FancyCat

Maybe Russia has indeed acknowledged the inability for the Russian forces to mount a offensive, but could it simply be intended as a short/midterm measure to reequip and rest formations while waiting out bad weather and mud? Instead of a long term switch to the defensive, maybe they finally got it into their heads they need to start prepping for a real stage 2 of the war.

Belgium is looking into supplying M109A4BE SPGs to Ukraine. Very lovely, Zelensky has sounded a note of approval regarding allied shipments of requested arms in his daily communications.

Thread regarding the loss of the chemical plant due to fire, sabotage is a much more likely reason considering the essential nature of this complex to Russian industry, war and civilian. https://twitter.com/Spoonamore/status/1517510440598843394?t=AwOU57emZn6uU4leyOGkzQ&s=19

I'm assuming NATO ammo is standardized so won't German ammo stocks of 155mm be usable in American howitzers? Would ensure no ammo shortages. My take from the report on the front is not great, Russian artillery is causing issues for defenders who can't give up territory without causing damage first. Absolutely NATO artillery is needed, I hope everything is flowing now and in motion. Ideally, the entire Ukrainian artillery arm should be transitioned to NATO as much as possible to ensure healthy supply. (Not that ex-soviet stuff gets decommissioned but I'm assuming the NATO stuff is better)

Thread from Hertling on the artillery from the U.S, nothing groundbreaking, tldr, not SPG, but will do the job of counter fire just fine, the package includes counter battery radars, light drones, AND have a logistical tail, training time less than SPGs, which is essential for Ukraine. https://twitter.com/MarkHertling/status/1517507077215764481?t=5hunfjamfnyKmFDJ4v3l6A&s=19

France sounding like it is sending SPGs Ceasar to Ukraine. https://twitter.com/JakOSpades/status/1517418849917878272?t=-ATlIQLKdtHrDaav8PANLw&s=19

From the same statement your tweet is probably looking at, the Russian military spokesman apparently also referenced Transnistria, so Odessa is still targeted. That they still declare the seizure of southern Ukraine is intended, and the "protection of Russians" in Transnistria would indicate state TV's insane rantings are not so insane in the Kremlin. Whatever the state of the Russian military, this is not great for the idea of Russia learning it's lesson. https://twitter.com/maxseddon/status/1517423108378042369?t=7IXVvQOH12Zw4ZymJ4ukkw&s=19

Maybe it's just me, but a infantry army that is roadbound and a mechanized army that is roadbound, the infantry army should still be outclassed but Ukraine is holding on. Still, the biggest argument for the war is going poorly for Russia is the fact they abandoned the northern front. Interesting you mention Kherson, a few Ukrainian officials fled at the beginning of the war, looks like those defections are directly related to the poor defense in the south. Still, personally the reasoning for the withdrawa of the northern front is ridiculous. If you really wanted to give peace overtures, simply pausing artillery and missile fire onto cities is a sound way of conveying overtures.

https://www.benning.army.mil/armor/earmor/content/issues/2017/spring/2Fiore17.pdf I assume this document is well read here, its on how a american BCT can fight and defeat a Russian BTG, apparently the BTG served well enough in Syria, since they had a wall of pro-Assad forces to be cannon fodder, and the BTG provided supporting fire.

I think for political, economic reasons, yes its important Ukraine preserve manpower, and build up, but its also important to liberate territory as soon as possible, so I'm going to assume Ukraine launches a offensive this summer, and pushes the Russians back enough to cause a general collapse, and Ukraine can push into the prior lost territory. Once they get to that point, yes Russia can keep fighting on, but I think the ability for Ukraine to push into new areas and threaten Crimea mean its either talks or the impending loss of Crimea and full defeat. Yes, the loss of Ukrainian and Russian exports will affect the supply shortage worldwide, causing more inflation and potentially more civil unrest, and of course risk nuclear war. I know people think war makes money, but defense makes money too, and whatever the outcome of the Ukrainian-Russian War, Russia will remain as a threat for arms sales, even in peacetime. Difference is, Ukraine can actually pay for it in peacetime. https://medium.com/@x_TomCooper_x/ukraine-war-19-20-april-2022-43dee2800321 While I cant find the source for Kupyansk (it was from a Pravda interview with the governor but i got it 3rd hand), this says they got to Shevchenkove yesterday, but Russia pushed some forces to block them. I defer of course to you. Korobochkyne vs Shevchenkove, is a big difference, hopefully we will get word of the latter being true soon if true.

The big question is the recent Belarusian moves to end their neutrality of stationing nukes on their territory, if those nukes are there, Russia has a feasible move to intervene, and risk escalation. The problem is while the Belarusian military does not want to die in Ukraine, they helped stop the overthrow of Lukashenka, unless lower tiers of the military coup him, its likely they will stand behind him. If Ukraine really wants to, they could probably liberate Belarus without too much trouble, but I doubt Ukraine wants to pursue offensive action like that. Maybe if their contacts in Belarus signal some positivity on a quick end..... I don't have a source, apparently, Ukrainian forces are already in western Kupyansk.

Ukraine should also consider ending the war sooner, as with public opinion and favorable administrations in France, Germany (yes they are cautious about weapons but money i dont doubt german finance is itching to advance in Ukraine), the EU, the US with Biden especially, Britain, the sooner the war ends, the better deals Ukraine can sign with them, than in 2024 with whoever replaces Biden for example.

