Uh so has Debaltseve fallen?

[Icecold]

They haven't been trained in Russia, they get their training in the field. Their morale is very high. It's surprising how much difference good morale makes, its more of a  factor than I would have thought possible.

 

Their objective is simple. They want to push the Ukrainians back, out of shelling range of where they and their communities live...to save their communities which have been smashed by the shelling. Whole villages have been reduced to rubble. 

 

The site Kras mentioned can be easily translated into English.

Edited February 20, 2015 by Icecold

[wee]

Thank you for your expertise.

 

 

Thank you for your compliment.

 

I'd like to highlight that I'm not an expert. I'm just an "average Joe" with very basic infantry training from conscript service, which is the base of my observations.

[Battlefront.com]

They haven't been trained in Russia, they get their training in the field. Their morale is very high. It's surprising how much difference good morale makes, its more of a  factor than I would have thought possible.

 

Their objective is simple. They want to push the Ukrainians back, out of shelling range of where they and their communities live...to save their communities which have been smashed by the shelling. Whole villages have been reduced to rubble. 

 

The site Kras mentioned can be easily translated into English.

Sigh... and so once again we start to go down the rabbit hole of alternative universes where Russian and separatist media paint a complete and totally accurate picture of the war.

Here's the ground rules for this thread and others that will no doubt follow.

We have a natural need to talk about the real war going on. I get that and I also am highly sympathetic to it, especially since I've already invested more than a thousand hours of my time following it. I am painfully aware that in any discussion, be it war, politics, or game features, there is always a fringe minority. The fringe always seek to distract real discussion from real issues by clobbering a thread with so much crap that it is impossible to not respond. At which point the intellectual value of the thread drops dramatically. Often to the point of futility and it must be closed.

But there is another way. The Forum rules already outlaw this behavior in several specific ways. This puts the pressure on the individual causing derailment of a discussion to obey the rules, thereby preserving the thread's integrity, or being punished for it.

This is the route I am going to take.

So read this and read this thoroughly. These are ground rules for discussing the topic of war in Ukraine. First, I am establishing some facts that are not up for debate:

1. What is going on in Ukraine is a war of foreign aggression by Russia against Ukraine. It is NOT a civil war, though of course there are people in Donbas who genuinely wish to fight to be a part of Russia or form their own state. However, without the direct actions of Russia there would be no war, therefor it is a war of aggression and not a legitimate civil war.

2. Russia has trained, equipped, and supplied this war since the very start. Less so in the Spring, but since then the ONLY reason the war has continued is due to the direct involvement of the Russian state.

3. Increasingly Russia is directly involved in planning and executing military actions within Ukraine as an extension of Russian state policy. The days when Russia was content to let others direct combat in Ukraine are long over because what happens in Ukraine directly affects Russia as a state. In particular how it influences actions by the West.

4. At present there is no Western lethal aid to Ukraine, but the separatists are nearly totally equipped and supplied by Russia.

5. There 10s of thousands of Russians and other nationalities who have fought, and are fighting, against the Ukrainian government. These range from genuine volunteers to paid mercenaries to Russian military and security forces ordered there by the Russian state. There are perhaps, at most, 200 non-Ukrainians fighting on the side of Ukraine fighting in the National Guard units.

These are the ground rules. I reserve the right to add to them as seems necessary.

A person refusing to comply with these rules is free to do so. But he will be warned only once. A second warning will result in a 4 day ban to give the person time to consider that he should not be posting here. There will be no third warning, rather a permanent ban.

There are other forums out there to participate in. If someone wants to debate the age of the Earth, there is a place for that. If someone wants to argue that White Race should dominate the world, there is a place for that. There is, unfortunately, a place to debate anything and everything. This, however, is not such a place. Do not test my resolve to keep it that way.

Steve

[sburke]

They haven't been trained in Russia, they get their training in the field. Their morale is very high. It's surprising how much difference good morale makes, its more of a  factor than I would have thought possible.

 

Their objective is simple. They want to push the Ukrainians back, out of shelling range of where they and their communities live...to save their communities which have been smashed by the shelling. Whole villages have been reduced to rubble. 

 

The site Kras mentioned can be easily translated into English.

Sorry I won't get sucked into this, if you still adhere that this is a local uprising of average joes who suddenly learned combat skills by trial and error, there is no way you are ever going to face that this is an entirely Russian creation. Good luck with that. Those poor coal miners who dumped the rocket barrage on Mariupol and shot down a Dutch airliner are just the victims here. Yeah.

[Alexey K]

Thank you for your compliment.

 

I'd like to highlight that I'm not an expert. I'm just an "average Joe" with very basic infantry training from conscript service, which is the base of my observations.

