Monty's Mighty Moustache

I think this one is far trickier than first glance.  If Putin spins this as somehow a US/Ukrainian operation then he looks weak and incompetent.  This was downtown Moscow, not some outer berg.  This is clearly a security failure so pinning it on a war opponent makes that opponent look competent and effective.  This is counter narratives of “we are winning in Ukraine” which they have been continually pushing.  So while it may drive support into Putin’s arms for the war, it may very well create a lot of doubt as to his ability to protect Russian in this war.  
In fact a terror attack is just about the worst false flag op to run here.  A massive explosion complete with ATACMs debris along with dozens of others “shot down” makes far more sense.  An asymmetric terror attack by a few armed gunman simply looks and feels like bad housekeeping and a massive intel failure, no matter how hard one tries to spin it.
I have no doubt they will link this back to Ukraine, but already here this is a soft link. “Ukraine was providing haven, but did not mastermind the whole thing.”  I am sure the real wingnuts will come up with all sorts of conspiracy theories but in the end Putin cannot lay this entirety at the feet of Ukraine without making Ukraine look much scarier and effective.  So what will be interesting is whether or not he does.  If he does, then things are likely worse internally for Russia than we can see.  He is willing to take the risk of making Ukraine look like they “got in a good one” because support is seriously flagging and he needs to leverage this any way he can.  If they downplay and sidestep, things might be tighter and more stable  because Putin is not entirely backed into a corner.
Putin has already called Ukraine “Nazi-terrorists” it was his entire excuse for the war.  Demonstrating of given credence to just how effective Ukraine still is at being as such, after two years of war, really runs counter to the entire Russian narrative thus far.

It's because the attack was all directed on Kyiv with strongest AD shield in Ukraine. If each city had the same protection, the total result would be like this.
It was at 5:00 I heard two Patriots launches, then heavy boom so windows shaken. It was Kinzhal or Iskander interception - it came from NE direction, were my district is located, so interception of ballistic missiles add some adrenaline %) Then, since 5 minutes one more (aero)ballistic target was destroyed, but slightly further. Then I heard 2-3 distant booms - all other missiles flew from western direction and were intercepted there - it's too far from me. 
 But anyway, several Kh-101 were intercepted over the city and hit the ground in residental areas  - 12 citizens were wounded. Damaged several buildings, one workshop, kindergarden, church, local power substation. Several cars burnt. 
Here fragment of missile impacted on the street not far from one of specific object %) and damaged buildings around - probably warhead detonated. 


Here of course "underground command bunker was destroyed" )))

People of this house were really lucky...

... Because warhead of intercepted Kh-101 fell down directly near the building and didn't explode

Of course, Russian MoD made a statement "the strike, including Kinzhal missiles was performed on decision making centers - all targets were hit". Ok. 390 millions USD to nowhere. Rich country...

Czech Republic already supplied 300 000 artillery shells. This claimed Yan Lipavsky, minister of foreign afafirs of this country.
In own turn Ukrainian representatives says this number will allow to close sharp deficite for next month and we hope further supplies will grow up. Ukraine now produce 122 mm and 152 mm ammunition and from second half of 2024 will launch produce of 155 mm shells
Also WSJ claimed Ukraine month ago launched serial production of unnamed missile with 400 miles range. 
 

Free-Russia fighters of RVC in NE part of Kozinka village. Russian tank got projectille in side, but, alas, too close range, the HEAT hadn't time to activate.
Graivoron district of Belgorod oblast completely out of electricity - power substation was destroyed.

Suddenly - Romanian volunteer unit "Getica" operates in Belgorod oblast (on the video you can hear Romanian language). Tank with LRL flag also has seen as well as Ukrainian tanks
Belgorod is gradually turning out into Kharkiv 2022. Deficite of food in supermarkets is beginning, people either hide in houses or flee from the city. Attack on Belgorod oblast is sensetive blow on Russian economy. Belgorod oblast is one of not many prospering regions of Russia. It gives to country many of meat (especially pork and chicken) - up to 11% of total production, milk, sunflower oil (up to 16 %), 39 % of iron ore, here concentraten many machine-building factories, so this turmoils and "uncertainity" (C) can undermine production, trade and taxes, which Belgorod gives to central budget
    
