How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Haiduk]

Extended photo of Lazurne strike. Except destroyed low-altitude radar 48Ya6-K1 "Podlyot" were destroyed rest of vehicles from this complex: control vehicle and electro-generator vehicle.

[Beleg85]

Interesting, it wasn't posted before so worth to note Ukrainians hit something (probably EW/radar device) in Enerhodar using Warmate drones. Their appearance is relatively rare so it was probbaly high-value target. Loitering ammo start to be slowly seen over battlefields.

[Battlefront.com]

4 hours ago, Haiduk said:

Since US only now included 1000 of guided artillery ammunition in next aid batch, I still doubt we have something like this. In our twitters also many opinions, that holes on the bridge more match to artillery shells, than missiles. And this could do Caesars, for example. Or PzH2000. But locals told about missiles. Alas, no videos of impacts. 

I would not be surprised if there were small numbers of Excalibur shells in Ukraine for months already.  I am still 100% convinced that the big HQ hit around Izyum was done by a PGM that Ukraine supposedly didn't have at the time.  It must be remembered that the public announcements are there for PR reasons.  Neither the donor country nor Ukraine are under some sort of obligation to publicly announce things ahead of time.

I am not convinced that was a HIMARS strike on the bridge.  The impact craters look more like a 22kg Excalibur hit vs. the 90kg of a the HIRAMS rounds they have.  But I'm not an expert on impact forensics so I could have that wrong.

Steve

[Machor]

12 hours ago, Grigb said:

But the most mental case happened with RU legendary leader of legendary group DDT. During live concert in Ufa Yuri Shevchuk said: "Motherland, [my] friends, is not the president's ass, which you have to slabber and kiss all the time. The motherland is a beggar grandmother at the train station selling potatoes. This is the motherland" Immediately after the concert he was questioned and a case against him was started.

Shevchuk's "Умирали пацаны" - "The boys were dying" was the first song that I thought about when this war started, and one would understand why by looking at the lyrics; but first, the song itself:

Shevchuk wrote this song after visiting the front during the First Chechen War, and here he's singing it to footage he himself shot in Chechnya:

My attempt at a translation:

Quote

 

"The boys were dying"

The boys were dying, terribly

The boys were dying, for nothing

And not every one of them was handsome

And not all of them were tall

 

But when they looked at me

Those human eyes covered with dust

Not like birds, and not like lambs

They warmed me like people

 

And I sang them Rock-n-Roll songs

Told them: It's all gonna be OK

And I yelled: We're all in this together

But it all sounded like a load of BS

 

The closer they are to death, the purer are people

The farther to the rear, the fatter are the generals

Here I saw, what may happen

With Moscow, Ukraine, the Urals

 

18 years - that ain't much

When you're wandering along the Tverskaya and broke

And it's quite something, when your heart has stopped beating

And your country gives you: a plastic wreath

 

The country sings them Rock-n-Roll songs

Tells them: It's all gonna be OK

The country yells: We're all in this together

But it sounds like a load of BS

 

The boys were dying, terribly

The boys were dying, for nothing

And not every one of them was handsome

And not all of them were tall

 

 

Edited July 20, 2022 by Machor
Corrected Wikipedia link

[Battlefront.com]

6 hours ago, The_Capt said:

So Kherson...ooo boy.  Well first off, I am buying off on the whole "traitor" theory that Kherson was likely sold-out, that or the UA simply got stretched too thin but this is the major southern axis so I do not see how they did not prioritize it - maybe they did and Russians down this way actually demonstrated talent.  Why?

Yup, when I saw that the Russians had made it over the bridge I immediately thought "WTF?!?".  The Crimean bottleneck should have been the most reinforced, mined, and otherwise horrible place to fight through and it seems Russia sailed right through it and straight to Kherson.  Yet the same Ukrainian armed forces caused massive delays to even more powerful Russian units in the north.  So either unusual levels of incompetence or some degree of treason.

6 hours ago, The_Capt said:

I will say it now, if the UA can do this, the war will be over much sooner than anyone thinks.

I don't think they can pull off the sorts of attacks you're talking about even if I thought they could force the river (which I do not).  It is also exceptionally risky and risky isn't something Ukraine has shown any appetite for up to now.  An aversion I completely support, BTW.  So it's either knocking the Russians out from the western side or nothing.

6 hours ago, The_Capt said:

The major problem with this one is Kherson itself.  If the RA is trapped like rats, they will fight like them.  The UA could break itself in a city of that size (which they know after Mariupol).  My guess is that they will simply bleed the RA white here, hitting them once again along the entire length of the RA operational system.  This presents the modern dilemma of "stay and bleed out" or "withdraw, preserve force and lose the city", either way, so long as the UA can keep pulling the RA in and killing them in numbers while they try and hold onto Kherson it is a winnable situation.

