Russia vs Ukraine

[alchemist]

I understand NATO are moving more anti air equipment into Gotland with the view of enhancing air capability. I agree, you're not doing much in the Baltic except air and possible troop deployments by sea but regardless - with how stacked Kaliningrad is - if it all went south you'd have to take it out early.

and the Russians are placing air defence systems on important buildings in Moscow... seems they are expecting an escalation

 

[Doogie]

and the Russians are placing air defence systems on important buildings in Moscow... seems they are expecting an escalation

Not really a surprise. So from your perspective - whats the out on this? I'm struggling to see one at the moment. Best I have is either internal strife at the Kremlin or the US agreeing to a demarcation line not far from where we are at now. Option 2 seems more likely.

 

[alchemist]

Not really a surprise. So from your perspective - whats the out on this? I'm struggling to see one at the moment. Best I have is either internal strife at the Kremlin or the US agreeing to a demarcation line not far from where we are at now. Option 2 seems more likely.

not sure... the old rules have been thrown out of the window... for example, the US never recognised USSR sovereignty over the Baltic republics but they would never have looked to wage a proxy war there... 7-8 years ago, Obama stated that Ukraine was a core interest for Russia but not for the US but the US now under Biden is acting like the war in Ukraine is existential for them, too... and everyone just keeps escalating... just consider three events --> someone likely in the West destroyed the Nordstream pipelines which are exclusively civil and undermined Germany's energy infrastructure and destroys permanently any German-Russian cooperation and integration and opens the door for countries to attack civilian infrastructure like the cables that crisscross the oceans... Ukrainian forces twice launched drone attacks on the Engels 2 air base 600+ kms into Russia where Russia's strategic bomber fleet with nuclear weapons is based which per Russian doctrine justifies the use of nuclear weapons because the attack undermines their nuclear deterrent... and Russia has taken over territory, run referendums and on the basis of said referendums annexed those territories and just consider how many Russian minorities exist in neighbouring countries and potential historical land claims Russia has on the basis of the old Russian Empire --> the Russians have already hinted that if the people in Odessa and Chernihiv wish it, referendums can be held there, too

it is like we are in the Devil's casino, the world's at stake and the players are all in

the war will go on for much of 2023, I would think... the financial packages from the US and EU will be enough to keep Kiev afloat... Russia is taking a risk averse strategy as can be seen from the withdrawals at Kharkov and Kherson, their use of Wagner mercenaries and volunteers, and so, I don't think there will be any serious offensives (although some analysts believe that they want to encircle the Ukrainians in Donbass by striking north from Zaporizhzhia and south from Belgorod since Stalingrad levels of fighting is awaiting at Kramatorsk and Slavyansk)... the Russians still don't have enough troops for all of Ukraine and so, perhaps, if/when Russia takes over Donetsk, the Russians may look to demilitarise everything between Donbass and the Dnieper, take a US-style no fly zone approach against any potential military build up in Western Ukraine and then freeze the conflict like in Georgia or Syria

 

[Doogie]

not sure... the old rules have been thrown out of the window... for example, the US never recognised USSR sovereignty over the Baltic republics but they would never have looked to wage a proxy war there... 7-8 years ago, Obama stated that Ukraine was a core interest for Russia but not for the US but the US now under Biden is acting like the war in Ukraine is existential for them, too... and everyone just keeps escalating... just consider three events --> someone likely in the West destroyed the Nordstream pipelines which are exclusively civil and undermined Germany's energy infrastructure and destroys permanently any German-Russian cooperation and integration and opens the door for countries to attack civilian infrastructure like the cables that crisscross the oceans... Ukrainian forces twice launched drone attacks on the Engels 2 air base 600+ kms into Russia where Russia's strategic bomber fleet with nuclear weapons is based which per Russian doctrine justifies the use of nuclear weapons because the attack undermines their nuclear deterrent... and Russia has taken over territory, run referendums and on the basis of said referendums annexed those territories and just consider how many Russian minorities exist in neighbouring countries and potential historical land claims Russia has on the basis of the old Russian Empire --> the Russians have already hinted that if the people in Odessa and Chernihiv wish it, referendums can be held there, too

it is like we are in the Devil's casino, the world's at stake and the players are all in

