War in Ukraine

[tvolsfan]

Reminder that Ras and Donjo have called the Syrian government democratically elected.

 

[KB5252]

Don't think the show has started yet. Institute for Study of War isn't seeing that in the action reports. Scale too small. These are probably probing assaults, trying to identify weak/ strong points in the Orc lines.

You know the Ruskies are all aware that they are about to be the object of massive assaults. Can you imagine the psychological effects of just sitting there for 3-4 weeks wondering if it's your area where the big hit will come? Especially since those troops are starting to see the technological advantages of the NATO weapons over their own. There was one mainline Russian unit that broke and ran at Bakhmut Wednesday retreating almost 3 km before Wagner troops rushed in and stabilized the lines at a reported high cost in Wagner personnel.

My guess is that every time the Ukrainians send out a recon in strength the Russians piss all over themselves and run.

You know, the Russian tank corps commanders were actually pretty good by the end of WW2. They schooled the Germans in the Battle of Kursk. Don't you know those guys are rolling in their graves over the current Russian tank corps.

If some of the reports are true, that Ukraine forces seized modern era tanks from Russians during the latest fights that would be hilarious, losing usable tanks in a probing assault.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

We will see what happens. Last time the Ukrainians went on the offensive they liberated Kherson and pushed the Russians back to the border in Kharkiv. That was without Western tanks and IFVs and fresh NATO trained brigades.

Yeah, and they took heavy casualties in the process and have ended up giving up a bunch of that ground since then, especially in Kharkiv Oblast. So roughly 6 months later, all those men died to see most of those gains erode away.

But either way, Kyiv and The West are focused on gaining territory, while Russia is focused on eliminating armies. You all laughed as the Russians pulled back/retreated from those regions in the fall, yet didn't come to the realization that Russia was willing to lose territory at the expense of saving the lives of their troops.

Attrition warfare.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

If indeed the counteroffensive is underway and remotely as successful as the last one...

Exactly what I am talking about right here.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Yes, in Ras' warped mind, if a woman fights back while being raped she's just escalating the encounter. She should really just work to find a compromise with the rapist.

Wrong analogy. It's not a rape.

 

[evillawyer]

Wrong analogy. It's not a rape.

Of course it's not a rape. It's an analogy for what's going on to help pea brains like you get what's going on. Think of it as me drawing a picture for you in pretty colors.

A rapist infringes a woman's sovereignty over her body without her consent. An invading country infringes the invaded country's sovereignty over its lands against the invaded country's consent. The rape victim clearly has the right to fight back to stop the rape and is not "escalating" be defending her body from abuse. Likewise, an invaded country doesn't "escalate" by defending itself from an invading country.

 

[KB5252]

Yeah, and they took heavy casualties in the process and have ended up giving up a bunch of that ground since then, especially in Kharkiv Oblast. So roughly 6 months later, all those men died to see most of those gains erode away.

But either way, Kyiv and The West are focused on gaining territory, while Russia is focused on eliminating armies. You all laughed as the Russians pulled back/retreated from those regions in the fall, yet didn't come to the realization that Russia was willing to lose territory at the expense of saving the lives of their troops.

Attrition warfare.

LOL, you should open and close every post with a clown horn emoji!

 

[KB5252]

Russia has done as much damage to itself as it did Ukraine. Russia changed it's tactics and completely changed strategy because it learned quickly it could not achieve initial goals.

Since then it's been mobilizations of 300k then 500k and it has only lost territory since those mobilizations. Spinning this as a positive for Russia is silliness. Russia can't win without an escalation the world would not be on board with. So he is doing what he can with what he has available.

The crazy thing is Ukraine has less but it is made up for with coordinated application of intelligence in real time between all of its forces.

Russia operates on a much different warlord/war chief capacity where it's a free for all with limited discipline and cooperation between "competing" forces. IMO this along with it's intelligence real time coordination deficiencies are the biggest factor holding Russian forces back.

 

[LouderVol]

Yeah, and they took heavy casualties in the process and have ended up giving up a bunch of that ground since then, especially in Kharkiv Oblast. So roughly 6 months later, all those men died to see most of those gains erode away.

But either way, Kyiv and The West are focused on gaining territory, while Russia is focused on eliminating armies. You all laughed as the Russians pulled back/retreated from those regions in the fall, yet didn't come to the realization that Russia was willing to lose territory at the expense of saving the lives of their troops.

Attrition warfare.

it doesn't really matter if Russia is "saving" lives on the defense if they are squandering them on the attack. again at some point you HAVE to push the advantage you gain through whatever tactics you use. Russia has not been able to take advantage. and I know you refuse to believe this, but no one, and I really do mean no one, wants a longer war than necessary. It is so self defeating on many levels.