 
Interesting in Russia, which always was showing how "Kievan junta 8 years have been bombing Donbas" there is alsmost full censorship on what now happening in Belgorod oblast. Russian VKontakte social media started to block and delete posts and comments od Belgorod citizens about shelligs, destructions and hard life in the city. Hordes of bots actively deny any successes of free-Russia forces in border villages

Does Putin have a base of support?
Sure.
So did Saddam and any number of other dictators but it's precisely wrong to imagine the show they just put on reflects what it is. A pre-secured 85% vote isn't a reflection of strength, it's an obvious attempt to tighten the lid on a pressure cooker. I mean seriously folks...if Putin had a large majority of natural voters who would vote for him do you really think he'd pass on the legitimacy that sort of result represents? Of course not. 
I know it's tempting to point and say "See...Russians are intrinsically bad and that's what this vote shows us" but if you do, be aware you are indulging in the kind of thinking that you hate when you see it on the other side. 

Completely agree. Of course, there were ballot papers throwings, but I doubt it were on 30 % level, as claimed some analysts. I've seen screenshots of Russian social media, where members of polling stations committees with visible scare tell each other that on their stations weren't any throwings, but Putin has won with overhelming margin.  We all could see queues of Russian citizen in European countries, which demonstratively said they come to vote for Putin, in Germany they openly demontsrated DNR flags, and "St.Georgian stripes" - "out of spite to the whole world"
Yes, on some foreign polling stations Davankov has won - "liberal" and "anti-war" candidate of "New peoples" party, for which called to vote many of Navalnyi followers 
But here is Davankov today have a meeting with Putin - his words is just "loyal oaths"
 "I congratulate you with a confident victory! I want to say that these actions of Kievan regime has no excusses. I was in 29 regions during my election campaign and I can say in all regions people work for our victory. You absolutely said right that our common goal to win in SMO. It's very important do not remain this confrontation for our next generations. It have to be solved by our. And many people came to me on my meetings and say "Only Vladimir Putin capable to win in this conflict, I will vote for him"
Other Russian influent "liberal" from "libertarian wing" of Navalnyi team - Mikhail Svetov, who now migrated to Argentina said that vicotry of Russia will be profitable for Russian "relocants" (swaggering Russians hate the "political refugees" word concerning themeselve), because this will rise authotity of Russia and will force West to cancel sanctions, which in many things affect Russians abroad.
One more influent "liberal" blames Ukrainians that Putin again came to power (!!!)
Nobody did so much for promoting of current president of Russia, as Ukrainians. Those Russians who tired of 25 years of dictatorship in Russia - do not forget to give thanks brothery Ukrainain people for more 6 years under the thumb of regime
He meant Ukrainains with own "unjustified rusophobia" and mockery over impotent Russian opposition forced liberals to vote for Putin. They are all clynic idiots, sicking with chauvinism.  

Any who now will say about "innocent peaceful Russians, who are just hostages of Putin's dictatorship" - go to hell and damn you! They just voteed for a war and loyality to Putin's policy. Only one type of real good Russians exists - those, who openly say that Russia is a rashist  state, who stand for Ukraine victory, support UKR army, recognize collective responsibility and agree that Russia have to pay reparations, who consider Russian soldiers are not "our poor boys", but invaders, murderers and rapers, which went at war just for money, Rashist ideology or just for opportunity to kill, who sit in jails for own position, who at last fight with a weapon in free-Russia units or make diversions inside Russia. 
So, I wish Russia to burn in flame, collapse and croack in agony. In order our planet at last get rid of this stinky sh...t spot on the map.    