At some point I knew we would come to a significant point and not agree on it.  And here we are

I absolutely agree that this is the worst case scenario, but I don't think it is the likely one.  My belief is that the Russian forces there have absolutely no will to die in place for a battle they know they will lose.  They are not Mariupol defenders by a LONG shot.  And that's the level of determination they would need to have to hold out even for a short period of time.  Instead I see their forces splintering into three groups the minute they think the bridge is out of commission:

• "F This!" - there are some pretty poor quality units filling the lines in areas north of Kherson and, for all I know, in Kherson itself.  They are not in-it-to-win-it.  These guys will leave their posts sooner rather than later, en mas or in single numbers in the middle of the night.
• "Maybe All Is Not Lost!" - these are the guys who believe that they can stay and fight without dying or being captured, but only so long as the fear of authority and/or naive beliefs in relief and/or not knowing the true situation holds out.  With a quick turn of events they will switch to the "F This!" mentality.
• "Glory To The Fatherland!" - every group of soldiers has fanatics who, for a variety of reasons, believe that victory is possible or that they can take out enough of the enemy so they can retreat with their heads held high.  Whatever the motivation, they will stay and fight until they think there's absolutely no hope.

I do not believe Russia has Mariupol caliber defenders for this place at this time.  Maybe for Donetsk or Luhansk cities, but not Kherson.

The way I see the battle developing is the "F This!" group takes themselves out of the equation by either deserting eastward or surrendering.  Any one of these guys with 1/4 of a brain will figure out that they aren't getting to the eastern bank because the bridges, if still up, will be heavily guarded by Russians looking to shoot deserters.  Since the river is wide, they might give up without trying.  Some might try to shoot their way across (certainly has happened in war) or they might think they can find a boat or something on the shore to cross.

Whatever the case, the "F This!" guys will create a degree of risk for the remaining forces.  It's pretty unnerving to not know if there really is a unit guarding your flank, especially if you don't trust them to start with.  As Ukrainian forces advance, and word starts making it around the Russian ranks, this will become worse and worse.  Units might not surrender, but they might not stay to die either.  Instead, they will likely unilaterally withdraw to Kherson or to the dam bridge and say "hey, we tried to fight but we ran out of ammo". 

What is the evidence that these two types exist?  Remember all those Russian vehicles Ukrainian farmers found abandoned in perfect working order or with holes in their fuel tanks.  That was during the supposedly good times for the Russian Army.  It happened once, it can happen again.

The third group, the "Glory To The Fatherland!" will stay and they will fight.  At first.  But once they start running low on ammo and taking significant loses, they won't want to be slaughtered in place.  Especially if a significant portion of their neighboring units have buggered off.  Which means they too will be seeking to get over the river.

As with Kyiv and Kharkiv, I am expecting that Russia either withdraws its forces or they collapse.  Unlike Kyiv and Kharkiv, the option to withdraw might already be off the table.  Which means large scale collapse is what remains.  That is what I think will happen.

Steve

[The_Capt]

1 minute ago, Battlefront.com said:

Yup, when I saw that the Russians had made it over the bridge I immediately thought "WTF?!?".  The Crimean bottleneck should have been the most reinforced, mined, and otherwise horrible place to fight through and it seems Russia sailed right through it and straight to Kherson.  Yet the same Ukrainian armed forces caused massive delays to even more powerful Russian units in the north.  So either unusual levels of incompetence or some degree of treason.

I don't think they can pull off the sorts of attacks you're talking about even if I thought they could force the river (which I do not).  It is also exceptionally risky and risky isn't something Ukraine has shown any appetite for up to now.  An aversion I completely support, BTW.  So it's either knocking the Russians out from the western side or nothing.

You know, at some point I knew we would come to a significant point and not agree on it.  And here we are

I absolutely agree that this is the worst case scenario, but I don't think it is the likely one.  My belief is that the Russian forces there have absolutely no will to die in place for a battle they know they will lose.  They are not Mariupol defenders by a LONG shot.  And that's the level of determination they would need to have to hold out even for a short period of time.  Instead I see their forces splintering into three groups the minute they think the bridge is out of commission:

• "F This!" - there are some pretty poor quality units filling the lines in areas north of Kherson and, for all I know, in Kherson itself.  They are not in-it-to-win-it.  These guys will leave their posts sooner rather than later, en mas or in single numbers in the middle of the night.
• "Maybe All Is Not Lost!" - these are the guys who believe that they can stay and fight without dying or being captured, but only so long as the fear of authority and/or naive beliefs in relief and/or not knowing the true situation holds out.  With a quick turn of events they will switch to the "F This!" mentality.
• "Glory To The Fatherland!" - every group of soldiers has fanatics who, for a variety of reasons, believe that victory is possible or that they can take out enough of the enemy so they can retreat with their heads held high.  Whatever the motivation, they will stay and fight until they think there's absolutely no hope.

I do not believe Russia has Mariupol caliber defenders for this place at this time.  Maybe for Donetsk or Luhansk cities, but not Kherson.

The way I see the battle developing is the "F This!" group takes themselves out of the equation by either deserting eastward or surrendering.  Any one of these guys with 1/4 of a brain will figure out that they aren't getting to the eastern bank because the bridges, if still up, will be heavily guarded by Russians looking to shoot deserters.  Since the river is wide, they might give up without trying.  Some might try to shoot their way across (certainly has happened in war) or they might think they can find a boat or something on the shore to cross.

