Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Under the circumstances it was a wise and right move, IMO.
I would any day trade for the lives of my men, to a lesser extent their equipment for the land I surrender. I can always get the land back. Not lives lost defending it.
I would any day trade for the lives of my men, to a lesser extent their equipment for the land I surrender. I can always get the land back. Not lives lost defending it.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Pure speculation at this point, however, Alex Christoforou based on a few data points feels that the two sides (US and Russia) have agreed to "freeze" this conflict.
I was about to bullet point the point he makes, when I came across a YT vid published a few seconds before:
An hour and 13 minutes long discussion with Garland Nixon:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwLR2RLjr-Y
BTW, Alex stated that, per a Telegram post, quoting a UN person (I could not find it) that the UN is preparing to send peacekeepers to Kherson city - which was just vacated by Russia.
This video provides more details than the one by Alex
I was about to bullet point the point he makes, when I came across a YT vid published a few seconds before:
An hour and 13 minutes long discussion with Garland Nixon:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwLR2RLjr-Y
BTW, Alex stated that, per a Telegram post, quoting a UN person (I could not find it) that the UN is preparing to send peacekeepers to Kherson city - which was just vacated by Russia.
This video provides more details than the one by Alex
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Seems strange that some kind of agreement could have been reached at _this_ stage of the conflict. Neither Russia nor the US have achieved the key objectives that each side publicly mentioned. Freezing now is like coitus interruptus even when no side is about to lose definitively either...
If indeed a freeze happens now, Russia walks away as partial but clear winner having very seriously damaged Ukraine's military, MIC, taken 20% territory, taken 10 million people, has more than made up for its frozen assets abroad by way of high oil & gas are commodity prices, Europe is in crisis, US reputation no better, and Russia back in the front of world affairs.
Whats the gain for the US to freeze now? Nothing they can take credit for. Russia is visibly stronger and not weakened in any way.
As for Ukraine, they proved to the whole world that they are another Pakiland. Lost immensely on all counts, especially a whole generation of their youth and sovereign control for the foreseeable future. A Paki future awaits them ie their existence will henceforth be solely predicated on being anti-Russian, and they'll become a headache for Europe.
Europe has become the biggest chutiya on the world stage. A page has turned and a long era of decline has begun.
My guess is even if a freeze happens now, which is a good thing ultimately since more lives won't be lost in battles, there is too much unfinished business and Ukraine will feel compelled to fester the conflict for a long time, Russia will respond, the west will continue to send trickles of supplies and continue to claim propaganda victories or atrocities to keep anti-russian sentiment alive among the blind. What the Ukr did to Donbass will be played back on them. Karma...
If indeed a freeze happens now, Russia walks away as partial but clear winner having very seriously damaged Ukraine's military, MIC, taken 20% territory, taken 10 million people, has more than made up for its frozen assets abroad by way of high oil & gas are commodity prices, Europe is in crisis, US reputation no better, and Russia back in the front of world affairs.
Whats the gain for the US to freeze now? Nothing they can take credit for. Russia is visibly stronger and not weakened in any way.
As for Ukraine, they proved to the whole world that they are another Pakiland. Lost immensely on all counts, especially a whole generation of their youth and sovereign control for the foreseeable future. A Paki future awaits them ie their existence will henceforth be solely predicated on being anti-Russian, and they'll become a headache for Europe.
Europe has become the biggest chutiya on the world stage. A page has turned and a long era of decline has begun.
My guess is even if a freeze happens now, which is a good thing ultimately since more lives won't be lost in battles, there is too much unfinished business and Ukraine will feel compelled to fester the conflict for a long time, Russia will respond, the west will continue to send trickles of supplies and continue to claim propaganda victories or atrocities to keep anti-russian sentiment alive among the blind. What the Ukr did to Donbass will be played back on them. Karma...