the war will go on for much of 2023, I would think... the financial packages from the US and EU will be enough to keep Kiev afloat... Russia is taking a risk averse strategy as can be seen from the withdrawals at Kharkov and Kherson, their use of Wagner mercenaries and volunteers, and so, I don't think there will be any serious offensives (although some analysts believe that they want to encircle the Ukrainians in Donbass by striking north from Zaporizhzhia and south from Belgorod since Stalingrad levels of fighting is awaiting at Kramatorsk and Slavyansk)... the Russians still don't have enough troops for all of Ukraine and so, perhaps, if/when Russia takes over Donetsk, the Russians may look to demilitarise everything between Donbass and the Dnieper, take a US-style no fly zone approach against any potential military build up in Western Ukraine and then freeze the conflict like in Georgia or Syria

Biden is playing for the domestic audience. He knows the republicans are just sitting there waiting for some indication of weakness and pulling back puts him in it.

As you've alluded to - this is getting closer to a zero sum game. Hopefully a freeze gives a moment for a reset.

 

[Tassie Devil]

yes and no... there will always be Nazis in Western Ukraine but if the Ukrainians are now demanding 300 main battle tanks, 500 howitzers and 600 IFVs, it can only mean that either they are planning another serious counter offensive (likely either at Kremenaya or towards Melitipol) or the majority of tanks and other armoured vehicles they had at the start of the war have been destroyed and the 350-400 tanks sent since from Eastern Europe are likely mainly destroyed, too... add the fact that per Von Der Leyen's estimate that Ukraine has lost more than 100,000 troops as of November indicates that Ukraine is losing 10,000+ troops a month in this war of attrition... with such an attrition rate, how much longer will Ukraine have an army? how much longer will Ukraine have men of military age? does seem like Ukraine has been and will continue to be demilitarised by the Russians

as for the revised goals, the land bridge between Russia and Crimea seems pretty solid for now and the Russians have spent the last couple months digging in and building large defensive lines across the contact line in Zaporizhzhia... Luhansk is mainly liberated but the Ukrainian push in towards Svatovo/Kremenaya is dangerous for them... Donetsk has extensive defensive lines (at least 3) and the Russians are working on the second line as we speak... as for Kherson, the Russians will stay on the east side of the Dnieper for the foreseeable future but the Ukrainians gained little in retaking Kherson city as they were unable to reinstitute electricty and water supply and so, a lot of civilians that stayed evacuated westwards

As I said though, Ukraine will never stop now. Not that they've got so much support from the west which will continue for a considerable time without doubt.

Your assertion that the land bridge is 'pretty solid' is a little far fetched as a large part of it is reachable for Ukraine fire power putting all residents at risk. How is that better for Russian citizens than before?

Whatever areas they've 'taken' aren't safer. A heap of Russian citizens left Crimea for example as the war is too close.

They'll never fully reach any goals they've set out not matter what way they twist it.

 

[Tassie Devil]

after holding a referendum in Kherson and annexing it in September-October, the new Russian general in charge decided that keeping Kherson city was too much effort and too much risk for the reward now and withdrew in November(?)... but rather than allowing the citizens of Kherson city be subject to reprisals once the Ukrainians took over once again (like happened in Kharkov), about 115,000 civilians were evacuated

Them leaving Kherson is your example of them "clearly trying to avoid civilian deaths"?

Wow. OK mate.

 

[alchemist]

Biden is playing for the domestic audience. He knows the republicans are just sitting there waiting for some indication of weakness and pulling back puts him in it.

As you've alluded to - this is getting closer to a zero sum game. Hopefully a freeze gives a moment for a reset.

honestly, I don't think the Ukraine War plays to a domestic audience in the US as much as people think... go on US and European media sites or YouTube or social media etc. --> somewhere where there is a comments section and you will see that American audiences are considerably more discerning and sceptical about the war than the Brits or French or Germans

the Republicans also are in a sort of bind because they now control the house and so, Biden has an 'out' of sorts if there are significant audits and/or reductions on funding to Ukraine by simply pushing back that Ukraine was winning with his support and the support of an all Democrat Congress but as soon as the Republicans came in, the support dried up and the brave Ukrainians were left to the mercy of Putler and the evil Russians

the war has been great profit wise for the military industrial complex in the US from its supplies to Ukraine but also those other countries that have supplied Ukraine too that now need to replenish their stocks with US gear... we have no idea how much of the weapons provided by the west makes it to the frontline and have much is sold on the black market... we have no idea how much of the financial aid is properly used and how much is siphoned off by the Ukrainian elite

