Centurian52

Polecats in CM when?

Three things stand out for me in this video.
1. Trench clearing is damn dangerous work (I guess I already knew that).
2. Drones are helping to make it a bit easer in two ways. First, by providing information to the clearing parties about threats and fleeting opportunities. Second, by opening up more angles to drop grenades from.
3. Do all Russian trenches really look this bad? This isn't the first trench clearing video I've seen, and the Russian trenches always seem to be in pretty poor condition. Before I though I was just looking at a small sample size, but now I'm starting to think there's a real pattern there. Yes, this is a lot better than no trench at all, but we're hardly talking about 1917 level standards here. These are not the sort of defensive works that could pose a serious obstacle to a large and well trained mechanized force of the sort Ukraine has reportedly been preparing.
 

We should definitely start defining Ukrainian  "success". 
Steve has outlined significant territorial recapture as a good threshold (let's say at minimum equal to either/both Kherson & Kharkiv quantities). 
I'd separate those two though,  as Kherson was a fixed point objective while Kharkiv was a more "pure"  territory capture. 
But those are "only"  operational successes,  when little was expected of those actions from a strategic or geopolitical sense. They were a very good proof of the pudding,  that Ukraine could attack and win but as we all know, expectations weren't high. 
However,  this year's offensive is an entirely different beast. Now,  there is very much an overt tone of Show Us You're Not Wasting Our Time. Expectations are high,  hopes are unreasonable and politicians are ticklish to growing backlash/Russian pressure of various types. 
Theres the adage of People understand what they already know.  So if we suggest that for a key geopolitical win,  that the general Western Commons can easily grasp,  then the ZSU  could try 3 objectives:
1. Kharkiv+ Type: Retake a lot of territory (even more than in '22). 
2. Kherson Type: Retake another major city
3. Kiev Type: Cause massive and operational level collapse of Russian forces, forcing flight to Russian borders, a blindingly clear defeat that gives Ukraine the initiative into 2024.
#1 can be achieved without 2 or 3. Potentially fast but inherently extends GLOCs
#2 requires #1 and ideally #3. Hard,  but potentially slow and attrional. 
#3 would provide #1 & #2 but is hardest of them all. 
 

The trouble with defining success is that in the real world success is a spectrum, not a toggle. The question isn't "will it be a success?", but "how successful will it be?". Ukraine is certain to retake some territory and inflict some casualties, just as it is certain to take some casualties. But it all comes down to how much of each. If they just manage to retake a handful of towns and inflict a few thousand casualties, but lose tens of thousand of soldiers in the process, then it will be a dismal failure (like the Russian winter offensive). If they manage to drive the Russians out of Ukraine entirely, effectively destroy the entire Russian army, and only lose a handful of men, then it will be a crushing victory. And there are a million variations in between those two extremes, each more successful than some possible outcomes, and less successful than other possible outcomes.
For my part I'm hoping to at least see a chunk of territory retaken on par with the Kherson or Kharkiv offensives, with enough strength left in the Ukrainian army to follow it up with at least one more offensive before the year is out. If it can accomplish something of strategic value, like cutting the Crimean land bridge, then that's even better. An even better outcome would be to not only take everything up to the neck of Crimea, but to retake Crimea as well all in one go. And in my wildest dreams I even imagine this thing collapsing the whole Russian frontline.
Of course the media is going to report the outcome as a position on a toggle, not a position on a spectrum (success or failure, not a degree of success). Whether it will be reported as a success will be determined by whether the results exceeded or fell short of public expectations. So it would seem that the best way to get PR victories in a war is to keep public expectations as low as possible. Kharkiv was playing this game on easy mode, since it came completely out of the blue, with no public expectations at all. Does anyone have any feel for what the public expectations are for this offensive? Are people expecting it to drive the Russians completely out of Ukraine or to just move the needle a bit?

After a year of war and at least tens of thousands of deaths, this really shouldn't get to me as much as it does. But it is taking every ounce of my willpower to contain my rage right now. At this moment I want nothing less than the blood of every single Russian. I want Putin's head on a pike. This was not a military target. It wasn't a barracks, or a communication station, or even any sort of critical infrastructure. This was a residential building. This wasn't an act of war. This was an act of terrorism.
And I know this isn't the first time this has happened. It's just another example of a long pattern of Russian crimes. I know that events like this are behind every report I read of continued Russian missile attacks. Not to mention that mass graves have been found in every single liberated area, complete with clear signs of torture.
I understand in theory why we don't want Russia to collapse completely. But right now I just don't care. I want Russia to be destroyed.

