Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

stevoc said:
No doubt they buy parts (even with the current sanctions) but could they have already exhausted their entire arsenal of missiles and bombs in the first few weeks of their invasion to the point where they now have to buy parts to manufacture new weapons?
Click to expand...
They might get into trouble with precision guided missiles etc, but they won't have trouble producing dumb bombs. Those are easy enough to produce, even for a shitshow of an economy like the current Russian.

Interesting is the question if they get into trouble producing tanks etc. There have been claims that for example Uralvagonzavod (their main tank factory) had to shut down production due to sanctions, but this is obviously unconfirmed.
 
stefan92 said:
They might get into trouble with precision guided missiles etc, but they won't have trouble producing dumb bombs. Those are easy enough to produce, even for a shitshow of an economy like the current Russian.

Interesting is the question if they get into trouble producing tanks etc. There have been claims that for example Uralvagonzavod (their main tank factory) had to shut down production due to sanctions, but this is obviously unconfirmed.
Click to expand...

Interesting thanks for the info, I had heard about their tank factory ceasing production. So hopefully the sanctions are limiting their ability to wage war at least at some level.

I get the call for Europe to cut off Russian Gas and I agree with it. But I don't know if it's helpful or factual for people like the Ukranian minister to be saying that EU nations buying Gas are directly fueling Russia's purchases of weapons to wage war. And I think it's unfair to claim that any country buying anything from Russia right now is complicit with their Genocide and War Crimes in Ukraine.
 
Looking at Twitter, it strikes me that the pro-Russian/anti-West tweeters know deep down that Russia is not going to win this war and is getting battered on the battlefield, so all they are left with are endless "what-about" tweets (what about Palestine, what about Ethiopia etc) or endless fake-news tweets designed - for example - to try and show that Ukraine is stuffed full of Nazis. It's all desperate stuff.
 
the hea said:
Very interesting thread on the artillery battle in Ukraine and why the Russian artillery are having so little succes despite massively outnumbering the Ukrainians.
Click to expand...

I enjoyed that content. Very interesting that the Russians might not have the tech / stockpile available to use air burst shells.
 
The twitter thread below provides a claimed, detailed story/time-line of the 35th Combined Arms Army of Russia's failed bid to capture Kyiv. This Combined Arms Army contained about 70,000 men and 7,000 armoured vehicles, including 2,100 tanks.

According to the thread author, the "armor was destroyed outside Makariv and much of the infantry wiped out in the urban combat meat grinder attempting to move into Irpin".

He says that half of the 35th Combined Arms Army ended up dead or wounded (before the rest fled back to Byelorussia), which if true would be an astonishing 35,000 casualties in this northern region alone.

 
GlastonSpur said:
The twitter thread below provides a claimed, detailed story/time-line of the 35th Combined Arms Army of Russia's failed bid to capture Kyiv. This Combined Arms Army contained about 70,000 men and 7,000 armoured vehicles, including 2,100 tanks.

According to the thread author, the "armor was destroyed outside Makariv and much of the infantry wiped out in the urban combat meat grinder attempting to move into Irpin".

He says that half of the 35th Combined Arms Army ended up dead or wounded (before the rest fled back to Byelorussia), which if true would be an astonishing 35,000 casualties in this northern region alone.

Click to expand...

Honestly when you consider that this was the biggest failure and that we have consistently see a figure of about 20,000 dead Russians in total, this number absolutely fits the picture and isn't astonishing at all.
 
stefan92 said:
Honestly when you consider that this was the biggest failure and that we have consistently see a figure of about 20,000 dead Russians in total, this number absolutely fits the picture and isn't astonishing at all.
Click to expand...

If they suffered 35,000 casualties around Kyiv alone, and that battle ended weeks ago now, it makes me wonder about the total Russian casualties across all areas (including in the Black Sea) to date. I'm starting to think it could easily now be at least 90,000.
 
Last edited:
GlastonSpur said:
The twitter thread below provides a claimed, detailed story/time-line of the 35th Combined Arms Army of Russia's failed bid to capture Kyiv. This Combined Arms Army contained about 70,000 men and 7,000 armoured vehicles, including 2,100 tanks.

According to the thread author, the "armor was destroyed outside Makariv and much of the infantry wiped out in the urban combat meat grinder attempting to move into Irpin".