I also truly think that there are elements in the US and UK that want war... for example, it makes absolutely no sense to boast about helping the Ukrainians sink the Moskva or target Russian generals in the field, to have Neocons' husbands openly thank the US for destroying the Nordstream pipelines, providing longer range missile systems, provide naval training and drones for the Ukrainians to attack the Russian naval base at Sevastopol, for Biden to backtrack on not using nuclear weapons as a first strike weapon etc.

 

[alchemist]

Them leaving Kherson is your example of them "clearly trying to avoid civilian deaths"?

Wow. OK mate.

the Russians going to the trouble of evacuating 115,000 while facing a Ukrainian counter offensive and not leaving them open to reprisals by Ukrainian forces demonstrates a regard for ordinary Ukrainian civilians

'We're hunting them down and shooting them like pigs': How the Ukrainians are taking brutal revenge on the collaborators who've betrayed their neighbours - and country - to the Russians

How Ukrainian intelligence chiefs are tracking down collaborators

Recent fatalities include Ivan Sushko, a wedding toastmaster appointed mayor of a town in the Zaporizhzhia region, who died in August after his car was blown up.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Doogie]

honestly, I don't think the Ukraine War plays to a domestic audience in the US as much as people think... go on US and European media sites or YouTube or social media etc. --> somewhere where there is a comments section and you will see that American audiences are considerably more discerning and sceptical about the war than the Brits or French or Germans

the Republicans also are in a sort of bind because they now control the house and so, Biden has an 'out' of sorts if there are significant audits and/or reductions on funding to Ukraine by simply pushing back that Ukraine was winning with his support and the support of an all Democrat Congress but as soon as the Republicans came in, the support dried up and the brave Ukrainians were left to the mercy of Putler and the evil Russians

the war has been great profit wise for the military industrial complex in the US from its supplies to Ukraine but also those other countries that have supplied Ukraine too that now need to replenish their stocks with US gear... we have no idea how much of the weapons provided by the west makes it to the frontline and have much is sold on the black market... we have no idea how much of the financial aid is properly used and how much is siphoned off by the Ukrainian elite

I also truly think that there are elements in the US and UK that want war... for example, it makes absolutely no sense to boast about helping the Ukrainians sink the Moskva or target Russian generals in the field, to have Neocons' husbands openly thank the US for destroying the Nordstream pipelines, providing longer range missile systems, provide naval training and drones for the Ukrainians to attack the Russian naval base at Sevastopol, for Biden to backtrack on not using nuclear weapons as a first strike weapon etc.

Not sure its that complicated. The koolaid for any US president is being found to be 'weak'. Once Biden went in - he's all in. But agree about the US military industry. They've always had the ear of the hawks and this time no different.

 

[alchemist]

As I said though, Ukraine will never stop now. Not that they've got so much support from the west which will continue for a considerable time without doubt.

Your assertion that the land bridge is 'pretty solid' is a little far fetched as a large part of it is reachable for Ukraine fire power putting all residents at risk. How is that better for Russian citizens than before?

Whatever areas they've 'taken' aren't safer. A heap of Russian citizens left Crimea for example as the war is too close.

They'll never fully reach any goals they've set out not matter what way they twist it.

pretty solid as in 3 lines of defences dug out and prepared by the Russians... and where have the Ukrainians been successful in this war that did not involve a Russian withdrawal where the fighting was disadvantageous for them?

as for whether the Russians will achieve their goals or not, we will see... a lot more fighting to be done

 

[alchemist]

Not sure its that complicated. The koolaid for any US president is being found to be 'weak'. Once Biden went in - he's all in. But agree about the US military industry. They've always had the ear of the hawks and this time no different.

the loss of US prestige internationally if they abandon Ukraine will dwarf the Afghanistan withdrawal in 2021... and it might just spell the end of the Neocon influence

 

[Tassie Devil]

pretty solid as in 3 lines of defences dug out and prepared by the Russians... and where have the Ukrainians been successful in this war that did not involve a Russian withdrawal where the fighting was disadvantageous for them?

as for whether the Russians will achieve their goals or not, we will see... a lot more fighting to be done

More solid without doubt but clearly not protecting those living within those areas as many have fled.

