Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

Raoul said:
You also have to factor in the weapons the Ukrainians are finally receiving now, which will help them gain more territory in the future.
Click to expand...
It makes no sense to look at the future when you try to rate the last months. What you write gives hope that the next offensive push could go better than the last, but that one has failed.
 
stefan92 said:
It makes no sense to look at the future when you try to rate the last months. What you write gives hope that the next offensive push could go better than the last, but that one has failed.
Click to expand...

I don't think its failed at all since it is still ongoing. The perception they had to reclaim all their land by end of summer or else its a failure is completely artificial.
 
stefan92 said:
True, but that progress happened throughout last years autumn offensive at latest, after that very little happened. And that's a failure (for both sides).
Click to expand...
Unfortunately I think the earlier successes of UA were due to the Russian incompetence and somewhat delusional underestimating of their opponent. After they switched fully to defensive mindset and dug in, the outcome converged to the expectation . They still have a lot of men and resources (feckton of mines) to hold the line. Meanwhile UA lacks the hi-tech means nato would deal with similar situation (air superiority + cas) and therefore it is again a ww1 style positional warfare + drone assists for targeting and recon. Its a stalemate for the foreseeable, f16 is not changing that I hope people got that out of their minds.

What could help though is a lot more of the current top stuff: atacms , himars etc and also their latest iterations. Sadly I believe the stocks aren't that deep because atacms were discontinued, and it really is needed in large quantities to cause a break.
 
Raoul said:
I don't think its failed at all since it is still ongoing. The perception they had to reclaim all their land by end of summer or else its a failure is completely artificial.
Click to expand...
I didn't expect them to free all of it, but at least make a significant push. They managed to hold the lines in the North and reclaimed some small villages in the Southeast, that's all they managed to achieve during the summer.

Now it looks like they are moving to the next operation (the Dnipro bridgehead) and hopefully will have more success on that new front, I'm with you here.
 
stefan92 said:
I didn't expect them to free all of it, but at least make a significant push. They managed to hold the lines in the North and reclaimed some small villages in the Southeast, that's all they managed to achieve during the summer.

Now it looks like they are moving to the next operation (the Dnipro bridgehead) and hopefully will have more success on that new front, I'm with you here.
Click to expand...

The push is obviously hard if the Russians have heavily mined the entire south, which means its going to be a very slow process going forward. The Ukrainian effort is obviously also not limited to just regaining land. They're also using ATACMS, drones, and other means to strike Russians well behind enemy lines and in places like Crimea, where the Russians have since had to evacuate most of their ships to prevent them from getting sunk. Short of Russia imploding politically from within, this is going to be a lengthy process that can't be reduced to a summer fighting season, but rather several years of fighting.
 
Last edited:
Morty_ said:
Well they could, actually, if supposed leading European nations like France and Germany actually took this seriously, instead of sitting back, thinking the US would always be there to solve their security problems.

Russia raises its military budget by 70% next year, Germany, raises its already low budget by a measly 3% or something, by comparison.
Click to expand...
Any army intending to drive out an invading army can't really be losing battles like Bakhmut, where the defenders had massive advantages with heavy fortification. As soon as it failed, I thought it didn't look good for the UKR. Now the same thing may happen in another key city.

The support can be better, but autocratic regimes are better at staying in the war for obvious reasons. This situation may be a warning sign for whoever may face China in the future. Hopefully, they don't have to.
 
Raoul said:
Freeing their country is of course a relative term. The Ukrainians are in it to win back all their territory including Crimea, so not accomplishing that in one summer is anything but a failure. A look at the map a month or so after the invasion and that of today and its easy to see which side has made far more progress.
Click to expand...
Well, didn't Milley say something like this time last year was a good time for UKR to negotiate with the Russians because they had the upper hand? It may look like he was right about it. Of course, whether Putin would accept it is a different matter.
 
The United said:
Well, didn't Milley say something like this time last year was a good time for UKR to negotiate with the Russians because they had the upper hand? It may look like he was right about it. Of course, whether Putin would accept it is a different matter.
Click to expand...