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Kherson remains part of Russia – Kremlin https://www.rt.com/russia/566351-kherso ... ithdrawal/
( )
( )
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
They have widrawn from certain regions of Kherson to ease their supply lines but not entirely
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Russian forces have withdrawn from the entire western bank. Moved everything to the eastern bank
@Cyrano,
The speculation started when people started connecting the dots:
* The Russian General's statement of difficult decisions + plenty of PR on Russian TV (very unusual for Russia)
* US DefSec saying Kherson is within reach of UKR
* Z claiming Kherson will fall
* Sullivan's trip to Kyiv and asking Z to call for talks
* And, finally CNN hosted a TV show with Z + Wife on this topic just days after Russia withdrew (so, who told CNN about it for them to cart their entire production team to UKR?)
"Freeze" no action for the time being, not the Korean style "freeze". Kherson is Russian territory and will be taken back. Thus the RT article
There is more to all this.
@Cyrano,
The speculation started when people started connecting the dots:
* The Russian General's statement of difficult decisions + plenty of PR on Russian TV (very unusual for Russia)
* US DefSec saying Kherson is within reach of UKR
* Z claiming Kherson will fall
* Sullivan's trip to Kyiv and asking Z to call for talks
* And, finally CNN hosted a TV show with Z + Wife on this topic just days after Russia withdrew (so, who told CNN about it for them to cart their entire production team to UKR?)
"Freeze" no action for the time being, not the Korean style "freeze". Kherson is Russian territory and will be taken back. Thus the RT article
There is more to all this.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
I think every one is just taking a breather until winter is over.
I doubt US is going to let Russia off the hook easily.
I doubt US is going to let Russia off the hook easily.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Honestly, I do not know what exactly is happening on the front lines - who is gaining, etc.
However, there are two things that are pretty obvious:
1) The US is sending fewer funds each time for the UKR forces (it is there on the US DoD website to track), and
2) The items being sent are much older
The latest: $400 Million in Additional Security Assistance for Ukraine
Posted by DoD on Nov 4, 2022.
Items being sent:
The M1117 is an old vehicle used by military police and for escort purposes - hardly an item for battle.
On the Ghost systems:
Considering backing Russia is getting in other areas - economic, political, etc, from the Global South, I really do not know what leverage the West has.
????????
However, there are two things that are pretty obvious:
1) The US is sending fewer funds each time for the UKR forces (it is there on the US DoD website to track), and
2) The items being sent are much older
The latest: $400 Million in Additional Security Assistance for Ukraine
Posted by DoD on Nov 4, 2022.
Items being sent:
The Hawk systems are from the 1960s. Guess Biden fears that the Republicans will not fund some/any, so he has money to refurbish systems that have not being used for decades.* Funding to refurbish HAWK air defense missiles for inclusion in future Presidential Drawdown packages;
* 45 Refurbished T-72B Tanks with advanced optics, communications, and armor packages;
* 1,100 Phoenix Ghost Tactical Unmanned Aerial Systems;
* 40 Armored Riverine Boats;
* Funding to refurbish 250 M1117 Armored Security Vehicles;
* Tactical secure communications systems and surveillance systems; and
* Funding for training, maintenance, and sustainment.
The M1117 is an old vehicle used by military police and for escort purposes - hardly an item for battle.
On the Ghost systems:
The only place this system has been used. 700 have been sent and no idea what they have to show for them.In April 2022, the US Defense Department stated that the Phoenix Ghost was developed before the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine and that it was a "close match" for the needs of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Battle of Donbas.[4][5] It was later revealed that the Phoenix Ghost was a project under the Big Safari weapons program.[6]
After initially sending 120 in April, it was announced in July 2022 that another 580 Phoenix Ghosts would be delivered beginning the next month[7][8][9] as part of the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI). The Phoenix Ghost weapons were being provided to Ukraine via a new procurement by the US DoD, unlike the other weapons the US has provided to Ukraine in the early months following the invasion in February 2022.[10] A U.S. aid package announced in November 2022 included more than 1,100 Phoenix Ghosts.[11]
Considering backing Russia is getting in other areas - economic, political, etc, from the Global South, I really do not know what leverage the West has.
????????
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
ANDREI MARTYANOV take on the situation.