I think you are mixing a lot of themes here to the detriment of objective analysis.  The Soviet system was designed to create as much mass as possible and project it at an opponent.  It may appear "cruel and uncaring" but in reality it was built on the brutal lessons of the Eastern Front and how a quick violent short war was far better than a drawn out one.
We vie for the same aspiration of short wars, we simply lean on technology instead of human capital.  And frankly we have no real proof either system is truly superior.
The Soviet system is a poorer fit for modern democracies; however, before we sit too high on that horse, lets not forget democracies fought in WW1 too, and were very able to throw human capital at a problem at great loss.
The reality is that there is nothing inherently "wrong" or "evil" about the Soviet military system - talking political ideology out of the equation - so long as one asks that system to do what it was designed to do.  The exact same thing goes for the Western military system.  In this war, both sides have tried the western approach...and it did not work.  Now they are in a grinding war of attrition for which the western systems is also a very bad fit.
Nor is there proof that democracies can't do attrition either.  We have proven that we are very capable at spending a lot of lives to win.  What I oppose is this reoccurring narrative that somehow all the problems all sides are having are "Soviet legacy" and any successes are somehow western modernization; this is simply not proven by what we have seen.
Russia has fallen back onto a more Soviet-like approach to force generation and employment...and clearly it is working for them.  They are able to hold ground and even conduct tactical advances even with appalling losses.  The UA is moving much farther to the western doctrine, and frankly some of it is working for them too.  They are able to hold, strike deep and have very high precision.  
The weaknesses of either system are also on display for all to see as well.  For the Soviet system it is rigidity and logistical weight, which is untenable on the modern battlefield.  For the Western system it is the serious lack of depth and capacity.
I suspect that each side is evolving to some sort of hybrid, or at least trying to.  Either way, it does us little good to point at every problem and go "difficulty upscaling due to Soviet legacy"  which frankly does not even make sense based on what Soviet legacy really was.
As to that last part I highlighted - well yes and no.  The Mongols created smart fast mass and took over half the planet, so not entire a new idea.  The Soviet system could generate modern mech and armor forces like no one else.  Their operational art was very advanced on how to employ that mass.  In many ways they really are a defining school of modern warfare, the counter-point to the western schools.  We have no actual war to try and decide which system was better to worse to be honest.  The Gulf War was the closest but it really was a poor analogue.  This war has shadows of the Soviet system but overlapped with other schools.

The team had two fausts, the first went over the top of the panzer (as expected) but the second hit and the crew bailed out. I had it marked down as dead but next turn the crew popped back in and started blasting away. I can't remember seeing that happen too often in all my years playing, I think it must have hit something squishy as only 4 crew got out (and back in again).
The range was about 45-50m if I remember correctly, they were waiting in ambush at the roadside in case he pushed his armour down unsupported. Felt very aggrieved

1) It depends. If they have good concealment then not really necessary to hide especially as tanks don't spot that well.
2) Yes a panzerfaust team with a Target Armour Arc will only shoot the rocket at armour. I can't remember exactly but I think armoured cars and such don't count as armour but half-tracks and tanks do.
3) Yes if the team is hiding and a target comes into the arc and they have a good shot they will unhide and attack.
Target arcs are a good way to make sure supporting assets such as HMGs or rifle squads don't open fire and give away the positions either, just set a small target arc of a few metres and they will not fire at anything outside the arc.

Oh boo hoo, we have given so much to Ukraine, why not Europe give their "fair share"? Why must America lead...Are we not the world superpower? Are we not the best, strongest, most advanced military world-wide? Do we not have the strongest economy? Tell me how starving our ally of ammunition of cold war era shells does anything positive for our standing to compete with China. Tell me how illustrating that America cannot compete in a war of attrition with some of the decrepit remains of the Soviet Union somehow strengthens us to for a future competing with the world's factory (China). And I'm not being rhetorical, come here you supporter of Ukraine and Trump/Republican Party and tell me how America is benefitting from not funding artillery shells for Ukraine. I am sick and tired of seeing this notion existing, that the Republican Party/Trump will be stronger on China, on ensuring America will be safe when they can't fund goddamn cold war era shells for Ukraine. Am I being "political"? So sorry, but fair is fair, can't bash Europe without being fair to America.

Truly America is so stupid. We can't provide a tiny portion of our gdp to a cause most Americans are fine with, to which no American lives are at risk, to degrade the ability of a enemy, and strengthen our own standing in the world....and we are willingly throwing it away. Holy ****, why would any nation ally with us vs China.
We are starving our ally of life for literally no ****ing reason. No reason except as a favor to a certain someone. And no none of the flimsy excuses pass, most Americans, most senators, representatives support Ukraine or at least espouse sentiments to such.

