Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

Raoul said:
Good thread as usual from him. I would also caution against triumphalism where the gains of the past week are presumed to continue indefinitely, which isn't very realistic.
Click to expand...
I am nobody to say he is wrong. But, I feel that his points are more relevant for attacking/invading armies in unfamiliar conditions/territories. I thought the area that AFU captured was not that big and it's their own land anyway. They should be able to defend much better now in those territories (with new equipment, training, and experience of doing it firsthand). Pushing the Russians out as much as possible in the east will put so much pressure on the ones in the south as well. And it seems like there is only minimal loss from the AFU's side for this counter offensive. They may need rest at one point, but it is not like they were doing intensive urban fighting for the last week.

It can be like scoring a goal and dropping off to defend after the first 30 mins to save energy, giving the other side momentum again in a football match. The Russians seem to have trouble with their field decisions and let them make panicked decisions to keep fecking up instead of giving time to find some decent solution for a while yet. If your army is on the run or on the brink of running, you can't make any effective decisions. The biggest favor that enemies can do is to let you settle down early. I'm sure the AFU has had more or less preplanned decisions about what they want to do for months. It is not like they just have to make decisions on the spot every day.
 
Last edited:
The United said:
I am nobody to say he is wrong. But, I feel that his points are more relevant for attacking/invading armies in unfamiliar conditions/territories. I thought the area that AFU captured was not that big and it's their own land anyway. They should be able to defend much better now in those territories (with new equipment, training, and experience of doing it firsthand). Pushing the Russians out as much as possible in the east will put so much pressure on the ones in the south as well. And all the sources are saying that there is only minimal loss from the AFU's side for this counter offensive. They may need rest at one point, but it is not like they were doing intensive urban fighting for the last week.

It can be like scoring a goal and dropping off to defend in the second half to save energy, giving the other side momentum again after the break in a football match. The Russians seem to have trouble with their field decisions and let them make panicked decisions to keep fecking up instead of giving time to find some decent solution for a while yet. I'm sure the AFU has had more or less preplanned decisions about what they want to do for months. It is not like they just have to make decisions on the spot every day.
Click to expand...

What you’re saying re dropping off is logical, but it’s hardly like the Ukrainian top brass and their NATO advisors haven’t thought of that! They will surely have pushed as far as they feel they can without risking burnout, mass casualties, or encircled troops. I’d imagine there are daily discussions at every level on how to not let the Russians regroup and reorganise whilst Ukraine prepares for its next attack.
 
NicolaSacco said:
What you’re saying re dropping off is logical, but it’s hardly like the Ukrainian top brass and their NATO advisors haven’t thought of that! They will surely have pushed as far as they feel they can without risking burnout, mass casualties, or encircled troops. I’d imagine there are daily discussions at every level on how to not let the Russians regroup and reorganise whilst Ukraine prepares for its next attack.
Click to expand...
That is what I am saying. I just do not think that the Ukrainians are overstretching at this point (far from it) as some are concerned. But that's my armchair opinion of course.
 
NicolaSacco said:
What you’re saying re dropping off is logical, but it’s hardly like the Ukrainian top brass and their NATO advisors haven’t thought of that! They will surely have pushed as far as they feel they can without risking burnout, mass casualties, or encircled troops. I’d imagine there are daily discussions at every level on how to not let the Russians regroup and reorganise whilst Ukraine prepares for its next attack.
Click to expand...

I see all of this as a three pronged effort, each of which would happen sequentially. First, stopping Russian advances and incrementally reclaiming lost territory of the past six months. Second, reclaiming all Ukrainian territory seized by Russia post 2014 (Donbas). Third, reclaim Crimea. Whether steps 2 and 3 still happen is probably down to how depleted the Russians are and whether their troops run away in other places to allow the Ukrainians to simply walk back in (that will definitely not happen in Crimea since it is logistically and militarily now part of Russia and will require extraordinary means to expel the people and infrastructure set up there over the past 8 years.
 
Izium civilians sharing this about Russian troops.

“A (Russian) artilleryman came and said ‘Father, we saved you from the Nazis,’” Valeriy said. “And I said to them, ‘Show me one.’”
Valeriy said he spoke to the young soldiers in Russian and tried to make them see that they were destroying the once-close relationship Ukrainians and Russians held, particularly in this part of the country which is so close to the border.

