more boots on ground but how many I don’t know. Perhaps he has reserved them for the “real war” is my assumption.

That’s pure conjecture, even Vladimir Putin can’t magic hundreds of thousands more trained soldiers, equip them, feed them and transport them to Ukraine. Russia’s logistics are already stretched. Not sure what “real war” means either.

I don’t know how they will mobilise but all I know is that there seem to be still boots on ground for sometimes even with their WWII equipment now.

Separatist soldiers in Donbas have been reported to be v.poorly equipped and armed with ancient rifles. It’s not as if Russia has stocks of WW2 vintage T34s that have been continuously maintained that can be deployed either.

I see no sign of Russia military retreating yet apart from perhaps reassigned etc. What operational capacity they have I don’t know but they are sure determine that’s all I can say

Russian forces have withdrawn from Kyiv?

When that proved futile and losses became too much, they withdrew, quickly.

They got routed. That's not the same as a retreat.

Assuming that is the case, will that end the war?

Of course not. Ukraine will not trust Russia to abide by any peace treaty and Putin cannot publicly admit that his war has failed. It might end as a frozen conflict. That's not the end of the war.

Assuming that is the case, will that end the war?

You already have the answer to that - even if Russia can hold Donbas and the Ukrainians then offer a ceasefire, Putin’s guarantees have been proven worthless.

Russia attempted to take Kyiv and it petered out out against fierce Ukrainian resistance that was backed by NATO equipment

It 'petered out' within 36 hours of the start of the war. Here's a thread from Feb 25.

I'm not sure that was so much to do with NATO equipment, as the Russian army being badly managed, badly equipped and badly led.

Incidentally, how are you defining 'NATO equipment' anyway? Ukraine has been buying Turkish drones since well before the war. Turkey is a NATO member. Does that mean the drones are 'NATO equipment'?

doris5000
Free Member

as the Russian army being badly managed, badly equipped and badly led.

No doubt that played a significant part.

They haven’t been pushed back, they came up against a defence they couldn’t break and withdrew

You analysis of the Russian performance of their attack on Kyiv is wrong.

I don’t know, I’m basing it on territorial gains and loses so far

Since this war started have the Russian made much territorial gains in the south and east that you can see? And if they answer to that is no, what d'you think has prevented that so far?

doris5000
Free Member
Incidentally, how are you defining ‘NATO equipment’ anyway? Ukraine has been buying Turkish drones since well before the war. Turkey is a NATO member. Does that mean the drones are ‘NATO equipment’?

At this stage the war is will more or less be getting funded externally tbh, Ukraine can't afford this type of war on it's own, so it's a bit of a moot question. Ukraine is pretty much a proxy and at the mercy of external interests now.

Not sure what to make of this

https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-putin-kyiv-business-europe-f0e1cd893715eda1e6bef696d9c47db3?utm_source=upday&utm_medium=referral

Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed victory in the battle for Mariupol on Thursday, even as he ordered his troops not to risk more losses by storming the giant steel plant containing the last pocket of Ukrainian resistance in the city.

Instead, he directed his forces to seal off the Azovstal plant “so that not even a fly comes through.”

Aside from claiming victory, again, whilst the defense is still active.

It kind of reads like they were taking very heavy losses, or that the morale was breaking.

At this stage the war is will more or less be getting funded externally tbh

I believe Ukraime is forecast to take a 35% hit to GDP, which is understandable considering the violence inflicted upon it.

Edited
https://m.dw.com/en/imf-slashes-global-growth-outlook-amid-ukraine-war/a-61513313

nickc
Full Member
I don’t know, I’m basing it on territorial gains and loses so far

Since this war started have the Russian made much territorial gains in the south and east that you can see? And if they answer to that is no, what d’you think has prevented that so far?

They've took a quite a chunk, aye. That they haven't taken more is due to good defenses in places like Mykolaiv, Kharkiv and forces butted up against the occupied donbas areas. I'd suggest resistance in places like Melitopol and even still Mariupol is also causing them serious problems.

I'm not saying it's going well for Russia, it clearly isn't. Looks more like stalemate to me. But as I say, we'll see how that plays out over the next week or 2. i hope the strategies in this 2nd phases do allow Ukraine to start taking back areas and really start pushing Russia out.

Russia having a bad day in the air

Ukranian claims of taking down 2 KA 52 attack helicopters and one SU-34 fighter/bomber seem to have video evidence now, too

https://twitter.com/GirkinGirkin/status/1517142014252388355
https://twitter.com/NotWoofers/status/1517103610953412608

edit
a 3rd one today, in Kharkiv

https://twitter.com/Arslon_Xudosi/status/1517143584348114948

Much heavier weapons being supplied.

This guy does a very good debunking of the "Russia isn't sending their best". In summary he analyses confirmned losses and concludes there is a mix of old and new equipment being destroyed as well as losses spread across regular and elite units.

This guy does a very good debunking of the “Russia isn’t sending their best”.