Lies, damn lies, statistics, and economic statistics. Reminds me of the old joke!
Two economists are walking in the park. As they're walking, they come across a pile of dog ****.
One economist says to the other, "If you eat that dog ****, I'll give you $50". The second economist thinks for a minute, then reaches down, picks up the ****, and eats it. The first economist gives him a $50 bill and they keep going on their walk.
A few minutes later, they come across another pile of dog ****. This time, the second economist says to the first, "Hey, if you eat that, I'll give you $50." So, of course, the first economist picks up the ****, eats it, and gets $50.  
Walking a little while farther, the first economist looks at the second and says, "You know, I gave you $50 to eat dog ****, then you gave me back the same $50 to eat dog ****. I can't help but feel like we both just ate dog **** for nothing."
"That's not true", responded the second economist. "We increased the GDP by $100

Crash site of IL-76, which fell down near Ivanovo. Some Russian TGs claimed that unknown passengers, who were onboard, were crewmen of A-50. Ivanovo-Severnyi airfield is a base of 610th Center of combat usage and flight personnel retrain, having in own composition IL-76 and A-50 planes, some of which are strored. If this is true, IL-76 crash can be a diveriosion to eliminate A-50 pilots and operators, which probably flew to bring into exploitation A-50, repaired from the storage to substitute previous losses
Reportedly (but not verified) in result of drone strikes on Beriyev aviation plant in Taganrog two A-50 (one of them - that which suffered from small drone attack in Belarus), staying under repar in hangar got additional damages and have taken out for unknown time.

A good rebuttal of RU's alternate world view by a Polish minister at the UN
 

Hi,
As a Swede I thought today would be a good day to stop lurking for a bit and drop a comment. Been playing cm for 20 years and following this forum for a long time.
Thank you all for contributing to this thread, checking it daily. Always a good source for news and discussion, so much knowledge and experience gathered is hard to get elsewhere. 
I always was all for our countrys neutral stance combined with a strong Defense but last decade has of course swayed us all in Sweden a bit. I have my background in the army, cv90. Seeing us finally start to retake our capabilities regarding defense is good.
Anyways thanks for having us in the club I guess (why am I thinking about brothers Marx)?
Carl 

Seriously and @squatter can look here too.  For anyone advocating Ukraine pursuing peace negotiations or suing for peace - easy to say but no one in this camp has provided a coherent theory of what that would look like right now.
Let’s say “Ok, you guys are right. Ukraine is out of options here. There are no viable way for Ukraine to continue to prosecute this war.”  Ok, so what?  What would peace negotiations look like?  How exactly do you guys see these “peace negotiations” happening.  Every time I ask this question I get some hand waving but no one has yet to unpack just how any peace negotiations could end up in anything but weakened western influence and a more vulnerable Ukraine that Russia is going to exploit.  What peace negotiation, that Russia is going to accept - while, as we are continually reminded, Russia is still capable of waging offensives to take ground?  What possible leverage does the west or Ukraine have in guaranteeing Ukrainian independence and security.  Is Russia going to offer reparations?  How about war crimes prosecution?  Is Russia going to give up an inch of ground it has taken?  Are they going to push for recognition of Crimea and Donbas as Russian provinces.
This is what is so disingenuous about this line of advocacy - at best it is delusional liberal left “let’s give peace a chance”.  At worst is it far right BS designed to program failure into this entire war so that their presidential candidate can be “right all along”.  In both cases the idea of peace negotiations right now is an empty coffin where actual ideas on this war go to die.  We may very well need a negotiated end-state in this war, but suing for peace now, while on the back foot is going to embolden Putin and his regime…and is exactly what they are looking for in order to promote themselves “Look we brought them all to their knees”.
But let’s open the floor.  Please walk us through what a peace process would look like right now.  Let’s stop sideline heckling on won’t work and tell us what you think will work.