1. you continue to risk lives and equipment you could otherwise use for the next fight.
2. you risk the enemy turning the table somehow.
3. you tie yourself to one conflict and leave yourself unable to respond to other issues, Armenia vs Azerbaijan, and even Kazakhstan.
4. the more men you deploy for the war, regardless of losses, mean the less you have at home to produce things you need.
5. unless you have an INCREDIBLY strong manufacturing base, which really has only been the US during WW2 and shortly after, and MAYBE China now, no one typically has enough manufacturing base to keep both the war effort and the civilian economies rolling. Even the Soviets during WW2 relied hugely on imports of food and raw material from the US. The Brits relied on food, weapons, oil from the US. Russia has China to depend on to keep them afloat for now, but this leaves Russia vulnerable to something like #3 popping up and biting them in the but.
6. its destructive. If you are wanting to take territory, you theoretically want some use out of it, the longer you fight over it, the less value its going to have. Russia apparently thinks this land is Russian, but apparently don't care about it with the amount of destruction. Even if Russia wants the land for a future buffer, scorched earth typically only works once, because your future opponents know about and can plan for it. its only a buffer is there something to fight over, if there is no reason to seize a particular buffer, it won't be fought over. and if they really wanted a buffer they should have been more worried about Finland.
7. Foreign political will. in the interconnected world economy any disruptions become huge ordeals. Its why even Russia has had to allow some grain to leave Ukraine. even their allies rely on that. the longer you are seen as the aggressor the worse it gets for you. You claim this with the US about always being involved in foreign wars and other nations not liking that, the same applies to Russia in Ukraine. Russia is seen as the aggressor. Like it or not they crossed the border, so they will be seen as the aggressor, and thus at fault on the world stage. This folds back to 3 & 5 as well.

 

[LouderVol]

Russia has had done as much damage to itself as it did Ukraine. Russia changed it's tactics and completely changed strategy because it learned quickly it could not achieve is initial goals.

Since then it's been mobilizations of 300k them 500k and it has only lost territory since those mobilizations. Spinning this as a positive for Russia is silliness. Russia can't win without an escalation the world would not be on board with. Do he is doing what he can with what he has available.

The crazy thing is Ukraine has less but it is made up for with coordinated application of intelligence in real time between all of its forces.

Russia operates on a much different warlord/war chief capacity where is a free for all with limited discipline and cooperation between "competing" forces. IMO this along with it's intelligence real time coordination deficiencies are the biggest factor holding Russian forces back.

I have been seeing a lot of break down on this lately.

Apparently the Russians don't even have a unified training strategy. each region has its own standard for what counts as a battle ready force. So in some places it may be western equivalent, but in the poorer areas, its no where close.

and in those training programs they don't even have the same terminology they use from one region to the next. So the commands may use different terms for the same thing. Kinda like if a school brought in a new offensive coordinator during a game. wouldn't matter if he ran the same style of offense, pro-style, up-tempo spread, whatever. He is going to use slightly different terms, and that causes confusion. and with several changes to the command structure, with this almost feudal system of leadership there is pretty big confusion going on. it may not matter if Russia was fighting a true weak nation, but they found a much more competent Ukraine than they thought. So all of these inefficiencies are becoming exposed and turned into weaknesses.

 

[tvolsfan]

Yeah, and they took heavy casualties in the process and have ended up giving up a bunch of that ground since then, especially in Kharkiv Oblast. So roughly 6 months later, all those men died to see most of those gains erode away.

But either way, Kyiv and The West are focused on gaining territory, while Russia is focused on eliminating armies. You all laughed as the Russians pulled back/retreated from those regions in the fall, yet didn't come to the realization that Russia was willing to lose territory at the expense of saving the lives of their troops.

Attrition warfare.

This is actually hilarious. I'd love to see all the gains that you think have eroded. We can even compare those to Russia's gains that have eroded.

You've spent the last 6 months telling us you were gaining in Bakhmut, and even that fell apart.

 

[PKT_VOL]

This is actually hilarious. I'd love to see all the gains that you think have eroded. We can even compare those to Russia's gains that have eroded.

You've spent the last 6 months telling us you were gaining in Bakhmut, and even that fell apart.

This is the visual chart for this post.

 

[Hunerwadel]

Just some perspective for anyone who may be geographically challenged:

 

[MontyPython]

"...Earlier Russia's defence ministry said Russian troops in one Bakhmut area had changed their position for strategic reasons.

It said units of the southern group of Russian forces had taken up a better defensive position in the Maloilinivka area, something which took into consideration "the favourable conditions of the Berkhivka reservoir".

However the head of Russia's Wagner mercenary group Yevgeny Prigozhin said what the Ministry of Defence was talking about "is unfortunately called 'fleeing' and not a 'regrouping'".

As the intense, bloody battle has worn on, Bakhmut has become symbolically important - though many experts question its tactical value."

 

[evillawyer]

 

[evillawyer]

"...Earlier Russia's defence ministry said Russian troops in one Bakhmut area had changed their position for strategic reasons.