He says that half of the 35th Combined Arms Army ended up dead or wounded (before the rest fled back to Byelorussia), which if true would be an astonishing 35,000 casualties in this northern region alone.

Click to expand...



Fantastic thread. So, to sum up, Putin's plan A was capturing Kiev's airport, quickly invade by air, seize the most important buildings and defeat Ukraine in one day. This failed because the ukranians saw it coming and proceeded to briefly recapture and then make the airport totally unusable for those purposes.

Then, Plan B was a massive land invasion force that would encircle and shell Kiev, forcing it to surrender. This failed because A) Ukraine effectively cut Russian supply lines (particularly the 40 mile convoy), leaving the RA out of gas 11 miles from Kiev, and B) Russia took 3 weeks to realize this and formulate an alternative supply line, valuable time that was used by Ukraine to reinforce their defense and prevent Russia to conquer any of the cities that it needed to encircle Kiev.

So apparently, a speed beats power scenario. Let's hope it's sustainable.
 
GlastonSpur said:
If they suffered 35,000 casualties around Kyiv alone, and that battle ended weeks ago now, it makes me wonder about the total Russian casualties across all areas (in the Black Sea) to date. I'm starting to think it could easily now be at least 90,000.
Click to expand...

Considering they have retreated from over half of the original fronts and don't appear to be doing very well in the remaining ones, it does indeed make one wonder.
 
GlastonSpur said:
If they suffered 35,000 casualties around Kyiv alone, and that battle ended weeks ago now, it makes me wonder about the total Russian casualties across all areas (in the Black Sea) to date. I'm starting to think it could easily now be at least 90,000.
Click to expand...

That twitter thread was interesting and I hope it is accurate. The Russians tried to surround Kiev quickly, and high speed exposes a lot of their force to counterattacks. Also, it is reasonable to assume that the Ukrainians had their best units and best available technology in the capital. In the East, the conditions are not the same, so probably the Russians did not have as many casualties there.

If Ukraine is to win, it is important to have the upper hand in technology. And by this, I mean modern western weapons that can inflict damage accurately from a distance. I hope that the weapons UK and US are providing will achieve that. I read a report that Ukraine will receive heavy drones MQ-9 Reaper, I hope it is true.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelpeck/2022/04/13/ukraine-may-get-us-mq-9-reaper-strike-drones/
 
frostbite said:
If Ukraine is to win, it is important to have the upper hand in technology. And by this, I mean modern western weapons that can inflict damage accurately from a distance. I hope that the weapons UK and US are providing will achieve that. I read a report that Ukraine will receive heavy drones MQ-9 Reaper, I hope it is true.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelpeck/2022/04/13/ukraine-may-get-us-mq-9-reaper-strike-drones/
Click to expand...
Those drones are nice, but won't do the heavy lifting due to their limited number. I have higher hopes for the influx of 155mm NATO artillery - for those a lot of precision guided ammo exists, as well as some more advanced ignition types. That can be decisive in the massive artillery battles that we expect.

This is an interesting thread on Russia's lack of modern artillery fuzes:
 
GlastonSpur said:
The twitter thread below provides a claimed, detailed story/time-line of the 35th Combined Arms Army of Russia's failed bid to capture Kyiv. This Combined Arms Army contained about 70,000 men and 7,000 armoured vehicles, including 2,100 tanks.

According to the thread author, the "armor was destroyed outside Makariv and much of the infantry wiped out in the urban combat meat grinder attempting to move into Irpin".

He says that half of the 35th Combined Arms Army ended up dead or wounded (before the rest fled back to Byelorussia), which if true would be an astonishing 35,000 casualties in this northern region alone.

Click to expand...

Where is he getting his numbers from about the size of the 35th CAA?
 
Sir Matt said:
Fires pretty deep in Russia at several fuel depots. :wenger:



Click to expand...


Must be the work of those special special forces SAS folk - supposedly disguised as medics according to the Russians and teaching the Ukrainians the dark arts of sabotage.

This is probably just the last of demonstration runs, to show the Ukrainians what's possible, before their proteges are unleashed far and wide, fanning out across Russia across the steppes and beyond. When we see fires in Vladivostok, then we'll know.
 