Oh good, you are back.  So I posted links to two estimates of RA force lay down south of Kherson.  From OS we have at least a decent idea that there is roughly a division down there.  I then did a force to space analysis that would show roughly 100 RA troops per km.  That is roughly 1/3 of the average troops density elsewhere and much less than RA offensive concentrations.  But, again, you simply ignore it.
I am not sure what a discussion in Kherson sector has to do with the larger strategic force comparison; however the argument was never that the “RUS are outnumbered and outgunned in Ukraine”, it was: the RA is thin at Kherson and Ukraine has on opportunity to exploit that.
Well at the CFC we also do not assume the enemy is “superior in every way so every option is too hard…so let’s just quit” either.  I have no doubt the RA has hard points along that obstacle but they do not have enough forces to create an effective “wall”, they have likely no depth and they definitely do not have air superiority.  I mean, seriously, how much more do you need?
So first off “difficult” does not automatically translate into “impossible” - that is not a good military rule of thumb.  So how “beleaguered” is that force at Krynky?  How much has it cost the UA to hold that bridgehead.  How hard have been the RA c-attacks.  You basically “have seen pictures of tired Ukrainian Marines” and translate that into “impossible mission”.  So who is demonstrating bias here, in order to fit a foregone conclusion?  Krynky shows that a small light force one the other side of the Dnipro can be sustained and resist RA attempts to push them out.  It demonstrates that the RA do not have decisive force at Krynky and I suspect the bridgehead is acting as a patrolling base.  The fact that they have held on for months reinforces this deduction.
Now the real question is, can the UA do 6-10 Krynkys?  Upscaling is a completely different issue.  It depends on availability of trained troops, water crossing equipment, stores and intelligence.  It is a complete complex operation.  Is it guaranteed?  Absolutely not - war is not a menu with items you can simply return to the kitchen because you don’t like them - this will be a very hard and dangerous operation.  However, it is 1) possible and plausible and  2) likely one of the better operational offensive options on the table.  You appear to write off any offensive operation for your own reasons, however, here is one professional military analysts who is telling you that there is an option space here given the proper resources.  The risks are high, however, the payoff may be high enough to warrant the risk.  Further the other options are all pretty much worse unless the UA has solved for minefields in this war.
(This is your queue to get huffy again and argue with the kitchen btw)
Your state position has been, and is (unless you wish to retract) - “Ukraine is out of options and as such we should be pursuing peace negotiations.”  If you can provide a single post where you do not reinforce this central premise then I think we can re-assess your position.  You have worked incredibly hard to remove the southern light operational option - to the point that Steve also called you out for ignoring evidence being presented in favour of your underlying position.  You have also dismissed any and all other options - again to reinforce your position.  You have side-stepped historical references as “out of date”, you have side-stepped force-space analysis and you have downplayed Ukrainian successes.  
Now, you are correct.  This could all be quite innocent and you do not have a conscious ulterior motive.  But now you might want to take a look at your own biases because you are definitely projecting a sub-conscious motive here.  You can get all huffy and demand to see the manager, but I still smell and suspect you of political motivations that align with other posters who have come through here who employ pretty much the exact same MO on the discussion of future Ukrainian military success - ignore or downplay any analysis or assessment that would give Ukraine any chance of success; over subscribe Russian capabilities and capacity: land back at “Ukraine is done…we must sue for peace”.
No argument on the transformative impact ISR has had on the battlefield.  And no one is saying a water crossing operation is going to be easy.  Like minefields, it will require pre-conditions which include a level of c-ISR.  However, we have a proof of concept that it can be done, which is a helluva lot more than we have with respect to minefields and RA forces elsewhere.  That is one large obstacle to try and cover in detail - 85-100kms.  And the UA has freedom of movement along most of that obstacle (I.e. unlike a minefield they can cross at multiple locations).  So what?  Well if one can keep the logistical demand low, one could sustain light operations through over the water and air resupply (see: heavy drones)…you know, like in other times in history.
A light force water crossing is damned hard and comes with significant risk, no getting past that.  However, compared to other options it may be the best of the bunch.  And it may very well work…and by “work” I mean draw RA forces away from other sectors to deal with it, which may open up other opportunities.
As to “Russian stooge” and “f#cking idiot”…you realize you are the only one to make these statements in this debate?  I still suspect you of ulterior motives but of course that will need proof otherwise.  No, I suspect you are a guy who is entirely enamoured in your own opinion and is always pushing to be the smartest guy in the room.  Now which rooms?  In the end, I really do not care.
Now who is throwing around “you are all f#cking idiots and Pro-Ukrainian bots”?  So if your purpose was to highlight how challenging future offensive operations will be for the UA…well, ok, got it. Contribution noted.  But it really appears you are working very hard to convince everyone that Ukraine has no offensive options left, and its defensive ones are nearly as hopeless…and therefore Ukraine should “sue for peace”.  
This will have been at least the 2nd, possible 3rd time someone has come out of the woodwork after Adiivka to push this perspective.  Your approach of 1) being entirely in love with your own opinion and 2) ignoring any and all evidence or counter analysis, and 3) becoming very offended when called out, matches those previous poster profiles.  Could all be innocent coincidence and you honestly believe this is the situation despite also hoping for a better outcome, but I remain suspicious.
Why?  Because like those other posters, you are not promoting actual discourse.  You are pushing a single position without room for anything else.  I am more than willing to admit a water crossing operation south of Kherson may very well fail, it is no guaranteed success.  I am also very willing to publicly admit that Ukraine is definitely facing some tough decisions this year.  I do not believe we are at the “beg Russia for peace” stage though and see still possible opportunities but windows may be closing.  You on the other hand dismiss any and all ideas that run counter to your position.  You are preaching, not discussing.  Could be just who you are, but you picked a really crappy time to come out and self-actualize.

