How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Blazing 88's]

19 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

..most importantly - pierogi!"

[sburke]

13 minutes ago, BeondTheGrave said:

Which is ironic because I do agree with his ultimate assessment, that the US should become more deeply involved. That they should be more risky re: escalation. The US should draw a chemical weapons red line, and if Putin crosses it they should erase the Russian army from existence. But I also recognize this is a dangerous course of action, the results of which are unpredictable and almost certainly would be unpopular at home and abroad. Direct US involvement in the conflict would probably crush the anti-war dissident movement in Russia, for example. I judge that Russia is on the verge of collapse, they're weak and you should always strike at weakness. But this risks a much wider war in Eastern Europe, one which not every NATO nation might want to fight, and which radically increases the possibility of nuclear escalation. I am not, for example, certain that Putin wouldn't use nukes to save the DR/LR or Crimea from a US counterattack. Somehow Cohen seems to be, maybe hes talked directly with Vlad on the issue. 

as calculating and brutal as it sounds there is value in Russia being thrashed by Ukraine and not giving Putin any chance to escalate.  That would play too well with his theme and likely add to his ability to survive this war still in power.  Being humiliated by the UKR army and popular resistance though is something I think would lead to him being removed.

AFTER that is where Western resolve needs to stay the course.  We need to ensure Russia is done.  No more threats to Eastern Europe, no more participation with western economy without fundamental change.

[akd]

10 minutes ago, DesertFox said:

Yeah I see. That could very well be the case. Anyways that single lonesome tank makes no sense. May it be the first kill or the last in sequence.

Looking at the drone video again, there is something burning (or maybe a recent hit on something) just off the road to the left in front of the approaching armor from the overpass. Maybe that is what is seen in the second still shot?

Edited March 15, 2022 by akd

[c3k]

3 minutes ago, akd said:

Looking at the drone video again, there is something burning (or maybe a recent hit on something) just off the road to the left in front of the approaching armor from the overpass. Maybe that is what is seen in the still shots?

At the very beginning of the footage, there is an explosion where the parallel road branches off from the main road. 

Regarding the running man: unbelievable that the hit and immediate brew up was survivable. But, apparently, it was. (No doubt with injuries, though.)

[Sequoia]

18 minutes ago, keas66 said:

The above simply puts you on the side of  erring by caution because Putin makes some threatening noises  - again leaving the field open for Putin to do as he wishes and only the Ukrainians paying for it with their lives .  Lets  agree to disagree I guess . I would like to see Putin confronted far more directly than he is  and if we risk escalation then so be it .

Putin is hardly doing what he wishes, and more Russians are dying than Ukrainians.

[DesertFox]

14 minutes ago, sross112 said:

It was probably running away from the menacing tractor that is parked behind the house on the right side of the road in the video.  

Yep 

 

 

[DesertFox]

9 minutes ago, akd said:

Looking at the drone video again, there is something burning (or maybe a recent hit on something) just off the road to the left in front of the approaching armor from the overpass. Maybe that is what is seen in the second still shot?

Not in the still shots posted by me above, but I think I might know what you mean. This? I guess those are mortar/arty shells?

[BeondTheGrave]

9 minutes ago, sburke said:

 Being humiliated by the UKR army and popular resistance though is something I think would lead to him being removed.

I agree with this, and with your inverse proposition (I think?) that western involvement would probably bail Putin out of a lot of his domestic troubles. The question is would direct military involvement ultimately produce a better outcome for the West than indirect engagement, especially in a situation where the war on the ground seems to have stabilized. NATO is dealing from a position of inherent, but limited, strength. This is both due to Russian failures as well as the inherent strength of the defensive, as true politically as militarily. NATO is trying to fix Russia's strategic centers of gravity and disrupt or destroy them at current. Despite Cohen's narrow viewed argument, its very obvious that Washington isn't the only NATO member to have concluded that the direct application of military force will not sufficiently unbalance Russian strategy. After all, I haven't seen one indication that Germany, Poland, or the Baltics are seriously considering sending their own troops into the conflict zone. Its not like Washington is holding the alliance back here. 