I don't know if he did, but it wouldn't matter since the Ukrainians are committed to getting all their land back. They can't go back to a pre-2022 construct where they have the Russians continuing to squat in Crimea. They know they have to get it all back now, or they may never have such a chance again.
 
Raoul said:
I don't think its failed at all since it is still ongoing. The perception they had to reclaim all their land by end of summer or else its a failure is completely artificial.
Click to expand...
No one thought they would free all their land by the end of summer. But even with conservative estimates, they would be in Tomak. That did not happen. You keep talking about more offensive operations from UKR. I am sure you do know that UKR troops are exhausted at this point, and where or when they will get a new fresh troop for more major offensives is a big question mark.
 
Raoul said:
I don't know if he did, but it wouldn't matter since the Ukrainians are committed to getting all their land back. They can't go back to a pre-2022 construct where they have the Russians continuing to squat in Crimea. They know they have to get it all back now, or they may never have such a chance again.
Click to expand...
https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/16/politics/milley-ukraine-strength-russia/index.html

“There may be a political solution where politically the Russians withdraw,” Milley said at a press conference Wednesday. “You want to negotiate at a time when you’re at your strength, and your opponent is at weakness. And it’s possible, maybe, that there’ll be a political solution. All I’m saying is there’s a possibility for it.” Nov16, 2022.
 
The United said:
No one thought they would free all their land by the end of summer. But even with conservative estimates, they would be in Tomak. That did not happen. You keep talking about more offensive operations from UKR. I am sure you do know that UKR troops are exhausted at this point, and where or when they will get a new fresh troop for more major offensives is a big question mark.
Click to expand...

I think people get a bit irrationally carried away with these expectations. The Ukrainians are doing an effective job at incrementally chipping away at previous Russian gains. They’ve defeated the Russians in terms of capturing Kyiv, they’ve also completely taken Kharkiv back, and have done the same in the south in Kherson. The villages and farmland in the south are slow going because they are heavily mined but they will get that eventually as well. There’s no rational talking point that can spin any of what has happened as a win for Putin.
 
Raoul said:
I think people get a bit irrationally carried away with these expectations. The Ukrainians are doing an effective job at incrementally chipping away at previous Russian gains. They’ve defeated the Russians in terms of capturing Kyiv, they’ve also completely taken Kharkiv back, and have done the same in the south in Kherson. The villages and farmland in the south are slow going because they are heavily mined but they will get that eventually as well. There’s no rational talking point that can spin any of what has happened as a win for Putin.
Click to expand...

Whenever people point out that UKR is not doing as well as they were hoping, others will come and say that bold part.

I mean, at the end of the day, who cares if Putin can take Kyiv or not at this point, at least if you are on the UKR side? Shouldn't the discussion be about whether UKR has a chance to retake most of their land back in a reasonable time? When I say'reasonable time', it means the time frame that the 'West' can support. It is not forever.

But even if we want to talk about Putin's strategy, once the support stops, yeah, Putin will chip away more and more land, which is grim for the UKR. Yeah, Putin lost strategically—short-term. But you can't say he won't get it at some point. And the fact that UKR troops are not doing as well as they should in all these counterattacks, even with 'the support', should reinforce the point that Putin is still in this war firmly and probably holds some slim advantage in the long term.
 
Last edited:
The United said:
I mean, at the end of the day, who cares if Putin can take Kyiv or not at this point, at least if you are on the UKR side? Shouldn't the discussion be about whether UKR has a chance to retake most of their land back in a reasonable time? When I say'reasonable time', it means the time frame that the 'West' can support. It is not forever.

But even if we want to talk about Putin's strategy, once the support stops, yeah, Putin will chip away more and more land, which is grim for the UKR. Yeah, Putin lost strategically—short-term. But you can't say he won't get it at some point. And the fact that UKR troops are not doing as well as they should in all these counterattacks, even with 'the support', should reinforce the point that Putin is still in this war firmly and probably holds some slim advantage in the long term.
Click to expand...