Hmm, I think Ukraine will probably never undertake offensive action beyond the border, beyond precise targeted targets aimed at a specific goal or motivation. Too much risk for giving Russia more motivation for war/escalation. While more time is better for Ukraine, I would caution a timeframe of 48 months is too long, the West wants this war to end sooner than later, and more importantly, Ukraine needs peace to rebuild, as without it, economically, investors will not be willing to invest in potentially broken infrastructure. Ukraine needs to regain territory sooner than later, to prevent further warcrimes, if these deportations are real, Ukraine literally will be liberating its civilians before they get shipped off to Siberia, that is and will be a important motivator in pursuing offensives in a shorter timeframe than 2 years down the line. Ukraine also needs to impart offensive action to emphasize to potential collaborators that cooperating with Russia is going to end up with them hanging from a tree soon enough. Ukraine will launch a offensive before the end of the year is stretching it is my guess.

I’m thinking insurance scam more than sabotage. If it was sabotage, false flag? oof, feeling bad for the Russian defense industry, all these videos make terrible selling points. Ukraine should definitely keep their defense industry online, I could see a ton of money being made on those Neptunes. (Taiwan anyone?)

Did he call off the offensive in general or simply Mariupol? I believe it's only for Mariupol. Russia needs to keep advancing, cause they have not taken the de jure borders of the separatist republics and absolutely no "victory" can be called without that being conquered.

If his morality is in question, Putin may have well launched the invasion with a eye on conquering Ukraine as quickly as possible, before his demise. Putin and Russian imperialists consider Ukraine to be a integral part of Russia, without it, Russia cannot compete on the world stage.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-20/germany-to-provide-ukraine-with-rockets-training-for-artillery PzH 2000s from the Netherlands, Germany will train and supply ammo for them.

Some major wtf if Russian soldiers are getting no pay. Either the top or middle is skimming it or some messup, or the Russian state has gone truly mad but definitely if this can't get resolved it's gonna spread and cause just as much chaos as the supply shortages.

Kamil Galeev is very interesting, if probably getting a lot wrong, his insight into Russia from a perspective of a minority born and raised in Russia offers a lot vs a western visitor or scholar’s perspective.

If they are still doing the grand encirclements, then Putin and co. are still not acknowledging the reality of the Russian position in Ukraine. Perhaps some of it is the military lying to Putin, lying to themselves, I would bet they still cling to the idea that caused them to underestimate Ukraine in the first place. What is certain, if their expectations are unrealistic, so will be their goals, Putin still desires to take the majority of Ukraine soon. A grinding attrition in eastern Ukraine while the Russian army reorganizes and regroups for the rest of the year does not fulfill the goal of taking Ukraine. Tho I wonder if this is even possible anymore, with sanctions sapping their ability to replace losses, could it be that their ability to undertake offensive action will simply decline as time passes vs Ukraine’s increasing ability to mobilize, train and equip their forces (with Western aid)? or maybe they are just stupid and refusing to accept temporary defeat.

I'm not so forlorn on the idea of NATO/EU rejecting Ukraine past the invasion. Obviously, membership during the invasion is impossible but if Russia were to be firmly ejected out of the pre-invaded lands, I think with the advantage in threatening Donbas and Crimea and sanctions, Russia will be forced to come to the table and once the negotiations are concluded, I'm sure public sentiment will pave for easier transition to EU and NATO membership. Some important factors, one, public opinion has shifted to Ukraine, governmental opinion on NATO and Ukraine has shifted and the prime reason for Russia's say in the matter has always been predicated on ensuring Russia wouldn't escalate as a result. Except Russia has thrown out her cards, and basically flipped the table, there isn't anything to fear upsetting Russia, everything is broken already. A EU with Ukraine will be very economically beneficial (isn't there a ton of resources, certainly manpower wise Ukraine is a keeper, NATO will enjoy the most experienced army in the world (and if your a believer in the hand of the military-industrial complex in geopolitics, a extremely potent base to profit from) and to be frank, with the way the Russian military is like right now? The dooming scenario of a quick Russian seizure of the Baltics and a dare at the western and central European states to fight and shed blood and begin a long term conflict for the eastern European states is dead. Instead, NATO as a whole can expect the bordering states (including if Ukraine is accepted) to act as a worthwhile and potent buffer, while it sounds callous, basically means it's not too risky for Germany and France to get bloody for Eastern Europe.

Crimea and Donbas is not tiny by any means. If your implying retaining the pre-invasion borders, that would be utterly humiliating for Putin and Russia since they recognized and sought as part of the invasion to gain all the de jure territories of DPLR so the only thing you could give is the remaining land in the de jure borders and I find that impossible, one, the amount of fortifications to hand over would hurt defense for the future, displaced population, etc, that isn't viable at all either.

I was considering the same thing, what to do with the missing people taken from Ukraine to Russia. In that sense, I find it perfectly acceptable to trade if that's what it takes to recover those kidnapped to Russia. I hope this includes Crimean Tatars, poor souls. God willing they can regain their homeland in Crimea.

I think legitimizing the seizure of Crimea and DPLR is a bad idea, sure don't militarily contest it, but nothing says you can't claim it for the rest of time de jure. Ukraine has international recognition for her borders including Crimea, and DPLR, and giving that up for a Russia that has shown to be less than trustworthy on her signed treaties, and clearly has a huge long standing wish to control Ukraine in some form, so no need to reward bad behavior. As for securing EU and NATO membership, mind you, NATO and EU states have entered with contested borders and frozen conflicts, colonial processions in flux, and some entered with agreements forbidding NATO military bases or activity on their soil, opposition to Ukraine joining NATO is rooted in not spooking Russia, as Russia has basically gone full blown insane now, that consideration should be dropped and Ukraine should be let in with a eye at being diplomatic to Russia, but nothing implying Russia has legitimacy in contesting Ukrainian foreign and domestic policy.

Ukraine stated a referendum is slated for May 1 - 10 in Kherson for a new Republic, I would hope Ukraine can retake it before then. Is the best map https://liveuamap.com/ or ISW for the latest developments?