Politics are central to warfare. Saying it's a political strategy doesn't make it not a military strategy. Saying it's political only specifies what level of warfare we are operating on (the strategic layer, not the operational or tactical layers). And how do you think the theory behind the terror bombings of WW2 and Vietnam worked? They were trying to send exactly the same message to the Germans, Japanese, and Vietnamese that the Russians are trying to send to Ukraine.
The problem with this sort of messaging is that the message that people receive is usually not the message you thought you were sending. You think you are sending the message "the only way to end this suffering is to give up", but the message people are actually receiving is "the perpetrator of this attack is a monster who deserves no sympathy or remorse".

Since I am not above shamelessly stealing a joke from Reddit:
 
Are we sure that is an oil depot on fire and not Admiral Kuznetsov pulling into Sevastopol harbour?

Payback?
 

After a year of war and at least tens of thousands of deaths, this really shouldn't get to me as much as it does. But it is taking every ounce of my willpower to contain my rage right now. At this moment I want nothing less than the blood of every single Russian. I want Putin's head on a pike. This was not a military target. It wasn't a barracks, or a communication station, or even any sort of critical infrastructure. This was a residential building. This wasn't an act of war. This was an act of terrorism.
And I know this isn't the first time this has happened. It's just another example of a long pattern of Russian crimes. I know that events like this are behind every report I read of continued Russian missile attacks. Not to mention that mass graves have been found in every single liberated area, complete with clear signs of torture.
I understand in theory why we don't want Russia to collapse completely. But right now I just don't care. I want Russia to be destroyed.

After a year of war and at least tens of thousands of deaths, this really shouldn't get to me as much as it does. But it is taking every ounce of my willpower to contain my rage right now. At this moment I want nothing less than the blood of every single Russian. I want Putin's head on a pike. This was not a military target. It wasn't a barracks, or a communication station, or even any sort of critical infrastructure. This was a residential building. This wasn't an act of war. This was an act of terrorism.
And I know this isn't the first time this has happened. It's just another example of a long pattern of Russian crimes. I know that events like this are behind every report I read of continued Russian missile attacks. Not to mention that mass graves have been found in every single liberated area, complete with clear signs of torture.
I understand in theory why we don't want Russia to collapse completely. But right now I just don't care. I want Russia to be destroyed.

After a year of war and at least tens of thousands of deaths, this really shouldn't get to me as much as it does. But it is taking every ounce of my willpower to contain my rage right now. At this moment I want nothing less than the blood of every single Russian. I want Putin's head on a pike. This was not a military target. It wasn't a barracks, or a communication station, or even any sort of critical infrastructure. This was a residential building. This wasn't an act of war. This was an act of terrorism.
And I know this isn't the first time this has happened. It's just another example of a long pattern of Russian crimes. I know that events like this are behind every report I read of continued Russian missile attacks. Not to mention that mass graves have been found in every single liberated area, complete with clear signs of torture.
I understand in theory why we don't want Russia to collapse completely. But right now I just don't care. I want Russia to be destroyed.

After a year of war and at least tens of thousands of deaths, this really shouldn't get to me as much as it does. But it is taking every ounce of my willpower to contain my rage right now. At this moment I want nothing less than the blood of every single Russian. I want Putin's head on a pike. This was not a military target. It wasn't a barracks, or a communication station, or even any sort of critical infrastructure. This was a residential building. This wasn't an act of war. This was an act of terrorism.
And I know this isn't the first time this has happened. It's just another example of a long pattern of Russian crimes. I know that events like this are behind every report I read of continued Russian missile attacks. Not to mention that mass graves have been found in every single liberated area, complete with clear signs of torture.
I understand in theory why we don't want Russia to collapse completely. But right now I just don't care. I want Russia to be destroyed.

After a year of war and at least tens of thousands of deaths, this really shouldn't get to me as much as it does. But it is taking every ounce of my willpower to contain my rage right now. At this moment I want nothing less than the blood of every single Russian. I want Putin's head on a pike. This was not a military target. It wasn't a barracks, or a communication station, or even any sort of critical infrastructure. This was a residential building. This wasn't an act of war. This was an act of terrorism.
And I know this isn't the first time this has happened. It's just another example of a long pattern of Russian crimes. I know that events like this are behind every report I read of continued Russian missile attacks. Not to mention that mass graves have been found in every single liberated area, complete with clear signs of torture.
I understand in theory why we don't want Russia to collapse completely. But right now I just don't care. I want Russia to be destroyed.