Last edited:
GlastonSpur said:
Must be the work of those special special forces SAS folk - supposedly disguised as medics according to the Russians and teaching the Ukrainians the dark arts of sabotage.

This is probably just the last of demonstration runs, to show the Ukrainians what's possible, before their proteges are unleashed far and wide, fanning out across Russia across the steppes and beyond. When we see fires in Vladivostok, then we'll know.
Click to expand...

From 5 days ago:


I do wonder if Russia is setting off a few things to try to make the case for a declared war more palatable.
 
Sir Matt said:
From 5 days ago:


I do wonder if Russia is setting off a few things to try to make the case for a declared war more palatable.
Click to expand...

Not saying that can’t be the case, but why would you do a false flag operation on war-critical infrastructure/industry? You’d think they would rather blow up some civilians and blame it on a misguided Ukrainian missile.

The chemical plant fire east of Moscow also would not fit in that context, though who knows which if any are just coincidences. Normally once you get to 3 incidents it’s no longer a coincidence.

edit: relevant…
 
Last edited:
Organic Potatoes said:
Not saying that can’t be the case, but why would you do a false flag operation on war-critical infrastructure/industry? You’d think they would rather blow up some civilians and blame it on a misguided Ukrainian missile.

The chemical plant fire east of Moscow also would not fit in that context, though who knows which if any are just coincidences. Normally once you get to 3 incidents it’s no longer a coincidence.

edit: relevant…
Click to expand...


Putin has done these before (the apartment bombings spring to mind), so there is the precedent. He could easily use something like this as a pretext to justify use of a WMD, if he gets desperate enough.
 
Raoul said:
Putin has done these before (the apartment bombings spring to mind), so there is the precedent. He could easily use something like this as a pretext to justify use of a WMD, if he gets desperate enough.
Click to expand...
Which were civilian targets. He’s already run out of fuel once on the way to Kyiv.
 
Wonder what would happen if the russians are pushed out of ukrainian territory but continue to use long range missiles on civilian targets.
 
Ukraine are getting their comms spot on if everyone still thinks it is plausible that these are Russian false flag operations.

botond said:
Wonder what would happen if the russians are pushed out of ukrainian territory but continue to use long range missiles on civilian targets.
Click to expand...
They’ve been doing it for eight years already. The only difference now is that they are using their longer range missiles and the world has started watching.
 
But does Germany support Ukraine now?


https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-europe-61185469

We should have supported Ukraine sooner - Germany

The German vice-chancellor says it was a mistake that his country didn't support Ukraine militarily much earlier.

In an interview with German public service broadcaster Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen, Robert Habeck says the support should have started years ago.

“We certainly should have supported Ukraine militarily much earlier, and I'm not just talking about days or weeks, but years," he says.

The previous administration of Angela Merkel was criticised for its ties with Russia, in particular its dependence on Russian energy.

Habeck says Germany is now helping to supply Ukraine with heavy weapons, after the government pledged to boost defence spending to meet Nato's target of 2% of GDP. It has also suspended the Nord Stream Two gas pipeline from Russia.
 
frostbite said:
But does Germany support Ukraine now?


https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-europe-61185469

We should have supported Ukraine sooner - Germany

The German vice-chancellor says it was a mistake that his country didn't support Ukraine militarily much earlier.

In an interview with German public service broadcaster Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen, Robert Habeck says the support should have started years ago.

“We certainly should have supported Ukraine militarily much earlier, and I'm not just talking about days or weeks, but years," he says.

The previous administration of Angela Merkel was criticised for its ties with Russia, in particular its dependence on Russian energy.

Habeck says Germany is now helping to supply Ukraine with heavy weapons, after the government pledged to boost defence spending to meet Nato's target of 2% of GDP. It has also suspended the Nord Stream Two gas pipeline from Russia.
Click to expand...
Literally no country spent more on aid to Ukraine in the past 8 years.

(OECD Workbook for 2018-2019. Can't remember where I read the complete tally for the 8 years but it's not even close when one considers how much of the EU contributions additionally originated there)
 
Last edited:
botond said:
Wonder what would happen if the russians are pushed out of ukrainian territory but continue to use long range missiles on civilian targets.
Click to expand...
Hard to imagine Ukraine kicking Russia out of the entire country but allowing them to assault Ukraine from Russian territory, instead of going into Russia and disabling the launchers.