“I told them they destroyed a man’s house, and he was from the Kursk region (of Russia),” Valeriy said. “Everyone here has relatives in Belgorod (in Russia) and other cities.”

He said at one point, Russian reconnaissance forces came to him and asked, “Who have we come to liberate here?”
Click to expand...
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/09/13/europe/ukraine-izium-recaptured-intl-cmd/index.html
 
alexthelion said:
Why is it?
Click to expand...
it would hint at something far and away beyond what is currently happening. ww3 basically. everything within ukraine is fair game from a nato pov. start moving inside russia and you'll see escalation all over within a very short period of time. syria. israel. the entire russian border. ukraine itself would be first of course. but there seems to be an understanding about that which makes sense for all sides.
 
Raoul said:
I see all of this as a three pronged effort, each of which would happen sequentially. First, stopping Russian advances and incrementally reclaiming lost territory of the past six months. Second, reclaiming all Ukrainian territory seized by Russia post 2014 (Donbas). Third, reclaim Crimea. Whether steps 2 and 3 still happen is probably down to how depleted the Russians are and whether their troops run away in other places to allow the Ukrainians to simply walk back in (that will definitely not happen in Crimea since it is logistically and militarily now part of Russia and will require extraordinary means to expel the people and infrastructure set up there over the past 8 years.
Click to expand...

The other major factor will be if Putin decides to do a general mobilization. That may honestly be the biggest factor to consider moving forward because if the answer is no, it's probably only a matter of time until Ukraine regains more territory.
 
Raoul said:
Reads like something one of Putin's propagandists on Russian TV would say. It wouldn't surprise me if he's in some way funded by Russian money.
Click to expand...

It would be interesting if someone publishes a list of those who received Russian money in the West for propaganda purposes. And how much money each of them received.
 
There are news that the 1st Guards Tank Army has suffered severe losses.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_Guards_Tank_Army


https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-zelenskyy-nato-kharkiv-7753fe41f7e03efa0bec0a37e18f3de6

In one indication of the blow sustained by Moscow, British intelligence said that one premier force, the 1st Guards Tank Army, had been “severely degraded” during the invasion and that conventional Russian forces designed to counter NATO have been badly weakened.

“It will likely take years for Russia to rebuild this capability,” the analysts said.

https://www.businessinsider.com/cap...yVgiSBm24fYLJH_A5n4Vko_pTY--hWCYxavcq8wXaLimA

Ukraine says it captured documents revealing that an elite Russian unit lost over 130 tanks in failed attacks on Kharkiv
 
Last edited:
sport2793 said:
The other major factor will be if Putin decides to do a general mobilization. That may honestly be the biggest factor to consider moving forward because if the answer is no, it's probably only a matter of time until Ukraine regains more territory.
Click to expand...
Even if Russia should do a general mobilization it would likely only prolong the war, but not change the outcome. Ukraine now has the technological advantage and already has a clear numerical advantage in infantery, and they come closer and closer to getting numerical advantages for heavy weaponry by destroying or capturing a lot of irreplacable Russian vehicles. A general mobilization would only result in throwing clueless people without proper equipment into the meat grinder.

The sad thing is that it will cost time and a lot more lives, but as long as there is a steady influx of support for Ukraine they will win this war.
 
frostbite said:
There are news that the 1st Guard Tank Army has suffered severe losses.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_Guards_Tank_Army


https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-zelenskyy-nato-kharkiv-7753fe41f7e03efa0bec0a37e18f3de6

In one indication of the blow sustained by Moscow, British intelligence said that one premier force, the 1st Guards Tank Army, had been “severely degraded” during the invasion and that conventional Russian forces designed to counter NATO have been badly weakened.

“It will likely take years for Russia to rebuild this capability,” the analysts said.

https://www.businessinsider.com/cap...yVgiSBm24fYLJH_A5n4Vko_pTY--hWCYxavcq8wXaLimA

Ukraine says it captured documents revealing that an elite Russian unit lost over 130 tanks in failed attacks on Kharkiv
Click to expand...
Allegedly their most elite/best equipped Field army level formation. Maybe something equating to the US Army's III Armored Corps getting routed (these things aren't exactly comparable).
 