Flooding in Kherson
Scott Ritter chat with Napolitano
Flooding in Kherson
Scott Ritter chat with Napolitano
Last edited by bala on 12 Nov 2022 11:45, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
i take this back. Russia is now east of the river.Atmavik wrote:They have widrawn from certain regions of Kherson to ease their supply lines but not entirely
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/ho ... 74fa5a6ac2
Article on Russian losses of Ka-52. An estimated 25 of the 100 in service have been lost. The crews and the helicopter performed well, but the initial push towards Kiev took a heavy toll and some of the best crews were lost. Now, the risk taking has reduced.
Article on Russian losses of Ka-52. An estimated 25 of the 100 in service have been lost. The crews and the helicopter performed well, but the initial push towards Kiev took a heavy toll and some of the best crews were lost. Now, the risk taking has reduced.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Taking a few steps back, we've been hearing of multiple failed offensives of AFU with what and whoever they've got, for the past three months at least. And that each time they tried, they lost significant nos of men and equipment, and must have weakened day by day.
Despite this, how is it possible they posed a threat strong enough for Russia to feel the pressure and withdraw from the West Bank on which stands Kherson?
Why couldn't Russian forces strengthen supply lines since the months they've been in control of Kherson? There is no UkrAF strafing them behind the lines.
Conversely why is Russia unable to cut Ukr supply lines to Donbass or Zapho or Kherson since months ?
Why didn't they try to put pressure back on by for ex: attacking Mikolayev and turning right to encircle AFU units moving towards Kherson ?
If the threat of flooding by Khakovka dam being blown up by Ukr was real, did Russia do enough to eliminate this threat? Evacuating Kherson for such a risk implies the flood plains are to the west of the river ie on its right bank. Common sense tells us that cities never come up exclusively on flood plains side of a river, so I have some doubts about this, unless there is topographic confirmation. However if the east bank is flooded then Russian forces will be stranded and cant be supported, so thats and understandably good reason to evacuate.
Still doesnt explain why Russia didn't establish defensive lines north & west of Kherson and use air raids to prevent formation of large concentrations of Ukr units that can threaten Russia's hold on Kherson.
While its certainly believable that Ukr is taking lot more casualties than Russia, they dont seem to be close to any point of collapse. Or they're hiding their residual force strength very cleverly and puff up to make Russia think they are still quite a force.
I've seen videos of Ukr troops entering Kherson to cheering groups of people waving Ukr flags etc( but only a few 100s). Troops were mostly in pickups ie "technicals" as they are called, not in IFVs etc. Could be advance parties. They seemed too tired and nervous to celebrate any sort of victory. But this also means Russia never built adequate defences around Kherson despite holding it for months.
To sum up, while Kherson withdrawal may not qualify as a debacle or major defeat, it does merit being called a fcukup (despite an orderly withdrawal without losses) and one that could have been avoided without extraordinary effort. After 8 months into the SMO, low troop numbers are no longer an excuse, the only thing thats saving Russia right now is Ukr forces have definitely been weakened enough to be unable to take much advantage of Russian mistakes, except wearily roll into mostly empty Kherson.
Despite this, how is it possible they posed a threat strong enough for Russia to feel the pressure and withdraw from the West Bank on which stands Kherson?
Why couldn't Russian forces strengthen supply lines since the months they've been in control of Kherson? There is no UkrAF strafing them behind the lines.
Conversely why is Russia unable to cut Ukr supply lines to Donbass or Zapho or Kherson since months ?
Why didn't they try to put pressure back on by for ex: attacking Mikolayev and turning right to encircle AFU units moving towards Kherson ?
If the threat of flooding by Khakovka dam being blown up by Ukr was real, did Russia do enough to eliminate this threat? Evacuating Kherson for such a risk implies the flood plains are to the west of the river ie on its right bank. Common sense tells us that cities never come up exclusively on flood plains side of a river, so I have some doubts about this, unless there is topographic confirmation. However if the east bank is flooded then Russian forces will be stranded and cant be supported, so thats and understandably good reason to evacuate.
Still doesnt explain why Russia didn't establish defensive lines north & west of Kherson and use air raids to prevent formation of large concentrations of Ukr units that can threaten Russia's hold on Kherson.