Beyond that, why on earth would they launch an invasion using a B team? If you're going to launch a war, commonsense is to use your best units to destroy the enemy as fast as you can.

Beyond that, why on earth would they launch an invasion using a B team

If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can’t find them, or can’t afford to hire the A-team?

I’m truly sorry.

can’t afford to hire the A-team?

I think this describes Russia in general.

Russian military strategy dating from WWII seems to involve overwhelming via numbers rather than via quality and strategy. The ancient tradition that ordinary Russian life is considered pretty cheap by its leaders.

If you’re going to launch a war, commonsense is to use your best units to destroy the enemy as fast as you can.

I think the argument is if you have lots of people and arent overly fussed about how many return then you might as well send waves of cannon fodder in rather than risk the highly trained and expensive troops

than risk the highly trained and expensive troops

The VDV were pretty much first in.

Moskva at Snake island too.

Russian military strategy dating from WWII seems to involve overwhelming via numbers rather than via quality and strategy

After some pretty disastrous results in some minor regional wars, the Russian army embarked on some major overhauls which resulted in the 2008 reforms, and the units that are knowns as BTGs emerged from that. This were the reforms that were initially run by Serdyukhov that got all the generals upset and eventually Serdyukhov fired. They were then run by Makerov, who was much more to the liking of generals as he was happy for them to carry on trousering the money that should have been spent on updating and reform. - Hence cheap tyres that fall off, pretend "paper" units that don't exist in reality and all that jazz.

The reforms were supposed to reduce the overall size of the military, update it's officer corps training, introduce revolutionary concepts like a  dedicated Military Police force (no, I'm not kidding) and introduce a more rounded  NCO cadre - the Russians don't use junior leaders in the same way that most western armed forces do. If you're really suffering insomnia I recommend this Congressional Research Paper on the subject.

You can judge for yourself how well these reforms have accomplished their aims...

The VDV were pretty much first in.

Yes its clearly wrong in this case but its the argument why you might send in cannonfodder.

Presumably VDV were sent to secure Hostomel? You'd obviously use airborne units to do that on day 1 of the invasion, it's the only way. The Russians were still under the illusion that they could secure the government buildings and radio stations in Kiev, effect regime change and be showered with flowers from grateful Ukrainians. It seems utterly delusional in retrospect, but I guess quite a few people didn't give the UA a chance and thought it would be a quick decapitation.

The Russians were still under the illusion that they could secure the government buildings and radio stations in Kiev, effect regime change and be showered with flowers from grateful Ukrainians. It seems utterly delusional in retrospect, but I guess quite a few people didn’t give the UA a chance and thought it would be a quick decapitation.

An interpretation of this that I have read in a few places is that Putin thought there were cells of pro-Russian insurrectionists, funded by Russia, which would leap up and help with the operation. But in fact these groups were mostly imaginary as the funding had been trousered by officials. So a mixture of delusion and deception.

But in fact these groups were mostly imaginary as the funding had been trousered by officials. So a mixture of delusion and deception.

Imagine developing an entire economy based on elites thieving national assets and then finding out that culture also screwed up your ability to wage genocidal wars...

That sort of endemic corruption isn’t new to Russia per se, but when people at the very top are hiving off assets overseas it’s really hard to seriously address corruption. We’ve seen this with the militaries of Afghanistan and Iraq, where payroll fraud was rampant and unchecked.

From the New Yorker

The amount of materiel value “lost” by Russia would seem to be a surprise to those at the very top though.

I know Russia is a big country

But they're having a bad day for spontaneous combustion

https://twitter.com/igorsushko/status/1517172233629626368?t=BFLkB-M8hfzKHrP_JdUCOw&s=19

are these reports verified?

Russian military strategy dating from WWII seems to involve overwhelming via numbers rather than via quality and strategy.

I seem to remember reading somewhere, that even in the defence of Stalingrad, Russia had many divisions held in reserve.

I would think this is still the case and there will be troops kept aside, that probably never be used in this campaign.

The Mirror are reporting the two fires

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/breaking-russias-biggest-chemical-plant-26767453

Not that its verified as a result

'Best' is subjective. A cursory glance at footage and available open source info on their 'best' units command structure & tactics places them way below an average UK line infantry unit.

You can only piss with the cock you've got, and the russians have a significantly poor member.

Beyond that, why on earth would they launch an invasion using a B team? If you’re going to launch a war, commonsense is to use your best units to destroy the enemy as fast as you can.

 

NATO can't help directly, but should pull training operations wherever/whenever it can at the moment. Might help to spread the Russians more thinly.

PS: I'm involved in a party wall dispute here in Warwickshire, so strategically I'm on another level!

PS: I’m involved in a party wall dispute here in Warwickshire, so strategically I’m on another level!

Needs a thread with added exclamation mark.
Are the UN involved yet?

I’m involved in a party wall dispute

Ain't no party like a party wall dispute party!