MTF said:
Allegedly their most elite/best equipped Field army level formation. Maybe something equating to the US Army's III Armored Corps getting routed (these things aren't exactly comparable).
Click to expand...
They are inteded as one of the spearhead ground forces of the western military district, so yes definetly one of the highest regarded and best equipped formations in the Russian army.
 
VorZakone said:
Click to expand...

From the article:

Solovyov was unwilling to concede Russia’s defeat to the Ukrainian troops and claimed that American and British soldiers were covertly fighting in their ranks. “In the process of preparing the battle-ready Ukrainian troops, it turns out they’ve been rapidly turning darker in color and becoming fluent English speakers. They’re becoming indistinguishable from the mercenaries... Some of them have a Southern drawl, others speak with a British accent. Stop pretending already,” he said. The idea of being defeated by NATO, as opposed to this smaller neighboring country, seems to sweeten the pot for many of the Kremlin’s cheerleaders.

"The west is weak and decadent, our race is is stronger... except when it comes to actually fighting, then the west and the other races are magically strong".
 
If a failed invasion could mean the desintegration of your country, you should be wondering if your country should be integrated the way it is.

In order to say who could "win", we have to determine what "winning" is in the first place. According to Russia's initial demands:

-Recognition of Crimea as russian
-Recognition of LNR and DNR
-Replacing Zelensky with a pro Russian president
-Stop Ukraine's path toward EU/NATO
-Demilitarization
-Denazification (understood as "eliminating the Anti russian sentiment in Ukraine")

I think most -if not all- of them have backfired, no matter the result of the war. The first and maybe the second still have a chance to happen. Would that be enough to consider it a "win"?
 
stefan92 said:
Even if Russia should do a general mobilization it would likely only prolong the war, but not change the outcome. Ukraine now has the technological advantage and already has a clear numerical advantage in infantery, and they come closer and closer to getting numerical advantages for heavy weaponry by destroying or capturing a lot of irreplacable Russian vehicles. A general mobilization would only result in throwing clueless people without proper equipment into the meat grinder.

The sad thing is that it will cost time and a lot more lives, but as long as there is a steady influx of support for Ukraine they will win this war.
Click to expand...

General mobilization would be catastrophic for Russia, they just can't afford to loose their youth, they're already in a terrible demographic situation, soon enough oil and gaz will be the only thing worth something in the whole country (it's already almost the case). Russia's decaying, the only thing that makes them a superpower is the number of atomic bomb they have and the fact that several countries rely on their gaz.
 
Oly Francis said:
General mobilization would be catastrophic for Russia, they just can't afford to loose their youth, they're already in a terrible demographic situation, soon enough oil and gaz will be the only thing worth something in the whole country (it's already almost the case). Russia's decaying, the only thing that makes them a superpower is the number of atomic bomb they have and the fact that several countries rely on their gaz.
Click to expand...
If their nuclear arsenal has been as well maintained as the rest of their gear maybe not a lot of that is actually useable.
 
The Purley King said:
If their nuclear arsenal has been as well maintained as the rest of their gear maybe not a lot of that is actually useable.
Click to expand...
AcrobaticAnxiousCaterpillar-max-1mb.gif
 
A pet peeve of mine...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...many-more-military-hardware-counter-offensive

‘What is Berlin afraid of?’ Ukraine presses Germany for more military kit

Ukrainian foreign minister accuses German government of ignoring requests for military hardware

The Ukrainian foreign minister, Dmytro Kuleba, accused the German government of ignoring Kyiv’s requests for Leopard tanks and Marder infantry fighting vehicles.

He said Berlin had only given “abstract fears and excuses” over why it was not providing more equipment.
 
People in our own media here are sure poking fun at France for all of their talk about military resources, how many contracts they have for hardware sales to other countries, and so on.



Only roughly $230 million in military aid from France, really? :lol:
 
frostbite said:
A pet peeve of mine...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...many-more-military-hardware-counter-offensive

‘What is Berlin afraid of?’ Ukraine presses Germany for more military kit

Ukrainian foreign minister accuses German government of ignoring requests for military hardware

The Ukrainian foreign minister, Dmytro Kuleba, accused the German government of ignoring Kyiv’s requests for Leopard tanks and Marder infantry fighting vehicles.

He said Berlin had only given “abstract fears and excuses” over why it was not providing more equipment.
Click to expand...

Germany can and, I think should, provide more. I'm not 100% sure that this is the way to go about it though!
 