This is the other major flaw in the thinking within the “sue for peace” crowd…what peace?
All war is negotiation.  However, that negotiation is framed by realities on the ground.  So while this war may very well end in some sort of Korean Peninsula solution on lines yet to be determined.  Like the Korean War both sides had to be forced to the table by military facts.
So the narrative coming out of the MAGA/Macgregor crowd is that 1) Ukraine has no hope.  No military solution exists for Ukraine and they build everything else around that central “fact”.  2) seeing as point #1 is a universal truth (and no room for counter-factuals exists within that universe), the Ukraine must sue for peace.  And of course their own Glorious Leader will somehow make an equitable and enduring peace happen.
This is utter bullsh#t.  Even if one accepts point #1 - and there is a growing pile of evidence the Ukraine is not “done”, as planes keep getting blown out of the sky - this theory completely fails to define just how their version of “peace” will happen.  Russian “peace negotiations” in the past have been self-serving and onion skin thin.  If Ukraine begs for peace right now, it will be from a position of weakness.  If the West begs for peace right now, it will be from a position of weakness.  Does anyone think that Putin is not going to exploit this fact? Russian peace terms will be their terms.  They will be designed to ensure: future Ukrainian vulnerability, a clear demonstration of Western weakness and failure, and promote Russian superiority.  
If Ukraine sued for peace right now I have zero doubts Russia would be asking for war reparations…from a country they invaded.  Russia would also likely demand legitimacy and recognition for the territories it captured.  And would make sure they set conditions for successful future actions - they will call it “Ukrainian neutrality”.
There is no easy tap out in this war.  It is a real war where endstate will emerge directly from military outcomes.  As a minimum Ukraine must freeze this war on its terms, not Russia’s and the West needs to support that.  The “fantasy” in all this is not the prospect of future Ukrainian military success, it is the entire belief that there is another option when dealing with Russia.  I suspect there will be an end line in all this and I am less and less convinced it will be the pre-2014 border; at this point pre-2022 will be a stretch.  But it is definitely not where we are today.  Ignoring the lines on the ground, Russian sacrifice is not high enough to force them towards anything remotely looking like an equitable peace negotiation that we could trust.

I'll bite...
Similar to 1916, both sides are exhausted but still swinging. Both sides think they can win and noone has proposed a solution that is remotely acceptable to both sides. Russia wants a divided and submissive Ukraine with a puppet government in power. Ukraine wants to return to 1991 borders and a substantial security guarantee to prevent Russia from invading again. Those are totally incompatible positions so they keep fighting. 
In WW1 the central powers were blockaded until they were unable to keep fighting. It took another 2 years. That is likely how this war will end. 
If the West allows Ukraine to lose then pax Americana is over and we return to the bad old days, except now we have nukes. So we need to make sure they don't lose. It really as simple as that. 