And in regards to teaching Putin a 'lesson,' the only less that matters is the strategic one. In 2014 he got away with it and faced few penalties. Today he has significant penalties AND may well not accomplish his goals at all, thanks in great part to western aid before and after the conflict. Russia's economy is crispy, its spending billions on a war it may not win, if it does win it will certainly face a major western backed insurgency, and Putin looks like a weak old fool internationally. US involvement would make me feel better, and sometimes US/NATO strategic planning ignores how important domestic morale is for their plans IMO. But Idk that doubling the casualty figures on the RA would be that much more of a penalty. Does it really somehow put Putin in an even weaker position? I cant see how. 

[db_zero]

Many of the commentators writing articles in major media outlets are the same ones who were cheer leading the US into invading Iraq in 2003 so I take what they say with caution. They are the same crowd who advocated for aggressive US expansion after the fall of the Soviet Union. Long discredited by the results of their push to spread democracy at the barrel of a gun, they now using this opportunity to push for aggressive US posturing. They have an agenda they are once again trying to push. 

Caution by the US is warranted. In 1951 after initial North Korean invasion, the US pulled off the Inchon landing and the US euphoric at the turn of events and got aggressive moving North. Then China stepped in.

Right now China is embarrassed at Russia's performance and indicating they would prefer a negotiated settlement and restraint. They have also indicated they want to avoid being sanctioned. Watching the reaction of average Chinese citizens on the street, most indicate they don't approve of the invasion and side with the Ukrainians, but also of note is if Russia was attacked then China should help Russia.

We're in the Cold War 2.0 and one of the features on the Cold War was proxy wars. No matter how this ends we're probably in for a long period of more proxy wars...

[Lethaface]

33 minutes ago, kraze said:

In USA when a single cop murdered a single dude without cause, even if criminal - police precincts burned.

In Russia when their army invaded a country without cause and started doing massive warcrimes - IKEA had the longest queues in its existence.

From 60 to 70% russians support the invasion openly according to multiple non-state polls, the rest may just not give a **** - so color me unempathic.

Well, whatever examples or analogies you're going to bring to the table people are people. Also Russian people. Claiming otherwise would amount to the same stuff '....ethnocism'. Is that really where you want to go? 

Plus, everyone with half a brain and the willingness to be informed already knows about the crimes against humanity / indiscriminate destruction they are causing. Could it be worse? Yes, much worse. But it's already ugly enough to conclude it's not only 'collateral' damage.. 

Now coming back to that single cop, single dude; you must have been sleeping under a rock if you think the whole issue was about one incident.

How do you know about 60-70%? Did you speak to all of them? Or any of them?

[Battlefront.com]

[deleted as I missed a whole page dedicated to discussing the tank destruction video making my comment irrelevant]

[keas66]

5 minutes ago, BeondTheGrave said:

I agree with this, and with your inverse proposition (I think?) that western involvement would probably bail Putin out of a lot of his domestic troubles. The question is would direct military involvement ultimately produce a better outcome for the West than indirect engagement, especially in a situation where the war on the ground seems to have stabilized. NATO is dealing from a position of inherent, but limited, strength. This is both due to Russian failures as well as the inherent strength of the defensive, as true politically as militarily. NATO is trying to fix Russia's strategic centers of gravity and disrupt or destroy them at current. Despite Cohen's narrow viewed argument, its very obvious that Washington isn't the only NATO member to have concluded that the direct application of military force will not sufficiently unbalance Russian strategy. After all, I haven't seen one indication that Germany, Poland, or the Baltics are seriously considering sending their own troops into the conflict zone. Its not like Washington is holding the alliance back here. 

And in regards to teaching Putin a 'lesson,' the only less that matters is the strategic one. In 2014 he got away with it and faced few penalties. Today he has significant penalties AND may well not accomplish his goals at all, thanks in great part to western aid before and after the conflict. Russia's economy is crispy, its spending billions on a war it may not win, if it does win it will certainly face a major western backed insurgency, and Putin looks like a weak old fool internationally. US involvement would make me feel better, and sometimes US/NATO strategic planning ignores how important domestic morale is for their plans IMO. But Idk that doubling the casualty figures on the RA would be that much more of a penalty. Does it really somehow put Putin in an even weaker position? I cant see how. 

Estonia just released an official position  supporting a no-fly Zone . The Poles are very keen to hand equipment over to the Ukrainians if  supported . I think a lot of these Eastern NATO  Members are looking to the US to  support a Stronger position against Putin - including limited force intervention in West Ukraine .  Your/ The current approach seems to be reliant entirely on Sanctions  ,the Ukrainians being able to sacrifice their Country  ( for the West ) and Putin to realize he is beaten and back off  - all with little to no cost to us except some munitions and higher prices at the pump .