Russia I have to say have learnt, and done much better in this war that initially. At least they're learning better how to defend themselves, which is wht you're saying.

Doesn't mean they'll ever reach their goals though as Ukraine will never step back now so that contested area will always be contested until Russia is completely out, which won't happen for some time if ever.

 

[Tassie Devil]

the Russians going to the trouble of evacuating 115,000 while facing a Ukrainian counter offensive and not leaving them open to reprisals by Ukrainian forces demonstrates a regard for ordinary Ukrainian civilians

'We're hunting them down and shooting them like pigs': How the Ukrainians are taking brutal revenge on the collaborators who've betrayed their neighbours - and country - to the Russians

How Ukrainian intelligence chiefs are tracking down collaborators

Recent fatalities include Ivan Sushko, a wedding toastmaster appointed mayor of a town in the Zaporizhzhia region, who died in August after his car was blown up.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Oh, yes. I forgot how the Russians were kind enough to 'evacuate' Ukraine citizens including children to Russia to spare their lives from the brutish Ukraines lol

I find it hilarious you're taking this line that Russia is trying to spare the lives of civilians ... though I'm not surprised at all.

Don't get me wrong, Ukraine is no angel in all of this but to claim Russia is doing their best to avoid civilian casualities is out there with the best I've heard.

A majority of Russian people I speak to don't even go that far, apart from the hardliners that is ...

 

[alchemist]

More solid without doubt but clearly not protecting those living within those areas as many have fled.

Russia I have to say have learnt, and done much better in this war that initially. At least they're learning better how to defend themselves, which is wht you're saying.

Doesn't mean they'll ever reach their goals though as Ukraine will never step back now so that contested area will always be contested until Russia is completely out, which won't happen for some time if ever.

the Russians gambled in the initial part of the war with lightning advances from the north, south and east and they were partially successful in taking large portions of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, they encircled Mariupol and took Kherson city almost without a fight... in the north, they took land quickly but without the troops to protect the rear, the Ukrainians were successful in ambushing Russian columns and Kiev artillery did a lot of damage to the Russians... the Russians were successful in taking land around Kiev and the airport but again, 40,000 is nowhere near enough to take a sprawling city where there is strong resistance (eg. more Russian troops were involved in the fighting in Mariupol which is a city of 450,000 than Kiev which has/had 3 million)... but the Russians were looking for a negotiated settlement and they were close to it in Istanbul until Boris Johnson flew to Kiev in early April and according to the Ukrainians, scuttled any potential peace deal

from that point on, the Russians withdrew from Kiev and focused on the fighting in the Donbass where they realised they had the artillery advantage and have pursued a war of attrition... see -->

"The Russian Strategy
The Russian forces are limited by manpower but strengthened by massive artillery and equipment stockpiles enabled by a robust military industrial complex. While there have been numerous reports in Western media that the Russian army is running out of artillery ammunition, so far there’s been no visible slacking of Russian artillery fire on any front. Based on these factors, the Russian side has relied on a traditional firepower-centric war of attrition. The goal is to force an unsustainable casualty rate, destroying Ukrainian manpower and equipment, while preserving Russia’s own forces. Territory is not important; its loss is acceptable to preserve combat power. At Kyiv, Kharkiv and Kherson, the Russian army refused to fight under unfavorable conditions and withdrew, accepting the political cost to preserve its forces.

To execute this strategy, the Russian army relies on firepower, particularly its artillery. Each Russian brigade has three artillery battalions compared to just one in each Western brigade. Paired with correction by massed quantities of UAVs and quadcopters, Russian artillery pulverizes Ukrainian forces before infantry mops up survivors. It is a slow, grinding war, but with a casualty ratio that is significantly in Russia’s favor. Russia couldn’t attack because it lacked the manpower to secure the flanks of advancing troops. Up to now, Russians could only advance in Donbas, where advance did not extend the frontline. Even here the intent was more to draw in Ukrainian forces and destroy them rather than capture the city of Bakhmut. Mobilization has the potential to overcome Russia’s manpower shortages and enable offensive operations, while equipping its forces is possible due to the mobilization of industry. Precision munition production is also up, despite consistent doubt in Western press. Video of strikes by Russian "Lancet 3” loitering kamikaze drones is up up by 1,000% since Oct. 13, according to one estimate, indicating a major increase in production."