While its certainly believable that Ukr is taking lot more casualties than Russia, they dont seem to be close to any point of collapse. Or they're hiding their residual force strength very cleverly and puff up to make Russia think they are still quite a force.
I've seen videos of Ukr troops entering Kherson to cheering groups of people waving Ukr flags etc( but only a few 100s). Troops were mostly in pickups ie "technicals" as they are called, not in IFVs etc. Could be advance parties. They seemed too tired and nervous to celebrate any sort of victory. But this also means Russia never built adequate defences around Kherson despite holding it for months.
To sum up, while Kherson withdrawal may not qualify as a debacle or major defeat, it does merit being called a fcukup (despite an orderly withdrawal without losses) and one that could have been avoided without extraordinary effort. After 8 months into the SMO, low troop numbers are no longer an excuse, the only thing thats saving Russia right now is Ukr forces have definitely been weakened enough to be unable to take much advantage of Russian mistakes, except wearily roll into mostly empty Kherson.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
There is a possibility that US NSA Sullivan offered Russia the chance to withdraw from Kherson else they will blow up the dam and strand people and Russian troops.
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/11/ ... eat-a79325
Don't know which side this news paper is on, so take it FWIW.
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/11/ ... eat-a79325
Don't know which side this news paper is on, so take it FWIW.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
If 25 have been lost (a figure I believe to be correct), at least the same number will be damaged and not operational. Out of the remainingmody wrote:https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/ho ... 74fa5a6ac2
Article on Russian losses of Ka-52. An estimated 25 of the 100 in service have been lost. The crews and the helicopter performed well, but the initial push towards Kiev took a heavy toll and some of the best crews were lost. Now, the risk taking has reduced.
62 (112 in service before the war), serviceability rate will typically be 2/3rd. So about 40 aircraft that can fly on any given day.
Russia is now relying more on the Mi-28s. They have 100+ in service.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Russia MOD says Ukraine lost 12,000 men trying to attack in Kherson since Oct and Russia lost 1500 men defending it. Russia's goal is to de-militilarize Ukraine (not capture territory, as you rightly suggest), for which it is fighting a battle of attrition. If that is the case, it should have been happy defending Kherson and inflicting a 8 - 1 loss ratio on Ukraine. Moreover Russia had just declared Kherson to be Russian. Losing Russian territory without putting up a fight, is viewed very differently from giving up Ukrainian territory (like in the Kharkov region).NRao wrote:Under the circumstances it was a wise and right move, IMO.
I would any day trade for the lives of my men, to a lesser extent their equipment for the land I surrender. I can always get the land back. Not lives lost defending it.
It is a similar situation as Stalingrad in 1942. The Red army had to choose between the (textbook) correct decision of retreating behind the Volga and preserving their army or staying and fighting - in the process making the city a symbol of resistance and destroying the Germans after luring them in.
For the Russia army to say they are unable to logistically support just 2 divisions, across the Dnieper river, seems ridiculous to me. The Soviet (now Russian) army was designed to advance across rivers and they probably have as much bridging equipment as NATO. If they had started mobilization earlier and got 2 more divisions into the Kherson front, they could have advanced 10-20 km more (which they did back in Feb) and put Kherson and the Dnieper bridges out of HIMARS range.
Last edited by Deans on 12 Nov 2022 17:03, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
A lot people have commented on what Russia should have or could have done to avoid the current situation. But there are very few reports about what Ukraine has done right since September to regain control of more than 10,000 Sq. Kms of territory.
They have mobilised on a big scale and boast by Zel about raising a million man army seems to be moving in the right direction.
However, AUF has taken a lot of casualities since Feb end and a lot of regular troops would be out of action by now.
To train new recruits of mobilized men and send to a high intensity battlefront is no joke. Even with NATO training. A 8-12 week training course can only do so much. There are volunteers from several countries fighting for AFU, but generally such disparate groups fighting together and speaking different languages, is not really a recipe for success.