RedDevilQuebecois said:
People in our own media here are sure poking fun at France for all of their talk about military resources, how many contracts they have for hardware sales to other countries, and so on.



Only roughly $230 million in military aid from France, really? :lol:
Click to expand...


And how much of that was spent on Zelensky cosplay get-up for Macron?
 
RedDevilQuebecois said:
People in our own media here are sure poking fun at France for all of their talk about military resources, how many contracts they have for hardware sales to other countries, and so on.



Only roughly $230 million in military aid from France, really? :lol:
Click to expand...

France and Germany together provided less than Poland!!!
 
Krakenzero said:
If a failed invasion could mean the desintegration of your country, you should be wondering if your country should be integrated the way it is.

In order to say who could "win", we have to determine what "winning" is in the first place. According to Russia's initial demands:

-Recognition of Crimea as russian
-Recognition of LNR and DNR
-Replacing Zelensky with a pro Russian president
-Stop Ukraine's path toward EU/NATO
-Demilitarization
-Denazification (understood as "eliminating the Anti russian sentiment in Ukraine")

I think most -if not all- of them have backfired, no matter the result of the war. The first and maybe the second still have a chance to happen. Would that be enough to consider it a "win"?
Click to expand...
At this point I wouldn't be surprised if Russia were to agree to only the first 2 points — the propaganda can spin it in a way that we've secured the safety and independence (or even the inclusion as a Russian territory) of people of Donbass... but it's a pointless hypothetical since Ukraine will never agree to those.
 
VorZakone said:
https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-...eace-deal-recommended-by-his-aide-2022-09-14/
Click to expand...
Everything just keeps going back to that essay in 2021 (?) and the rambling speech before the invasion, about how Ukraine shouldn't actually exist. As @WPMUFC said, he just wants to expand Russia before he was gone, any other concerns are secondary. Even "NATO on our borders" doesn't seem like the actual concern. The actual concern is that if Ukraine is in NATO, then Ukraine would almost certainly continue to exist.
 
neverdie said:
the argument wasn't that ukraine couldn't make breakthroughs. it was that it couldn't win, partially, which i still think is true but depends on how you define win. does it mean ultimate defeat of russia? because that is beyond ukraine and nato. does it mean taking the lost territory back? these questions were asked by very senior figures in foreign affairs from the outset. they weren't criticisms made by anti-ukranians. they were questions asked by people who wanted clarification over the kind of war their countries were dragging them into. the criticism was always the lack of clarity regarding the goal and ad hoc policy making. saying one thing which implied one level of support one day and another which hinted at something far larger and more escalatory the next.

i do think they're fighting russia to the last ukrainian but that doesn't mean that ukraine can't benefit from it. were the americans not fighting the soviets to the last afghani? did the afghanis care? so of course they're using ukraine. it's not a single-use kind of operation. the ukrainians aren't idiots. they know they have use-value to the west and they know their position. nato wants to fight russia via proxy. ukraine wants to fight russia directly. match made in heaven, no? it's not a contradiction, basically. my only criticism would depend upon what the west does over the next couple of years. not what it's doing now. what happens when the russians push back. and then ukraine pushes back. and on and on. all yet to come.

unfortunately i think this will be a massively drawn out war and last for years with the positions being unpredictable but possibly as they were before february.

the other thing is that if you think people making criticisms of the war are on russia's side, then you have, probably, been misled. some will be, for whatever reason which they themselves will scarcely comprehend, but most are not. most i've seen had almost no negative opinions of ukraine and almost no positive opinions on russia, but a highly critical view of nato. which i think is historically justified.
Click to expand...
Do you think China, North Korea, and Iran will fight this proxy war to the last russian?
 
Rajma said:
Do you think China, North Korea, and Iran will fight this proxy war to the last russian?
Click to expand...
i'd guess china would be happy enough to do that. i think that's probably the arrangement, yeah. from ukraine's pov, nato has guns and money and it wants both of those to fight a war against russia after being invaded. from nato's point of view, it'll be happy that russia is bogged down in war with ukraine. i don't think its a contradiction. the afghanis and arab militias knew that the americans were using them in a proxy war against the soviets but they were still happy to take the stinger missile launchers and anything else going. mutual enemies and all that. but everyone will know how and why they're working together and what and whose interests are in play.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.