I don’t think anyone of serious power in the West wants a full Russian collapse.  The overall Western grand strategy since the end of the Cold War has been “stable status quo”.  We have spent the last 33 years pretty much working on all fronts to sustain “the system”.  We toss scarfs and hats on it but at its core is a central unchanging stability.  Why?  Because stability is good business.  The West, with the US at the centre built the scheme that “won” the Cold War and want that party to keep going because we get very rich off it.  The rest of the world makes our stuff for cheap, while also buying our other stuff.  
But pretty much from Day 1 “the others” pushed back.  First was the intra-war years, interventions and then terrorism.  Now this has upscaled to “revisionist states” and “power competition”.  Russia invaded Ukraine for several reasons but one of them definitely was to demonstrate that they are not going to be bound by western rules (Hell, Putin said exactly this in that speech back in Sep ‘22).  This puts the West in a dilemma, they can either do too little and Russia threatens the system, or they crush Russia…and it threatens the system.  So they appear to have chosen the middle path, which of course is getting hijacked by the internal movements who want to…wait for it…change the system.  MAGA, alt-right, nationalists, whatever, all disagree with “the system” even though it has made everyone richer.  The reality is that it did not make everyone equally rich so discontent is natural.  Worse, power spheres exploit this so they can get more powerful (and richer).  So Rust-Belt yokels eat this stuff up and start to dismantle “the system”, which includes democracy apparently.  The reality is Trump is a symptom, not a cause and I am not sure even they realize how dangerous this game they are playing is.
So Ukraine happens and becomes a symbol of a “war for, and against, the system.”  It isn’t about the fact that killing innocent Ukrainians is wrong - hell if morales like human life mattered we wouldn’t have Gaza.  No, Ukraine is all about “the system” and both sides appear to be waging it viewed through that lens.  Russia needs to show that they are going to play by their own rules, but not completely break themselves.  One could ask “why is Russia fighting this war by half measures?”  Do they enjoy a quagmire?  No, Putin understands what he has gotten himself into and is adopting a slow burn strategy, hoping we will get distracted and caught up in our own nonsense…and he might be right.
The rest of the West is trying to step up, but frankly we have grown awfully fat, dumb and happy on the back of the US - who now is having a bipolar fit.  In the end, we can live with a fallen Ukraine.  We can shore up the borders and lock Russia out.  We can live with a partial victory in Ukraine, do we really care about Crimea, LNR and DNR?  No, we did not in ‘14 and we don’t now.  We can’t live with a completely imploded Russia.  Those are where the real risks lie.  Too many unknowns that could really break the system.  So we wind up with a half hearted war designed to punish Russia for challenging the system but not destroy them.  Ukraine is, and I am being brutally honest here, is almost secondary to the entire conversation.  It was simply a very unfortunate country where both sides could try and prove a point.  We love Ukraine all of a sudden because they are an opportunity to show that 1) Russia was wrong to challenge the system, and 2) the system still works.  
I strongly suspect this is why this war is also so muddled in military circles.  We are watching a war to defend the system..that is demonstrating the weaknesses of our own military system at the same time.  So we put blinders on and try to pretend it isn’t happening.  Our military power has to still be relevant…otherwise how can we defend the system?
So to answer your question, “yes, the US and the West know exactly how important Ukraine really is and are fighting this war based on that calculus.”  The answer however is “somewhat important”.  We care and feel bad, but care much more about our own issues.  Putin read the short game about as wrong as one can.  He may have read the long game extremely well.  The way to beat the West is not outright confrontation, it is apathy.  2 years is forever for a culture addicted to clicks and flashing lights.  Putin’s off ramp is being able to draw a victory line somewhere of his choosing and he is shooting for that.  And we might just let him get there.
Now I would not start freaking out and worry about a second attack on Kyiv.  Something that dramatic might actually get our attention again.  No, this needs to become a boring war - I am starting to think Putin’s Tucker Carlson interview was smarter than we thought.  What better way to get Western audiences to yawn and start to change the channel than a history lesson?

Dude, take your meds or something.  You have come out swinging on a number of issues even when it was clear you were way off base.  You were going after folks on that A-50 when it was clear that you were looking at an older incident - and not the one with the posted video from the last 24-48 hours.  Now you are coming at someone else for whatever the hell this is about…gee you think Russian troops could not get their hands on Ukrainian coveralls?  Kinophile commented on how the Russian Army has brutal practices and you object…so your position is that the Russian Army does not have brutal practices?  Based what?  The sign translation?
You seem to be in a fighting mood for the sake of simply fighting.  Seriously go to a bar and get smacked around, get it out of your system and then come back.

Thanks for the clarification, but you might consider thumbing down the ad hominem attacks a bit.

Gentleman. You can't fight here, this is the war room.
(Sorry I had celebratory drink.)

None shall pass!

Perhaps: "Delboyism"?
Derrick "Del-boy" Trotter, British classic sitcom icon, cockney who sells stolen goods:

EDIT: He even claims to support Chelsea.