Moreover, by all accounts, AFU has lost most of its heavy armour and whatever 8-10 dozen tanks were donated from eastern european countries have all been T72s, not upgraded to the latest standard. Ukraine own tank factories have been destroyed and they might have very limited capability to repair, service and put back into action damaged tanks. They hardly have any armed or attack helicopters and all of their few remaining fighter aircrafts are generally engaged in air patrols and don't really take part in bombing Russian positions. For precision guided weapons, they mainly have the Tochka missiles and the guided rockets of HIMARS and M270s. All their supply lines are maintained by simple trucks and a lot of railway lines too have been damaged in Ukraine. The sea route has been shut mostly and only the Odessa port is operational from the territory that Ukraine controls.
Their offensive largely consists of large number of infantry supported by heavy artillery. The last time armies were launching this type of large scale offensive, was in World War -1. In fact for a while, trenches had become the standard defensive formations across the frontline in Donbas.
AFU does have the support of NATO for ISR, electronic snooping, satellite surveillance and AWACS and all of these have been top notch.
However, Russia too should have reasonable satellite surveillance capability.
What has Ukraine military done right to turn the tide of the war in both the north and the south, while stalling the Russian offensive in the center towards Bakhmut.
They have mobilised on a big scale and boast by Zel about raising a million man army seems to be moving in the right direction.
However, AUF has taken a lot of casualities since Feb end and a lot of regular troops would be out of action by now.
To train new recruits of mobilized men and send to a high intensity battlefront is no joke. Even with NATO training. A 8-12 week training course can only do so much. There are volunteers from several countries fighting for AFU, but generally such disparate groups fighting together and speaking different languages, is not really a recipe for success.
Moreover, by all accounts, AFU has lost most of its heavy armour and whatever 8-10 dozen tanks were donated from eastern european countries have all been T72s, not upgraded to the latest standard. Ukraine own tank factories have been destroyed and they might have very limited capability to repair, service and put back into action damaged tanks. They hardly have any armed or attack helicopters and all of their few remaining fighter aircrafts are generally engaged in air patrols and don't really take part in bombing Russian positions. For precision guided weapons, they mainly have the Tochka missiles and the guided rockets of HIMARS and M270s. All their supply lines are maintained by simple trucks and a lot of railway lines too have been damaged in Ukraine. The sea route has been shut mostly and only the Odessa port is operational from the territory that Ukraine controls.
Their offensive largely consists of large number of infantry supported by heavy artillery. The last time armies were launching this type of large scale offensive, was in World War -1. In fact for a while, trenches had become the standard defensive formations across the frontline in Donbas.
AFU does have the support of NATO for ISR, electronic snooping, satellite surveillance and AWACS and all of these have been top notch.
However, Russia too should have reasonable satellite surveillance capability.
What has Ukraine military done right to turn the tide of the war in both the north and the south, while stalling the Russian offensive in the center towards Bakhmut.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Right, apart from Russian mistakes I was detailing above, I too wondered what Ukr has done right ...
Kherson and Donbass are very different theatres, and they have somehow forced Russia to withdraw from the first, and achieved minor pushbacks plus effective stalling for months on the second.
The attrition of Ukr forces is real, ukr cemeteries and hospitals are full. Blood is being imported for transfusions though kept out of the press.
A handful of himars and 777s alone cant give such an advantage. Either they are bluffing while about to collapse or there is some other factor at play which we don't know about.
Kherson and Donbass are very different theatres, and they have somehow forced Russia to withdraw from the first, and achieved minor pushbacks plus effective stalling for months on the second.
The attrition of Ukr forces is real, ukr cemeteries and hospitals are full. Blood is being imported for transfusions though kept out of the press.
A handful of himars and 777s alone cant give such an advantage. Either they are bluffing while about to collapse or there is some other factor at play which we don't know about.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Perhaps the question is not what Ukraine has done right but as Deans alluded to the question is what has Russia done wrong?