 

Do you have any info on direct involvement of Russian regulars in this conflict?

[Alexey K]

Sorry to leave this topic, but with forum moderation policy imposed by Steve in #78 any discussion, IMO, is pointless. 

 

Have good conversation and good luck

[Baneman]

You have to admire the bald-faced gall of the Russian line - apparently calling for UN peacekeepers is "a destructive move."

The Ukrainian president's call "raises suspicions that he wants to destroy the Minsk accords", Russia's UN ambassador Vitaly Churkin said.

 

But separatists continuing to attack does not appear to harm the Minsk accords.

Clearly their understanding of "Ceasefire" is wildly out of whack with everyone else's.

[wee]

Do you have any info on direct involvement of Russian regulars in this conflict?

 

Absolutely nothing.

 

That's why I use term Russian citizens, wiiiide and broad term, which covers everything from possible russian conscripts (no solid evidence) to russian PMCs and volunteer civilians, reservists, active duty officers or noncoms participating the conflict on their holidays or other free time etc. Russian citizens are participating the conflict for sure, that we can admit.

[Battlefront.com]

After reading the above people might wonder where the gray area is and if I'm not going to tolerate any discussion at all about the details of Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine. I think this following post and my response should serve as an example:

 

EDIT: As far as I know from unofficial publications in Russian social media (doubius source, I know) real support from Russia came no sooner than August 2014 for rebel counteroffensive.

It depends on what you classify as "support". Agreed that significant Russian military presence did not appear until either late July or early August, with the bulk of the counter attack forces arriving in August. However, from the very start Russia was arming the separatists in Ukraine with weapons funneled through non-governmental organizations. The weapons, ultimately, came from Russian military warehouses because, as far as I know, average Russian citizens do not have stockpiles of full automatic weapons and ammunition. They also don't have truckloads of RPG-18s and AT-4 systems. Which showed up in large quantities even before the BMPs, tanks, and other things which materialized out of thin air in late Spring.

Also, it must be remembered that Grikin's group was part of a multi year organization by Russia in Crimea in anticipation of exactly what happened in February 2014. Those "self defense" groups numbered somewhere around 1500-3000 by PRE CONFLICT estimates (i.e. they were already known of before the war started).

Now, it is true that the Rostov training camp took a while to set up, so for sure the initial influx of Russians into Ukraine were not trained explicitly by this camp. However, many were admitted veterans of similar "self determination" actions in the Caucuses, Transnistria, and even ex-Yugoslavia. Girkin, for one, was a GRU officer. So though not explicitly trained by Russia to engage in operations within Ukraine, they were still trained by Russia in a more general sense and were either sent or allowed to go to Ukraine by Russia knowing exactly what they intended on doing.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Sorry to leave this topic, but with forum moderation policy imposed by Steve in #78 any discussion, IMO, is pointless. 

 

Have good conversation and good luck

Sorry, I had hoped to get my response to your post up before you made this decision. Hopefully you can see that I am not against any discussion about the details. The details are crystal clear yet. Though, based on your other posts, I can see that you may wish to bow out of the discussion now. Believe me when I say this... I respect you for doing so.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

You have to admire the bald-faced gall of the Russian line - apparently calling for UN peacekeepers is "a destructive move."

The Ukrainian president's call "raises suspicions that he wants to destroy the Minsk accords", Russia's UN ambassador Vitaly Churkin said.

 

But separatists continuing to attack does not appear to harm the Minsk accords.

Clearly their understanding of "Ceasefire" is wildly out of whack with everyone else's.

It's even "funnier" than that. The same people that were loudly calling for Russian "peacekeepers" to enter into Ukraine are now the ones saying that non-Russian peacekeepers would be destabilizing and counter productive. If I thought that the likes of Pushilin were sensible people, I would be surprised at the gall. But I know his type and therefore I expect nothing less from him.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

It think you are right, they are most likely quite incompetent. Separatists are thrown to battle with very little or no military training at all. That's quite obvious if you look at their small unit actions and tactics in various combat videos. Poor fire control, poor use of cover, environment and camouflage, grouping up too often in improper situations, poor use of spotters to cover rear and flanks. These for example.

As was shown in July, the average separatist unit has very low combat capabilities. Even separatist leaders have complained, bitterly, that some of these units were there only to loot and make money. Especially the Cossack units. In fact, Putin had to make a public warning against their actions and, when they still didn't listen, he sent in the special forces (widely documented in photos and by the separatists themselves) to clean house. Some units were sent back to Russia, others were negotiated with, still others were forces to Horlivka and Debaltseve. These units were used as cannon fodder as they themselves have stated.

 

Without mentioned russian support, separatist uprising would be futile and it will collapse soon after russia and (some) russians cut down their support, especially material.