He obviously does since he attempted regime change at the very beginning of the war. Take Kyiv and replace the government with a stooge Russian leader. That has failed and the Ukrainians should be given credit for defeating the Russians in doing it.

Putin's own resources are not unlimited either, and the fact that he is clutching at straws by having to use prisoners and get weapons from North Korea, is suggestive he himself is running out of resources at at time when the Ukrainians are getting billions from the US and Europe.
 
Raoul said:
He obviously does since he attempted it immediately following the beginning of the war. Take Kyiv and replace the government with a stooge Russian leader. That has failed and the Ukrainians should be given credit for defeating the Russians in doing it.

Putin's own resources are not unlimited either, and the fact that he is clutching at straws by having to use prisoners and get weapons from North Korea, is suggestive he himself is running out of resources at at time when the Ukrainians are getting billions from the US and Europe.
Click to expand...

I mean, he does, but why should people in the UKR care when 10% of their lands are still being occupied and it is not stopping?

If we are being honest, UKR running out of resources is a closer reality for us. And the Russians will get tons of ammunition from their 'friends'. About using prisoners, it is not the last straw. They are useful for Putin, and it gives a chance to protect the regular Russian army. The actual last straw would be having to use the regular army everywhere which they can't afford. Guess what? They still have shitloads of prisoners to waste away.
 
The United said:
I mean, he does, but why should people in the UKR care when 10% of their lands are still being occupied and it is not stopping?

If we are being honest, UKR running out of resources is a closer reality for us. And the Russians will get tons of ammunition from their 'friends'. About using prisoners, it is not the last straw. They are useful for Putin, and it gives a chance to protect the regular Russian army. The actual last straw would be having to use the regular army everywhere which they can't afford. Guess what? They still have shitloads of prisoners to waste away.
Click to expand...

That's actually not correct. The Ukrainians are getting a massive weapons package from the US. The Russians are not getting anything near that. Sending prisoners into Ukraine, many who don't know what they're doing, isn't going to help him.
 
DT12 said:
North Korean artillery proving decisive apparently.

https://english.elpais.com/internat...rainian-offensive-and-goes-on-the-attack.html
Click to expand...

I never understood why the West never attempted to purchase artillery from North Korea for a deal that they could not refuse. With that you would have solved temporary Ukranian ammo supply, cut off this source from the russians and avoid that North Korea would have access to advanced Russian technology. Or at least you would make Russia to pay much more as North Korea would show Putin what the west was trying to do.

I am sure that North Korea has countries in europe that they could negotiate with. Like Sweden that it seems is the interlocutor for north korea as per last negotiations with the US private repatriation
 
The United said:
I mean, he does, but why should people in the UKR care when 10% of their lands are still being occupied and it is not stopping?

If we are being honest, UKR running out of resources is a closer reality for us. And the Russians will get tons of ammunition from their 'friends'. About using prisoners, it is not the last straw. They are useful for Putin, and it gives a chance to protect the regular Russian army. The actual last straw would be having to use the regular army everywhere which they can't afford. Guess what? They still have shitloads of prisoners to waste away.
Click to expand...

I understand there's a lot of media pessimism on this subject, much of which gets spammed on here from the likes of the major US outlets, but the reality of the matter is that western support only continues to grow, has done consistently and shows no signs of slowing down.

The only main risk to it is a GOP presidency. Once that is out of the way US support will stay for as long as it takes to ensure Russia poses no military threat to any country in Europe. Whether it takes 2 years or 20, Ukraine has to be fortified. Not much choice for any serious world leaders with a stake in the matter.
 
Simbo said:
I understand there's a lot of media pessimism on this subject, much of which gets spammed on here from the likes of the major US outlets, but the reality of the matter is that western support only continues to grow, has done consistently and shows no signs of slowing down.