[akd]

13 minutes ago, DesertFox said:

Not in the still shots posted by me above, but I think I might know what you mean. This? I guess those are mortar/arty shells?

No, that looks like arty impact.  Follow the road down from overpass and right where tree line starts on left, there is a smoke plume, down and to the left of tank in middle of the road.

[billbindc]

 

g

So I guess we have something like proof that Russian forces depend on the cellular network too.

 

[akd]

Author here takes a shot at some Russian unit IDs in key locations:

 

[Lethaface]

1 minute ago, keas66 said:

Estonia just released an official position  supporting a no-fly Zone . The Poles are very keen to hand equipment over to the Ukrainians if  supported . I think a lot of these Eastern NATO  Members are looking to the US to  support a Stronger position against Putin - including limited force intervention in West Ukraine .  Your/ The current approach seems to be reliant entirely on Sanctions  ,the Ukrainians being able to sacrifice their Country  ( for the West ) and Putin to realize he is beaten and back off  - all with little to no cost to us except some munitions and higher prices at the pump .

Yeah but Estonia isn't going to enforce a no-fly zone by itself. 

At the moment many countries are stating they are increasing support including weapons but publicly saying that they don't want to make the Russians any wiser so they're not telling what exactly (could be some pliers and screwdrivers).

I think that's good, because it disallow Russia to use the information for more threats (and it's own intelligence). At the same time, there seems to be little appeasement. Which is a good thing imo, if Russia is allowed to withdraw to pre Feb 2022 borders with lifted sanctions there will be a repeat in a couple of years. 
As I see it, that's clear now for everyone so I don't think Russia will get off this lightly. It's probably also why they haven't thrown in the towel yet; Russia also knows that times have changed.

[DesertFox]

26 minutes ago, akd said:

No, that looks like arty impact.  Follow the road down from overpass and right where tree line starts on left, there is a smoke plume, down and to the left of tank in middle of the road.

Yep I have it. At the 0.01-0.02 mark you see it. >Green circle. Darker smoke than the arty plume. What do you think is it?

https://icedrive.net/s/Akg23tvQSSZAuG3ShXRBSVwajFFy

Edited March 15, 2022 by DesertFox

[Lethaface]

29 minutes ago, BeondTheGrave said:

Today he has significant penalties AND may well not accomplish his goals at all, thanks in great part to western aid before and after the conflict. 

I'd change 'great' into 'substantial'. It was the people of Ukraine who were fed up and caused Maidan. It was them who took the rebuilding of the army seriously. It was them who had the will to fight. It is them doing the fighting and dying. 

Sure, the West was quickly/already there to support Maidan. For geopolitical/strategic reasons, this time with a just cause :). The west helped train Ukraine and armed Ukraine. However that support was limited, it was only after the Ukrainians showed the world their will to fight that the support came in from around the globe.

I find it quite intriguing how in a country as corrupt as Ukraine, somehow the competence and capabilities of their armed forces was vastly improved in ~7 years. If the same will can be used to improve corruption/oligarchy in Ukraine after they have dealt with the current 'problem', I'm sure Ukraine can become a successful country.

Edited March 15, 2022 by Lethaface

[Probus]

2 hours ago, BeondTheGrave said:

I strongly disagree with this. If anything the lesson, IMO, is the opposite. Had Ukraine had a western security guarantee either via NATO or the EU this would not have happened. The Baltics are prone to the exact same kind of wormhole conflicts involving their own Russian minorities. That hasn't happened thanks to their inclusion in NATO. If Ukraine fails to develop a meaningful and reliable security guarantee then it is setting itself up to go through this huge trauma again in another eight years, and another eight years after that, until finally the Russians get lucky and win one. 

Ukraine can always say what they need to say to get Russians out of Ukraine then be as truthful as Putin in the follow-thru.  Say they won't join NATO, get Russia out, stop the killing, then join NATO.  Russia falls into a great depression, not capable of any further offensive action, NATO secures Ukraine as Putin gets overthrown.  Maybe just wishful thinking, but at this point, if Ukraine breaks long term promises to Russia whilst gaining peace, I don't think the world would consider that treachery. More like justice.