A war can not be fought without supplies, in particular ammunition. People who have an understanding of military logistics can do some calculations pretty easily to figure out the volume of aid that is being consumed. For example...

Very early in the conflict the Slavyansk separatists captured (for real) some airborne APCs. In particular a Nona SPG. Nona's have a very limited ammo supply on board and they did not capture anything other than the vehicles. It was very, very widely documented so it's not to be questioned. Yet that thing fired day after day after day at Ukrainian positions. It probably expended it's entire store of ammunition on the first day, if not the second. Yet it somehow managed to keep firing day after day. There were NO military bases in the separatist territory from where this ammunition could have been captured. They had not captured any other Ukrainian vehicles at the time, plus 122mm artillery shells are not something that the average Ukrainian unit had lying around in quantity. So even back then, in the early days, it was clear that supplies were coming from Russia.

This is the difference between someone with military experience or at least (like me) analysis expertise notice. What the average person notices is nothing. The press notice nothing either. They don't even know what questions to ask, not to mention how to ask them.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Back to Debaltseve...

The numbers coming out from Ukrainian sources put the numbers at almost what I had on the previous page:

2500 withdrawn in good health

60 dead

200-250 wounded

150-200 unaccounted for

Of the unaccounted for about 100 appear to have been taken prisoner, which means about 50-100 more dead and wounded.

I stand by my previous statements that Ukraine executed a good, though imperfect, fighting retreat. Compare this with Ilovaisk or the "southern cauldron" and you can see a massive improvement in Ukraine's military capabilities. Even at the staff level, which is definitely Ukraine's weakest point.

Steve

[AttorneyAtWar]

The mainstream media is terrible at reporting on Ukraine, they still refer to any separatist action as "Russian backed separatists", they never come right out and say Russian troops are also aiding them. Another gripe I have is the lingo they use, when referring to equipment they always refer to BMP's as tanks or artillery, I may be getting a bit picky here, but I'd say that distinction is pretty important, especially in a critical battle being fought. You can get the complete wrong idea of how the battle is going from a report saying Ukrainian and Russian tanks fought outside Donetsk, when in actuality it was artillery pieces trading fire.

[wee]

 So even back then, in the early days, it was clear that supplies were coming from Russia.

 

 

The common separatist explanation, that the separatist material comes from captured Ukranian depots and warehouses, makes me allmost piss my pants with hilarious laughter. Allmost everytime I hear it. 

 

There's also one thing I like to bring in to this conversation. It's the reserve status of some separatist specialized operators. Several million people are living in the "Novorossian" region of east ukraine. From that population, you can raise some older reservists to fight in separatist ranks, which have at least some specialized training for some spezialized equipment. For example, AA-gunners (ZU 23-2), AT-gunners (100mm MT-12), Artillerists (122mm D30), Mortar & ATGM crews and FO teams could be gathered from the volunteers. Not to forget MT-LB, BMP and BMP crews.

 

In the region, there must be at least hundereds of thousdands of men from 25 up to 60 years old, who have gained some military training in Ukranian or Soviet army. With additional training (maybe from Russian advisors?) you can gather spezialized crews to man the equipment, especially Soviet designed, which are quite simple and "idiot proof" to use. 

 

I have noticed earlier that there are quite a  lot of older tankers seen to man the "captured" separatist tanks, some of them maybe even 50 or even 60 years old. Born in 1960s, served as a tank crew in the soviet army until the end of 1980s, and today as a separatist tanker. It's easier and faster to give some additional training to old tanker, even to one who has served 30 years ago, than take younger one without any experience, and start from the zero.

Edited February 20, 2015 by wee

[Lethaface]

Er... "Reverse Direction Advance"?

 

How does advancing while being under fire from heavy artillery look like? Although I have no military training I'm sure I would floor the bloody pedal to the metal after I'd decided where and when to move.

Edit: Something like, "Davai davai davai!!"  Anyone observing this might not get the impression there is actually a thorough plan behind those speeding fools in military vehicles.

Edited February 20, 2015 by Lethaface

[wee]

 Although I have no military training I'm sure I would floor the bloody pedal to the metal after I'd decided where and when to move.

Edit: Something like, "Davai davai davai!!"

 

"Pedal to the metal" I like that.

 

That's right. One tactic to save the convoy from the ambush, is to drive through it away from the zone of fire, and stop in safe place or at least 400-500m after ambush, disembark, count casualties and maybe organize counterattack or at least defensive perimeter if necessary.  

 

No wonder why the ambushing side try to destroy the first and last vehicle in the convoy first... 

[wee]

Let me also add that speaking of the level of Russian participation in Ukranian conflict, is little irrelevant. Do they, or do they not, on what level and do they have any RF active service military units present in the area?