The only main risk to it is a GOP presidency. Once that is out of the way US support will stay for as long as it takes to ensure Russia poses no military threat to any country in Europe. Whether it takes 2 years or 20, Ukraine has to be fortified. Not much choice for any serious world leaders with a stake in the matter.
Click to expand...
I would like to have more sources for this. Obviously, the ME conflict has made the media covered less on this. I saw Denmark or Norway sending a good size of aid whereas the USA is struggling to get more aid to pass the House atm.
 
The United said:
I would like to have more sources for this. Obviously, the ME conflict has made the media covered less on this. I saw Denmark or Norway sending a good size of aid whereas the USA is struggling to get more aid to pass the House atm.
Click to expand...

The House will definitely fight about mixing both Ukrainian and Israeli aid into one bill, but in the end there are more than enough Republicans in the Senate and House to make sure it goes through. Obviously, the next impending government shutdown on 17 November will be an obstacle in terms of getting it done before or after.
 
Raoul said:
That's actually not correct. The Ukrainians are getting a massive weapons package from the US. The Russians are not getting anything near that. Sending prisoners into Ukraine, many who don't know what they're doing, isn't going to help him.
Click to expand...
Obviously, the Russians are not getting the same amount from the likes of NK, but they still have a massive amount of equipment in a lot of areas, including manpower. Denying that and keeping saying that the Russians will run out of it would not make it true in reality. Prisoners did play a huge part in taking the Bakhmut if you remember.

And about kicking the Russians out of their lands, the map from the NYT actually puts things in a bit of perspective. "When both sides’ gains are added up, Russia now controls 188 square miles more territory in Ukraine compared with the start of the year." "Less territory changed hands in August than in any other month of the war, according to a New York Times analysis of data from the Institute for the Study of War. While Ukraine made small gains in the south, Russia took slightly more land overall, mostly in the northeast."

For comparison, the UKR summer/fall offensive last year gained about 200 square miles in about one week in early October...

UKR received 'big' support for this counterattack. But the result on the battle field is far from ideal, even against 'prisoners' who don't know what they are doing. Imagine for one second that if that 'big' support drops off just a little bit.
 
Last edited:
it has been tough for Ukraine recently. Russia is sacrificing men and equipment for quick wins. Ukraine took a while to adapt to mines.

The Russian economy is on the ropes and won’t be able to stay this way for years. The war will therefore be likely be won or lost at the next US election
 
The United said:
Obviously, the Russians are not getting the same amount from the likes of NK, but they still have a massive amount of equipment in a lot of areas, including manpower. Denying that and keeping saying that the Russians will run out of it would not make it true in reality. Prisoners did play a huge part in taking the Bakhmut if you remember.

And about kicking the Russians out of their lands, the map from the NYT actually puts things in a bit of perspective. "When both sides’ gains are added up, Russia now controls 188 square miles more territory in Ukraine compared with the start of the year." "Less territory changed hands in August than in any other month of the war, according to a New York Times analysis of data from the Institute for the Study of War. While Ukraine made small gains in the south, Russia took slightly more land overall, mostly in the northeast."

For comparison, the UKR summer/fall offensive last year gained about 200 square miles in about one week in early October...

UKR received 'big' support for this counterattack. But the result on the battle field is far from ideal, even against 'prisoners' who don't know what they are doing. Imagine for one second that if that 'big' support drops off just a little bit.
Click to expand...

If land is the only thing you will take as evidence then sure, but the fact they appear to be opening up the southern ports and threatening Crimea is certainly a positive. If they can get closer to surrounding Crimea, put pressure on the Kerch bridge, keep taking out Russian naval and air defence targets, then they could take Crimea relatively quickly in principle. It's slow progress to get in a position to really turn the screw but once they are in position it could all go a lot faster.

Another metric to consider would be dead Russian soldiers and the effect on Russia's economy. Given how much they've had to bump their military budgets this year it suggests it's not going terribly well for them.
 
TwoSheds said:
If land is the only thing you will take as evidence then sure, but the fact they appear to be opening up the southern ports and threatening Crimea is certainly a positive. If they can get closer to surrounding Crimea, put pressure on the Kerch bridge, keep taking out Russian naval and air defence targets, then they could take Crimea relatively quickly in principle. It's slow progress to get in a position to really turn the screw but once they are in position it could all go a lot faster.