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
The Ukr forces are not exactly rushing in to take Kherson - an empty city with no civilians left. We have to remember that the original Ukr force is almost spent/done with, we are now dealing with Nato forces and command/control. Rus has taken the position to reduce risks for itself and regroup for another battle. Kherson and other areas will be re-taken once the Nato forces are bled to nothingness. Rus strategy is to grind away and take time. This is perfect for Rus since the West is all time bound while being destroyed slowly and methodically.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
I think its still overwhelmingly UKR forces but extensively guided NATO command/control.bala wrote: we are now dealing with Nato forces and command/control.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Another PoV on "freeze":
17 minutes long.
17 minutes long.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Footage shows massive explosion at dam in Kherson – video https://www.theguardian.com/world/video ... rson-video
scorched earth policy?
US/nato allege Russian army has blown a part of Kherson dam while retreating
scorched earth policy?
US/nato allege Russian army has blown a part of Kherson dam while retreating
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/11/ ... 72540322=1
blackout in kherson after dam blast
blackout in kherson after dam blast
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
These are the 3rd rate UKR forces, enhanced by Nato equipment. There are other nationalities, like the Poles. The Nato command/control is effectively feeding (concentrate them on some attack objective and throw them up) them to the Rus forces. Apparently Rus can jam HiMar missiles.Jay wrote:I think its still overwhelmingly UKR forces but extensively guided NATO command/control.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
When the Russian take an objective they have demonstrated their prowess but when the UKR does something then it is the Russians allowing them to. If this thread is purely about combat tactics and strategy is there not a level of double standards here?
The UKR are doing militarily exactly what any inferior force would do - beg borrow steal resources etc etc. They may be rag tag and have lost a lot of men but on the most important metric they are still there - the will to fight.
We may or may not agree with the ideological basis of the UKR decision to fight to its destruction but at a combat level they have done well. Even if there is an infusion of western troops the bulk of the fighting is surely being done by the UKR.
The UKR are doing militarily exactly what any inferior force would do - beg borrow steal resources etc etc. They may be rag tag and have lost a lot of men but on the most important metric they are still there - the will to fight.
We may or may not agree with the ideological basis of the UKR decision to fight to its destruction but at a combat level they have done well. Even if there is an infusion of western troops the bulk of the fighting is surely being done by the UKR.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
YT video from Col. Doug Macgregor : "We have lied about Ukraine"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-y0ixn7Cocw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-y0ixn7Cocw
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Ukraine has done what USSR did in WW2. It is fighting a total war, where every able bodied adult (incl. women) have been mobilized.Cyrano wrote:Right, apart from Russian mistakes I was detailing above, I too wondered what Ukr has done right ...
The attrition of Ukr forces is real, ukr cemeteries and hospitals are full. Blood is being imported for transfusions though kept out of the press.
A handful of himars and 777s alone cant give such an advantage. Either they are bluffing while about to collapse or there is some other factor at play which we don't know about.
The average Russian civilian (at least the educated middle class in Moscow/ St Petersburg), is still not too bothered about the war.
Russia is trying to do fight a war with NATO with limited disruption to its peacetime economy, relying on local militia (Syrian model) and with no prior preparation. Whatever they are doing now, could and should have been done months ago. If they had announced limited mobilization even 2 months earlier, it would have been enough to prevent the loss of territory in Kharkov and Kherson.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fz59GWeTIik
Good analysis of why things have gone wrong for the Russians.
Perun is Australian army, seems less biased than NATO analysts.
He did one video earlier on corruption in the Russian army, which is linked to the problems described here.
Good analysis of why things have gone wrong for the Russians.
Perun is Australian army, seems less biased than NATO analysts.
He did one video earlier on corruption in the Russian army, which is linked to the problems described here.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Back in 2014 I lamented that the Russians were fools for not taking over all Ukraine, right then, when they still had the chance to end the threat once and for all. At the time, I asked what was the point of only engaging in half measures when it was clear that they were going to be severely sanctioned anyway, that Ukraine would be their blood enemy from that point on, and that the US and its lackeys would use Ukraine to hurt Russia. So why not just take over the whole country, then?Deans wrote:Cyrano wrote:Whatever they are doing now, could and should have been done months ago. If they had announced limited mobilization even 2 months earlier, it would have been enough to prevent the loss of territory in Kharkov and Kherson.