 

Doesn't really matter any longer, IMHO. Russian participation in the conflict is allready so heavy and obvious, that it wouldn't change the situation if they have active service units in the area. It couldn't make their responsability or participation for the conflict more bigger than it allready is. My opinnion is that if their support for the separatists and Novorossia is absolutely vital, and they would collapse without it, they are De facto as equal participant and operator in the conflict as Ukraine is.   

Edited February 20, 2015 by wee

[Battlefront.com]

Let me also add that speaking of the level of Russian participation in Ukranian conflict, is little irrelevant. Do they, or do they not, on what level and do they have any RF active service military units present in the area?

 

Doesn't really matter any longer, IMHO. Russian participation in the conflict is allready so heavy and obvious, that it wouldn't change the situation if they have active service units in the area. It couldn't make their responsability or participation for the conflict more bigger than it allready is. My opinnion is that if their support for the separatists and Novorossia is absolutely vital, and they would collapse without it, they are De facto as equal participant and operator in the conflict as Ukraine is.

I agree with this more than I disagree, however there is something to consider.

Although Russia's "plausible deniability" was never good, and is now a humorless joke, the truth is that the Russian forces operating in eastern Ukraine are not the same as they would be if Russia decided to go ahead and do an open invasion or a Crimean type invasion (i.e. a conventional invasion with only a lie to cover for it). The combat units are mostly special forces or cobbled together companies and battalions of "volunteers" taken from regiments/brigades. Although they are progressively using more and more frontline Russian equipment (T-72B3 for example), the bulk of the equipment is still 2nd line or even 3rd line. The logistic and support elements in Ukraine are also minimal.

What I'm saying is if Russia went in with full conventional forces there would be a big difference in the character of the fighting. I think it would end the track record of Ukraine's forces coming off very well against separatist attacks in terms of proportional casualties. Things would be much bloodier for Ukraine, though I suspect Russian casualties would be high as well. Especially because a large number of the Russian soldiers involved would have minimal training and uneven temperament for battle. The current and past Russian soldiers fighting in Ukraine so far are several cuts above that.

Steve

[z1812]

Sorry to leave this topic, but with forum moderation policy imposed by Steve in #78 any discussion, IMO, is pointless. Have good conversation and good luck

My sentiments exactly. No one has a crystal ball or a monopoly on truth.

[A Canadian Cat]

As the saying goes you are entitled to your opinion but you are not entitled to the facts.

Some of these threads have been very interesting and the opinions of other are always interesting to consider but some posts contain "information" that is so far away from what can plainly be seen as to make me wonder if they came from an alternate reality or something. Discussing alternate realities in real life is not really very interesting. So by all means lets discuss what is happening on the ground but in this reality please

[Battlefront.com]

My sentiments exactly. No one has a crystal ball or a monopoly on truth.

Someone who thinks the Earth is 9000 years old, NASA faked the moon landings, or that God killed US service personnel in Iraq because of anti-gay legislation in the US government would certainly agree with this sentiment. I don't.

What is going on in Ukraine is a war of aggression. That is not up for debate here any more than is discussing the shape of the Earth (it's round). Nonsense positions only distract from a meaningful discussion. In this case, debating what is actually going on in Ukraine since that is definitely an unclear topic that is worthy of discussion.

Steve

[sawomi]

My sentiments exactly. No one has a crystal ball or a monopoly on truth.

 

+ 1

 

(URL removed due to violation of Forum policy)

Edited February 20, 2015 by Battlefront.com

[Battlefront.com]

The content of my post removed to be consistent to edits made in previous post.

Steve

[Amatoro]

My sentiments exactly. No one has a crystal ball or a monopoly on truth.

 

+1

 

No one has monopoly on truth. Except of moderator of course.

 

The war can't proceed without support of Russia. I think so. It can be fact. Can this war proceed or be started without political and financial support from the West? No, it can not. It seems that it is fact also.

Does the support from Russia make this war agressive? No more than support of France and Spain in American Revolutionary War (Foreign intervention

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolutionary_War).Or German and Italian support to Franco in Spanish Civil War.

 

I can't imagine myself spending 5 billion USD to develop my competitors country while playing Civilization. Can you? In Civilization, the only reason for that is to fight somebody by other hands.

 

But US goverment do so

(starting at 7:40). Actually the whole speech is interesting. Especially, if you replace words like "right way" to "our will".

 

So, this war is not so simple as bad guys vs good guys. There is no simple crystal clear facts yet in this war. Except of facts designated for this role by moderators of

course.

 

PS. Sorry for my English. I am working on it.

Edited February 20, 2015 by Amatoro