After a year of war and at least tens of thousands of deaths, this really shouldn't get to me as much as it does. But it is taking every ounce of my willpower to contain my rage right now. At this moment I want nothing less than the blood of every single Russian. I want Putin's head on a pike. This was not a military target. It wasn't a barracks, or a communication station, or even any sort of critical infrastructure. This was a residential building. This wasn't an act of war. This was an act of terrorism.
And I know this isn't the first time this has happened. It's just another example of a long pattern of Russian crimes. I know that events like this are behind every report I read of continued Russian missile attacks. Not to mention that mass graves have been found in every single liberated area, complete with clear signs of torture.
I understand in theory why we don't want Russia to collapse completely. But right now I just don't care. I want Russia to be destroyed.

After a year of war and at least tens of thousands of deaths, this really shouldn't get to me as much as it does. But it is taking every ounce of my willpower to contain my rage right now. At this moment I want nothing less than the blood of every single Russian. I want Putin's head on a pike. This was not a military target. It wasn't a barracks, or a communication station, or even any sort of critical infrastructure. This was a residential building. This wasn't an act of war. This was an act of terrorism.
And I know this isn't the first time this has happened. It's just another example of a long pattern of Russian crimes. I know that events like this are behind every report I read of continued Russian missile attacks. Not to mention that mass graves have been found in every single liberated area, complete with clear signs of torture.
I understand in theory why we don't want Russia to collapse completely. But right now I just don't care. I want Russia to be destroyed.

You are a better person than me. Perhaps I should have followed your lead.

After a year of war and at least tens of thousands of deaths, this really shouldn't get to me as much as it does. But it is taking every ounce of my willpower to contain my rage right now. At this moment I want nothing less than the blood of every single Russian. I want Putin's head on a pike. This was not a military target. It wasn't a barracks, or a communication station, or even any sort of critical infrastructure. This was a residential building. This wasn't an act of war. This was an act of terrorism.
And I know this isn't the first time this has happened. It's just another example of a long pattern of Russian crimes. I know that events like this are behind every report I read of continued Russian missile attacks. Not to mention that mass graves have been found in every single liberated area, complete with clear signs of torture.
I understand in theory why we don't want Russia to collapse completely. But right now I just don't care. I want Russia to be destroyed.

After a year of war and at least tens of thousands of deaths, this really shouldn't get to me as much as it does. But it is taking every ounce of my willpower to contain my rage right now. At this moment I want nothing less than the blood of every single Russian. I want Putin's head on a pike. This was not a military target. It wasn't a barracks, or a communication station, or even any sort of critical infrastructure. This was a residential building. This wasn't an act of war. This was an act of terrorism.
And I know this isn't the first time this has happened. It's just another example of a long pattern of Russian crimes. I know that events like this are behind every report I read of continued Russian missile attacks. Not to mention that mass graves have been found in every single liberated area, complete with clear signs of torture.
I understand in theory why we don't want Russia to collapse completely. But right now I just don't care. I want Russia to be destroyed.

No they are not a 'state sponsor' they are a TERRORIST STATE.  My blood is boiling seeing this.  I will stop because all I can do is type strings of violence-tinged expletives......

The trouble with defining success is that in the real world success is a spectrum, not a toggle. The question isn't "will it be a success?", but "how successful will it be?". Ukraine is certain to retake some territory and inflict some casualties, just as it is certain to take some casualties. But it all comes down to how much of each. If they just manage to retake a handful of towns and inflict a few thousand casualties, but lose tens of thousand of soldiers in the process, then it will be a dismal failure (like the Russian winter offensive). If they manage to drive the Russians out of Ukraine entirely, effectively destroy the entire Russian army, and only lose a handful of men, then it will be a crushing victory. And there are a million variations in between those two extremes, each more successful than some possible outcomes, and less successful than other possible outcomes.
For my part I'm hoping to at least see a chunk of territory retaken on par with the Kherson or Kharkiv offensives, with enough strength left in the Ukrainian army to follow it up with at least one more offensive before the year is out. If it can accomplish something of strategic value, like cutting the Crimean land bridge, then that's even better. An even better outcome would be to not only take everything up to the neck of Crimea, but to retake Crimea as well all in one go. And in my wildest dreams I even imagine this thing collapsing the whole Russian frontline.
Of course the media is going to report the outcome as a position on a toggle, not a position on a spectrum (success or failure, not a degree of success). Whether it will be reported as a success will be determined by whether the results exceeded or fell short of public expectations. So it would seem that the best way to get PR victories in a war is to keep public expectations as low as possible. Kharkiv was playing this game on easy mode, since it came completely out of the blue, with no public expectations at all. Does anyone have any feel for what the public expectations are for this offensive? Are people expecting it to drive the Russians completely out of Ukraine or to just move the needle a bit?