It said units of the southern group of Russian forces had taken up a better defensive position in the Maloilinivka area, something which took into consideration "the favourable conditions of the Berkhivka reservoir".

However the head of Russia's Wagner mercenary group Yevgeny Prigozhin said what the Ministry of Defence was talking about "is unfortunately called 'fleeing' and not a 'regrouping'".

As the intense, bloody battle has worn on, Bakhmut has become symbolically important - though many experts question its tactical value."

More "victorious" fleeing from the Russians

 

[MontyPython]

More "victorious" fleeing from the Russians

Exactly. Russia is boldly advancing backwards while frightened Ukrainians are retreating over them.

 

[Septic]

Exactly. Russia is boldly advancing backwards while frightened Ukrainians are retreating over them.

@volgr will be in here momentarily to describe how this tactical advance to the rear will bring Ukraine to its knees.

 

[Hunerwadel]

"...Earlier Russia's defence ministry said Russian troops in one Bakhmut area had changed their position for strategic reasons.

It said units of the southern group of Russian forces had taken up a better defensive position in the Maloilinivka area, something which took into consideration "the favourable conditions of the Berkhivka reservoir".

However the head of Russia's Wagner mercenary group Yevgeny Prigozhin said what the Ministry of Defence was talking about "is unfortunately called 'fleeing' and not a 'regrouping'".

As the intense, bloody battle has worn on, Bakhmut has become symbolically important - though many experts question its tactical value."

View attachment 551132

....."Russian forces have taken up a better defensive position in the Maloilinivka area"

Wait! I thought volgr and Ras said Russia was on the offensive.

 

[LouderVol]

the real way you know things aren't going well for Russia is how quiet those guys are.

conveniently missing when the news gets bad for Russia.

 

[WBO]

Going to have to start putting machine gun emplacements behind the Russian troops. Bet that would look good in a Moscow recruiting poster.

 

[AM64]

I have been seeing a lot of break down on this lately.

Apparently the Russians don't even have a unified training strategy. each region has its own standard for what counts as a battle ready force. So in some places it may be western equivalent, but in the poorer areas, its no where close.

and in those training programs they don't even have the same terminology they use from one region to the next. So the commands may use different terms for the same thing. Kinda like if a school brought in a new offensive coordinator during a game. wouldn't matter if he ran the same style of offense, pro-style, up-tempo spread, whatever. He is going to use slightly different terms, and that causes confusion. and with several changes to the command structure, with this almost feudal system of leadership there is pretty big confusion going on. it may not matter if Russia was fighting a true weak nation, but they found a much more competent Ukraine than they thought. So all of these inefficiencies are becoming exposed and turned into weaknesses.

The feudal system absolutely seems to apply. While the adventure in communism phase may have made everybody equally miserable, it really never moved Russia into the modern era. Sure the Soviets took some exceptional serfs and educated them better, but they never improved the lot of Russia. It appears that Russia is still something like a hundred years less advanced than most of the world - they do have some newer toys in the hands of people of caveman mentality and without the intellect to apply them efficiently. It's still going to be Russian thugs trying overwhelm and win the battle with large numbers of cannon fodder - it's the only game they know.

 

[WBO]

I don't know if I would say "schooled" for Kursk. They had twice as many tanks, 4 times the artillery, 3x the number of men. Russia lost as many tanks as the Germans, and a lot more soldiers. months to prepare for the defense, and a German strategy bungled by Hitler.

You are correct about that, but remember the Germans had designed the Tiger to offset numerical superiority and was built to be an open country tank. The new first version T-34s the Soviets had were weak gunned and couldn't even kill an unarmored Panzer at long range.

It was the use of the hidden tank traps and funneling structures forcing the Germans into artillery kill boxes that was the big difference.

 

[Pennheel]

The feudal system absolutely seems to apply. While the adventure in communism phase may have made everybody equally miserable, it really never moved Russia into the modern era. Sure the Soviets took some exceptional serfs and educated them better, but they never improved the lot of Russia. It appears that Russia is still something like a hundred years less advanced than most of the world - they do have some newer toys in the hands of people of caveman mentality and without the intellect to apply them efficiently. It's still going to be Russian thugs trying overwhelm and win the battle with large numbers of cannon fodder - it's the only game they know.

Yeah,that's what I've noticed. They just seem to throw their soilders at these battles without any care for them. They just expect to overwhelm the enemy without any safety for their own,and it's horribly backfired. I was immediately thinking of the Soviet mindset with this war. It's insanity that they continue it,but like you said,it's the only thing they know. I'm not shedding tears for their invasion because they deserve what they're getting . I can see why it's going this way though.

 

[TVOLS]

Russia tried to destroy US-made Patriot system in Ukraine, officials say

So the hypersonic missile was targeting the patriot battery I guess. SIAP