I cant imagine how much Putin must regret his lack of nerve at the time.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
And they would have taken over the country successfullt then. What was different about the Russian armed forces then?Y. Kanan wrote:Back in 2014 I lamented that the Russians were fools for not taking over all Ukraine, right then, when they still had the chance to end the threat once and for all. At the time, I asked what was the point of only engaging in half measures when it was clear that they were going to be severely sanctioned anyway, that Ukraine would be their blood enemy from that point on, and that the US and its lackeys would use Ukraine to hurt Russia. So why not just take over the whole country, then?Deans wrote:
I cant imagine how much Putin must regret his lack of nerve at the time.
Intentions have to be aligned with capability.
Mr Putin is capable to taking over Ukraine if he decides to not call this a SMO. Till such time the capability is not there - whether self-imposed or otherwise.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
The outcome of 2014 was a bloodless takeover of Crimea and a civil war in Ukraine, which bled Ukraine and resulted in Minsk-2. That was a huge success for Putin. He could not have guessed that US would double down on their efforts to implement regime change in Russia and MInsk-2 would be violated (since neither was, in his view, the act of a rational player).Y. Kanan wrote: Back in 2014 I lamented that the Russians were fools for not taking over all Ukraine, right then, when they still had the chance to end the threat once and for all. At the time, I asked what was the point of only engaging in half measures when it was clear that they were going to be severely sanctioned anyway, that Ukraine would be their blood enemy from that point on, and that the US and its lackeys would use Ukraine to hurt Russia. So why not just take over the whole country, then?
I cant imagine how much Putin must regret his lack of nerve at the time.
If Russia had invaded the rest of Ukraine, there would have been no legal fig leaf to justify it. NATO might well have intervened with boots on the
ground (because US guaranteed Ukraine's territorial integrity in exchange for giving up Nukes). Most of the world incl. India would probably have condemned it. Russian public would not have supported it. The Russian military was also a lot weaker than it is now.
That said, it may have made sense for more active Russian intervention in the Ukraine civil war, with the intent of freeing the whole of the DPR/LPR districts, rather than half of them under Minsk-2
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Russia’s Southern Supply Hub Is Now In Range Of Ukraine’s Rockets. Expect Explosions
lots of propaganda and some truth . Typical west reporting.
lots of propaganda and some truth . Typical west reporting.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
The head of Russian Intelligence Organization came to Tehran from Turkey after meeting with the head of CIA (FLIGHT enthusiasts report on SM)
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-asia-63593855
missiles rain over Ukraine, Moldova power knocked out in Ukraine
missiles rain over Ukraine, Moldova power knocked out in Ukraine
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
One or more missiles hit a part of Poland.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
I hope NATO will invoke article 5 now (and not chicken out behind proxy war)
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Russian missiles cross into Poland during strike on Ukraine-unleashes darkness on Ukraine
https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukrai ... ce=Twitter
https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukrai ... ce=Twitter
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
There is a decent chance that the missile was a Ukrainian S-300. Which is why I did not mention any nation in my prior post.
Russia has said that it did not target any Poland/Ukrainian border areas.
On NATO, they will not - no appetite in major nations. Not even in Poland.
Just BTW, Pentagon war games have consistently projected 40,000 Americans dead in the first week of such a conflict. (Besides the post I had on that the US is not ready.)
Add to that from other nations: 100,000 in the first week?
I think this has gone too far. Hope and pray it does not escalate any further than it needs to.
Russia has said that it did not target any Poland/Ukrainian border areas.
On NATO, they will not - no appetite in major nations. Not even in Poland.
Just BTW, Pentagon war games have consistently projected 40,000 Americans dead in the first week of such a conflict. (Besides the post I had on that the US is not ready.)
Add to that from other nations: 100,000 in the first week?
I think this has gone too far. Hope and pray it does not escalate any further than it needs to.
Re: Russian-Ukrainian War: Combat Tactics & Strategy
Why should they fight and lose lives when a proxy war is working just fine.IndraD wrote:I hope NATO will invoke article 5 now (and not chicken out behind proxy war)
The difference between and Western and Russia is that the west places more of a premium on its soldiers lives.