What’s Ahead in the War in Ukraine | Russia Matters

www.russiamatters.org

Russia made errors in their campaign -->
* creating a 1,000 km frontline with limited manpower and hence, the subsequent withdrawals from Kiev, Kharkov and Kherson;
* not mobilising earlier;
* not instituting a proper rotation of troops as theirs is a contract army and a lot of the troops signed 6 month contracts with the SMO commencing in February and so, when the 6 months was up, a lot returned to Russia in August-September which coincided with Ukraine's counter offensives which shows the West was providing intel to the Ukrainians and likely even planned to Kharkov operation at least;
* not building proper defences in the Kharkov region;
* a lack of a unified command with LNR, DNR, Chechen, Wagner and Russian Army all operating somewhat independently

but the Russians have solved a lot of these issues

 

[alchemist]

Oh, yes. I forgot how the Russians were kind enough to 'evacuate' Ukraine citizens including children to Russia to spare their lives from the brutish Ukraines lol

I find it hilarious you're taking this line that Russia is trying to spare the lives of civilians ... though I'm not surprised at all.

Don't get me wrong, Ukraine is no angel in all of this but to claim Russia is doing their best to avoid civilian casualities is out there with the best I've heard.

A majority of Russian people I speak to don't even go that far, apart from the hardliners that is ...

no, hardline Russians want to carpet bomb the Ukrainians and most Russians would say up until the appointment of Surovikin that the Russians took it too easy on the Ukrainians

 

[Doogie]

the Russians gambled in the initial part of the war with lightning advances from the north, south and east and they were partially successful in taking large portions of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, they encircled Mariupol and took Kherson city almost without a fight... in the north, they took land quickly but without the troops to protect the rear, the Ukrainians were successful in ambushing Russian columns and Kiev artillery did a lot of damage to the Russians... the Russians were successful in taking land around Kiev and the airport but again, 40,000 is nowhere near enough to take a sprawling city where there is strong resistance (eg. more Russian troops were involved in the fighting in Mariupol which is a city of 450,000 than Kiev which has/had 3 million)... but the Russians were looking for a negotiated settlement and they were close to it in Istanbul until Boris Johnson flew to Kiev in early April and according to the Ukrainians, scuttled any potential peace deal

from that point on, the Russians withdrew from Kiev and focused on the fighting in the Donbass where they realised they had the artillery advantage and have pursued a war of attrition... see -->

"The Russian Strategy
The Russian forces are limited by manpower but strengthened by massive artillery and equipment stockpiles enabled by a robust military industrial complex. While there have been numerous reports in Western media that the Russian army is running out of artillery ammunition, so far there’s been no visible slacking of Russian artillery fire on any front. Based on these factors, the Russian side has relied on a traditional firepower-centric war of attrition. The goal is to force an unsustainable casualty rate, destroying Ukrainian manpower and equipment, while preserving Russia’s own forces. Territory is not important; its loss is acceptable to preserve combat power. At Kyiv, Kharkiv and Kherson, the Russian army refused to fight under unfavorable conditions and withdrew, accepting the political cost to preserve its forces.

To execute this strategy, the Russian army relies on firepower, particularly its artillery. Each Russian brigade has three artillery battalions compared to just one in each Western brigade. Paired with correction by massed quantities of UAVs and quadcopters, Russian artillery pulverizes Ukrainian forces before infantry mops up survivors. It is a slow, grinding war, but with a casualty ratio that is significantly in Russia’s favor. Russia couldn’t attack because it lacked the manpower to secure the flanks of advancing troops. Up to now, Russians could only advance in Donbas, where advance did not extend the frontline. Even here the intent was more to draw in Ukrainian forces and destroy them rather than capture the city of Bakhmut. Mobilization has the potential to overcome Russia’s manpower shortages and enable offensive operations, while equipping its forces is possible due to the mobilization of industry. Precision munition production is also up, despite consistent doubt in Western press. Video of strikes by Russian "Lancet 3” loitering kamikaze drones is up up by 1,000% since Oct. 13, according to one estimate, indicating a major increase in production."