[Probus]

2 hours ago, Blazing 88's said:

At the end I think one can make out a crew member running to the bottom of the screen, his pant legs seem to be in flames... then the vid cuts.

How does anyone survive that, let alone run aftwards!

[sburke]

3 minutes ago, Probus said:

Ukraine can always say what they need to say to get Russians out of Ukraine then be as truthful as Putin in the follow-thru.  Say they won't join NATO, get Russia out, stop the killing, then join NATO.  Russia falls into a great depression, not capable of any further offensive action, NATO secures Ukraine as Putin gets overthrown.  Maybe just wishful thinking, but at this point, if Ukraine breaks long term promises to Russia whilst gaining peace, I don't think the world would consider that treachery. More like justice.

I doubt Ukraine is going to have to promise anything.  At the rate the negotiations are moving the Russian army in the field will collapse before there is anything to sign.

[sburke]

wow, it's all over now!  Elon Musk challenged Putin to a 1 on 1!  WTF?!  I kind of understood how folks would talk about issues amongst royalty caused by inbreeding, but what is Elon's excuse?

Chechen warlord Ramzan Kadyrov responded to Elon Musk's challenge to fight Putin, saying Musk would get destroyed (msn.com)

[Vergeltungswaffe]

Elon Musk is 6'2" and 50 years old.

Vlad is 5'7" and 69 years old.

I like Elon's odds in single combat.

[Battlefront.com]

46 minutes ago, keas66 said:

Seems like a major chunk of VDV ( VDK ? )  units walking away from their vehicles  ?

 

When you're "shock troops" are in a state of shock, that's a bad sign!

It's quite possible that the unit parked their vehicles to stay alive and then ran out of food and/or fuel while waiting for someone to take control of the situation.  So they up and left.

It looks like this is the same unit that got clobbered a couple of days ago.  At least the neighborhood looks similar.  If correct this might explain why these guys in the above video up and left.

This is a good time for me to once again talk about sudden collapse of military capabilities. 

1. we've already seen a collapse of offensive capabilities.  The evidence for that came in a long time ago (The_Capt's post 3 pages back covered that very well!) so it's established reality.
2. the causes of this collapse of offensive capabilities is due to systemic and irreversible failures within the Russian military.  This isn't something that can be fixed within a few days, or even a few years.
3. they've lost a lot of combat power in terms of men, material, ammunition, vehicles, communications equipment, etc.  They've even lost something like 4 generals and a half dozen critical brigade level leaders.  Again, this isn't something that can be fixed with a couple of days or even a week's worth of pausing.
4. the Ukrainians are not going to sit still and let the Russians make an attempt to regaining the initiative.  Russia has, already for more than a week now, ceded initiative over to the Ukraine.  That will take a lot of successful effort to reverse and so far Russia has shown no signs it is capable of such an effort.
5. more and more evidence is coming into the open source world that indicates Russia is lacking critical components for fighting a war beyond where they are now.  Ammo, food, vehicles, and personnel top the list of things they are running out of.
6. evidence indicates Russian morale is in a terrible state.
7. all the while, things back home don't seem to be going very well.  Not crisis point yet, but store shelves are being emptied and there's no imports to take their place.

Here's where this all leads us to...

If you have a theory about what a possible outcome might be, look at the real world current and near-term situation as best you can and ask a very simple question:

"are the core requirements for X outcome evident today?"

In testing the theory "Russia will soon resume effective and meaningful ground offensive" I don't see any evidence on the ground that they can do that any time soon (or ever).

In testing the theory "Russian forces might start to surrender and/or retreat en mas" I see all the ingredients for that to happen any time.

Steve

[DesertFox]

1 minute ago, Battlefront.com said:

When you're "shock troops" are in a state of shock, that's a bad sign!It's quite

[snip]

In testing the theory "Russian forces might start to surrender and/or retreat en mas" I see all the ingredients for that to happen any time.

Steve

The most puzzling thing for me as of yet is, that they all seem to abandon their tanks without any effort to make them combat inefficient for the enemy. In case of those VDV unit in the vid. I guess there are some HUGE disciplinarian problems we yet know nothing about. Also the fact that the belorus army is yet to be seen on ukrainian soil leads me to believe that the card house will collapse soon. Yes I agree, we might see surrender of the russian soldiers any day from now on. I would be surprised if they would slog on for further 10 days.