Another metric to consider would be dead Russian soldiers and the effect on Russia's economy. Given how much they've had to bump their military budgets this year it suggests it's not going terribly well for them.
Click to expand...
Yes it definitely helps to divide what's ongoing in different zones. Then we get:
- a tie in the North-East (Bakhmut/Avdiivka) with slight advantages for Russia
- a tie in the South-East with slight advantages for Ukraine (Robotyne) and potential to evolve positively (Dnipro bridgehead)
- a strategic win in the Black Sea for Ukraine (increasingly crippled the Russian fleet and drove some of them out of Sevastopol to Novorossyisk)
 
stefan92 said:
Yes it definitely helps to divide what's ongoing in different zones. Then we get:
- a tie in the North-East (Bakhmut/Avdiivka) with slight advantages for Russia
- a tie in the South-East with slight advantages for Ukraine (Robotyne) and potential to evolve positively (Dnipro bridgehead)
- a strategic win in the Black Sea for Ukraine (increasingly crippled the Russian fleet and drove some of them out of Sevastopol to Novorossyisk)
Click to expand...

Agree. And to build on this, land won in the Donbas is worth a lot less militarily than land won in the south.
 
VorZakone said:
Who is the Ukrainian ex-politician?
Click to expand...

The guy who said this back in 2019, when many of those who are now in the Ukrainian government (Shmyal, Podolyak, even Zelenskiy) accused him of spreading fear-mongering hysteria:




He's recently been giving pessimistic assessments of Ukraine's prospects, so naturally he's now a clueless dolt all over again.
 
DT12 said:
The guy who said this back in 2019, when many of those who are now in the Ukrainian government (Shmyal, Podolyak, even Zelenskiy) accused him of spreading fear-mongering hysteria:




He's recently been giving pessimistic assessments of Ukraine's prospects, so naturally he's now a clueless dolt all over again.
Click to expand...

A bit like you then. Still think Russia will prosper and the west will fail?
 
massi83 said:
A bit like you then. Still think Russia will prosper and the west will fail?
Click to expand...
I've never said Russia will prosper and the West will fail. I've said that Ukraine will not win this war as they've defined victory. For saying this I and others were attacked and mocked (including by PM by you, fascinating how you self-styled defenders of democracy always resort to aggression and insults when faced with an opinion you don't like). Thus, anyone with an interest in rational discussion largely abandoned this thread over a year ago, leaving it to the same 3 or 4 people to spam it up with endless delusion from the likes of Ben Hodges, Ilya Ponoromenko and Kiev Independent.
 
DT12 said:
I've never said Russia will prosper and the West will fail. I've said that Ukraine will not win this war as they've defined victory. For saying this I and others were attacked and mocked (including by PM by you, fascinating how you self-styled defenders of democracy always resort to aggression and insults when faced with an opinion you don't like). Thus, anyone with an interest in rational discussion largely abandoned this thread over a year ago, leaving it to the same 3 or 4 people to spam it up with endless delusion from the likes of Ben Hodges, Ilya Ponoromenko and Kiev Independent.
Click to expand...

Rational discussion being a relative term of course. One could argue with significant credibility that the Ukrainians are far closer to kicking the Russians out than the Russians are in taking over all of Ukraine. If you look at a pre-2022 compared to today, beyond the landbridge to Crimea and a couple of southern Ukrainian cities in largely agrarian areas, there's nothing the Russians have gained outside of Donbas.
 
Raoul said:
Should last a few weeks at least.

Click to expand...


About 2-3 months at 15.000 shells a day

Also north korea can send more

Meanwhile the whole europe cant supply even remotely this quantity in months
 
4bars said:
About 2-3 months at 15.000 shells a day

Also north korea can send more

Meanwhile the whole europe cant supply even remotely this quantity in months
Click to expand...

They blow far more ammo than that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.