What’s Ahead in the War in Ukraine | Russia Matters

www.russiamatters.org

Russia made errors in their campaign -->
* creating a 1,000 km frontline with limited manpower and hence, the subsequent withdrawals from Kiev, Kharkov and Kherson;
* not mobilising earlier;
* not instituting a proper rotation of troops as theirs is a contract army and a lot of the troops signed 6 month contracts with the SMO commencing in February and so, when the 6 months was up, a lot returned to Russia in August-September which coincided with Ukraine's counter offensives which shows the West was providing intel to the Ukrainians and likely even planned to Kharkov operation at least;
* not building proper defences in the Kharkov region;
* a lack of a unified command with LNR, DNR, Chechen, Wagner and Russian Army all operating somewhat independently

but the Russians have solved a lot of these issues

I disagree with your first point partially. Kyiv and Kharkiv I agree. Kherson, well, with winter coming up unless Russia went crazy on holding it, it was a sitting duck. Militarily it was the right decision to withdraw.

 

[Doogie]

the loss of US prestige internationally if they abandon Ukraine will dwarf the Afghanistan withdrawal in 2021... and it might just spell the end of the Neocon influence

and I'll throw this out - by definition - the neocon label is no different in Russia than in the US. and this is what it gets us.

 

[alchemist]

I disagree with your first point partially. Kyiv and Kharkiv I agree. Kherson, well, with winter coming up unless Russia went crazy on holding it, it was a sitting duck. Militarily it was the right decision to withdraw.

the optics were bad that a month after holding a referendum and annexing Kherson, the Russians were abandoning the main city... but the Russians had about 20,000 troops in the city including elite paratroopers but were not in a position to launch offensives towards Nikolaev and so, they were just sitting there fighting off offensives from the Ukrainians and with the river behind them, it was a logistical issue... so, pull back, blow up the bridge, and then take pot shots at the Ukrainians with artillery from across the water... and with the energy being attacked, it was more difficult for the Ukrainians to redeploy the Kherson troops to the east

there was a photo doing the rounds on Russian telegram channels that Russian troops left a message in Kherson for the Ukrainian troops reminding them that Kherson is a part of the Russian Empire, that they will be back and not to make a mess... macho Slav bullsh*t

 

[Doogie]

the optics were bad that a month after holding a referendum and annexing Kherson, the Russians were abandoning the main city... but the Russians had about 20,000 troops in the city including elite paratroopers but were not in a position to launch offensives towards Nikolaev and so, they were just sitting there fighting off offensives from the Ukrainians and with the river behind them, it was a logistical issue... so, pull back, blow up the bridge, and then take pot shots at the Ukrainians with artillery from across the water... and with the energy being attacked, it was more difficult for the Ukrainians to redeploy the Kherson troops to the east

there was a photo doing the rounds on Russian telegram channels that Russian troops left a message in Kherson for the Ukrainian troops reminding them that Kherson is a part of the Russian Empire, that they will be back and not to make a mess... macho Slav bullsh*t

and that reinforces your last point. its was not militarily smart to extend beyond the Dnipro unless you could maintain a solid foothold. with western escalation of hardware (which always on the cards), that foothold needed to be significant. Never enough time to further develop the advantage, it was a high risk gamble that given the state of the war, a mistake an integrated command would not have made.

all armies live and die by supply lines. winter and the difficulties in moving big freight by road is tough. add in a river, well - it was just an obvious thing to do.

 

[alchemist]

and I'll throw this out - by definition - the neocon label is no different in Russia than in the US. and this is what it gets us.

yes and no... there is a militaristic and expansionist element to certain circles in Russia, there is an obvious clique around Putin that has benefited by way of positions and financially, a certain sense of injustice that Russia lost its rightful place in the world in the 1990's, a paranoia about the West being out to get them, anger over "lost" territories... for example, Putin gave an interview in 2020(?) talking about historical Russian lands being gifted to other republics and peoples during Soviet times and there being no mechanism for the return of these "gifts" once those republics and peoples broke away... a convoluted mess