Of course that seems like a frightening escalating, and you have to wonder what Russia would feel the need to do in response. They would be under immense internal pressure in this situation, even if they were quite sure the Ukraine armed forces had no intention of holding Russian territory. But at the same time, it would really just be more of the same.

We're all concerned about Russia using nuclear weapons, considering their rhetoric I'm a little surprised they're not using them already. Or do they still believe in MAD and it's just a bluff? You have to wonder what kind of condition those weapons are in a well.
 
Beans said:
Hard to imagine Ukraine kicking Russia out of the entire country but allowing them to assault Ukraine from Russian territory, instead of going into Russia and disabling the launchers.

Of course that seems like a frightening escalating, and you have to wonder what Russia would feel the need to do in response. They would be under immense internal pressure in this situation, even if they were quite sure the Ukraine armed forces had no intention of holding Russian territory. But at the same time, it would really just be more of the same.

We're all concerned about Russia using nuclear weapons, considering their rhetoric I'm a little surprised they're not using them already. Or do they still believe in MAD and it's just a bluff? You have to wonder what kind of condition those weapons are in a well.
Click to expand...
Ukraine actually attacking Russia would be exactly the scenario were Russian doctrine suggests using nuclear weapons for self defense of their homeland.

Some small attacks likely wouldn’t be enough as we have already seen, but assured destruction of anyone launching a large scale attack on Russia is key to their defense strategy. It only becomes MAD when the attacker also has large scale nuclear capabilities.

Russian doctrine also considers the use of tactical nuclear attacks to "deescalate" a conflict, so this keeps to be worrying. Maybe they really believe that they are actually fighting a war against NATO so that MAD already applies here, but who knows?

I was wrong about a lot of things I thought the Russians wouldn't do, so I just share my thoughts about their published theories, I won't do any real predictions for this.
 
Wow. With friends like these, who needs enemies? Former mayor of Düsseldorf and SPD party member posted this and then had to retract it. The whole gamut of downplaying and doubting Russia's atrocities and finger pointing at Ukraine. Can't find the text of the original to provide a translation.

 
TMDaines said:
Wow. With friends like these, who needs enemies? Former mayor of Düsseldorf and SPD party member posted this and then had to retract it. The whole gamut of downplaying and doubting Russia's atrocities and finger pointing at Ukraine. Can't find the text of the original to provide a translation.

Click to expand...

Now we see exactly that happen what I discussed here (and was heavily criticised for) around the Steinmeier visit that was cancelled by Zelensky, which I called a stupid move.

Ukrainian diplomats use a much more aggressive language towards Germany than the Russians do and therefore those who are close to Russia have a field day finger pointing at Ukraine.

It's not what the majority of Germans thinks, but Melnyk and Zelensky just make it so simple for Russian apologists in Germany.
 
Last edited:
Russia attacked at least five smaller regional train stations in the west of Ukraine today:

 
stefan92 said:
Ukraine actually attacking Russia would be exactly the scenario were Russian doctrine suggests using nuclear weapons for self defense of their homeland.

Some small attacks likely wouldn’t be enough as we have already seen, but assured destruction of anyone launching a large scale attack on Russia is key to their defense strategy. It only becomes MAD when the attacker also has large scale nuclear capabilities.

Russian doctrine also considers the use of tactical nuclear attacks to "deescalate" a conflict, so this keeps to be worrying. Maybe they really believe that they are actually fighting a war against NATO so that MAD already applies here, but who knows?

I was wrong about a lot of things I thought the Russians wouldn't do, so I just share my thoughts about their published theories, I won't do any real predictions for this.
Click to expand...
Sure, I just take it as a given that any incursion would have to be stealthy and you couldn’t stay. Ideally it would be done with artillery fired from Ukraine or from the air.

But my scenario isn’t a self-defense scenario, Ukraine would be taking out weapons attacking Ukraine only, not actually attacking Russia with some goal of taking territory or concessions.

Russia may decide not to notice the difference, but surely no one can seriously think the Ukrainian army could occupy Russia.

From the bit I’ve read, Russia and the US are both concerned that the limited use of “tactical” nukes could result in escalation leading to Armageddon, saying they would treat it just like a big nuke.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.