The trouble with defining success is that in the real world success is a spectrum, not a toggle. The question isn't "will it be a success?", but "how successful will it be?". Ukraine is certain to retake some territory and inflict some casualties, just as it is certain to take some casualties. But it all comes down to how much of each. If they just manage to retake a handful of towns and inflict a few thousand casualties, but lose tens of thousand of soldiers in the process, then it will be a dismal failure (like the Russian winter offensive). If they manage to drive the Russians out of Ukraine entirely, effectively destroy the entire Russian army, and only lose a handful of men, then it will be a crushing victory. And there are a million variations in between those two extremes, each more successful than some possible outcomes, and less successful than other possible outcomes.
For my part I'm hoping to at least see a chunk of territory retaken on par with the Kherson or Kharkiv offensives, with enough strength left in the Ukrainian army to follow it up with at least one more offensive before the year is out. If it can accomplish something of strategic value, like cutting the Crimean land bridge, then that's even better. An even better outcome would be to not only take everything up to the neck of Crimea, but to retake Crimea as well all in one go. And in my wildest dreams I even imagine this thing collapsing the whole Russian frontline.
Of course the media is going to report the outcome as a position on a toggle, not a position on a spectrum (success or failure, not a degree of success). Whether it will be reported as a success will be determined by whether the results exceeded or fell short of public expectations. So it would seem that the best way to get PR victories in a war is to keep public expectations as low as possible. Kharkiv was playing this game on easy mode, since it came completely out of the blue, with no public expectations at all. Does anyone have any feel for what the public expectations are for this offensive? Are people expecting it to drive the Russians completely out of Ukraine or to just move the needle a bit?

Part 3 of battle for “Cyclops” position. Shows how difficult and dangerous this work is even with drone support:
 

The trouble with defining success is that in the real world success is a spectrum, not a toggle. The question isn't "will it be a success?", but "how successful will it be?". Ukraine is certain to retake some territory and inflict some casualties, just as it is certain to take some casualties. But it all comes down to how much of each. If they just manage to retake a handful of towns and inflict a few thousand casualties, but lose tens of thousand of soldiers in the process, then it will be a dismal failure (like the Russian winter offensive). If they manage to drive the Russians out of Ukraine entirely, effectively destroy the entire Russian army, and only lose a handful of men, then it will be a crushing victory. And there are a million variations in between those two extremes, each more successful than some possible outcomes, and less successful than other possible outcomes.
For my part I'm hoping to at least see a chunk of territory retaken on par with the Kherson or Kharkiv offensives, with enough strength left in the Ukrainian army to follow it up with at least one more offensive before the year is out. If it can accomplish something of strategic value, like cutting the Crimean land bridge, then that's even better. An even better outcome would be to not only take everything up to the neck of Crimea, but to retake Crimea as well all in one go. And in my wildest dreams I even imagine this thing collapsing the whole Russian frontline.
Of course the media is going to report the outcome as a position on a toggle, not a position on a spectrum (success or failure, not a degree of success). Whether it will be reported as a success will be determined by whether the results exceeded or fell short of public expectations. So it would seem that the best way to get PR victories in a war is to keep public expectations as low as possible. Kharkiv was playing this game on easy mode, since it came completely out of the blue, with no public expectations at all. Does anyone have any feel for what the public expectations are for this offensive? Are people expecting it to drive the Russians completely out of Ukraine or to just move the needle a bit?

Last year I cautioned on a few occasions that the Russians might learn from their mistakes (afterall, the Soviets started WW2 as an absolute tactical mess, but they definitely got a lot better by the end). And yes, they seem to have learned some lessons. But I think Russia faces several obstacles to learning.
First, war is a two player game. It isn't enough to learn from your past mistakes. You need to learn faster than the other side. And the Ukrainians have proven that they are much faster learners than the Russians. The competence gap has gotten wider, not narrower, despite evidence that the Russians have managed to learn some lessons.
Second, the Russian military seems to have a lot of deeply ingrained problems which actively resist efforts to get the organization as a whole to learn, even if its individual members learn. This video touches on one of those issues, combat compliance.
With a combat compliance problem as bad as Russia's even a very talented tactician may not be able to employ his formations in a tactically proficient way. A lot of tactics which would be more effective simply cease to be options. And this is just one example out of many issues in the Russian army (the difficulty in transferring lessons between multiple parallel organizations that don't like each other is another). These are the sorts of problems that need to be solved before actual tactics can even begin to improve.
This is absolutely true. The outer crust of Russia's prepared defenses will be the hard part. They also don't have to worry as much about combat compliance, training, maneuver, and other issues while all they are asking their men to do is hold a trench. But that outer crust will not hold forever. Sooner or later Russian forces will have to maneuver, or fall back under pressure, and I have serious doubts about their ability to do that.

No airforce markings on these, must be civilian I guess...