Whatever the case, the "F This!" guys will create a degree of risk to the remaining forces.  It's pretty unnerving to not know if there really is a unit guarding your flank, especially if you don't trust them to start with.  As Ukrainian forces advance, and word starts making it around the Russian ranks, this will become worse and worse.  Units might not surrender, but they might not stay to die either.  Instead, they will likely unilaterally withdraw to Kherson or to the dam bridge and say "hey, we tried to fight but we ran out of ammo". 

What is the evidence that these two types exist?  Remember all those Russian vehicles Ukrainian farmers found abandoned in perfect working order or with holes in their fuel tanks.  That was during the supposedly good times for the Russian Army.  It happened once, it can happen again.

The third group, the "Glory To The Fatherland!" will stay and they will fight.  At first.  But once they start running low on ammo and taking significant loses, they won't want to be slaughtered in place.  Especially if a significant portion of their neighboring units have buggered off.  Which means they too will be seeking to get over the river.

As with Kyiv and Kharkiv, I am expecting that Russia either withdraws its forces or they collapse.  Unlike Kyiv and Kharkiv, the option to withdraw might already be off the table.  Which means large scale collapse is what remains.  That is what I think will happen.

Steve

Not really a disagreement to be honest.  Troops with nowhere to go and belief that surrender is not an option tend to fight a lot longer and harder just to stay alive one more day.  Now if the RA has an “out”, even just walking out over foot bridges I also expect them to crumble based on the quality of troops they have been pushing.  Or if the UA can convince them surrender is a good idea etc.

Either way, it will be a test for the RA one way or the other and a very public one.  I also think full operational collapse is a possible outcome, we should know once we see big bold blue arrows actually happening.  The risk though is Kherson soaking up too many UA resources in urban fighting, which does not require a whole lot of the RA to make it happen (see Mosul).  

First we need to see what this UA offensive looks like, if it indeed is happening.  

[FancyCat]

7 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Not really a disagreement to be honest.  Troops with nowhere to go and belief that surrender is not an option tend to fight a lot longer and harder just to stay alive one more day.  Now if the RA has an “out”, even just walking out over foot bridges I also expect them to crumble based on the quality of troops they have been pushing.  Or if the UA can convince them surrender is a good idea etc.

Either way, it will be a test for the RA one way or the other and a very public one.  I also think full operational collapse is a possible outcome, we should know once we see big bold blue arrows actually happening.  The risk though is Kherson soaking up too many UA resources in urban fighting, which does not require a whole lot of the RA to make it happen (see Mosul).  

First we need to see what this UA offensive looks like, if it indeed is happening.  

Do we have any evidence that RU forces won't surrender to UKR forces? Maybe our Russian speakers can enlighten us, but I'm under the impression that RU forces don't consider UKR forces to be "bloodthirsty" especially with the frequent reports of prisoner exchanges, including the Azov whom one would probably consider to be the most likely to get hung by Russia, have been exchanged. 

Maybe the fear of being tried for warcrimes? but i dunno if thats the same as being executed. 

[Battlefront.com]

2 hours ago, Haiduk said:

Reportedly next strike on the Antonivskyi bridge area on left bank of Dnieper. Also strike on Chornobaivka airfield area. Locals write about strike on coastal Skadovsk town near Lazurne, being struck on Sunday.

I like this.  If they are smashing the area around the bridge (on the western bank) then it probably means Russians are moving around in that area.  Either coming or going, it indicates that the Russians know that this is something serious.

Hitting the base at Chornobaivka is likely to underscore how pointless it would be to use this for some sort of air resupply.  Coupled with the memories of how badly Ukraine spanked Russian air forces there earlier in the war, this should offer serious deterrence for using it in any significant way.

I don't know what the strike on Skadovsk might mean.  An indication that Ukraine is able to do a lot more if it wants to?

Whatever the case is, I am thinking that what we're seeing is Ukrainian making sure the Russians understand the offensive has started.  If so, then I'd guess that the Ukrainian planners are thinking the same thing I'm thinking about how the Russians might react to this.

If this is the start of an offensive, I expect we'll soon see reports of conventional shelling of Russian frontline Kherson positions very, very soon.  As in right now or early daylight hours.  Not so much as a prelude to ground assaults, rather more PSYOPS.

Every Russian soldier that feels the urge to flee reduces the chances a Ukrainian soldier might die retaking this area.  If I were in command of the offensive I'd want to make good and sure the maximum psychological damage is done before ordering forces forward.  The tools and conditions are there to leverage, that I am sure of.

Steve

[acrashb]

18 hours ago, Artkin said:

I wonder what UA thinks of using 30mm DU on their own soil. 

DU is a toxic metal, like lead, but is not radioactive.  Just in case you didn't know this.  And yes, I am over-simplifying.

6 hours ago, The_Capt said:

The major problem with this one is Kherson itself.  If the RA is trapped like rats, they will fight like them.  The UA could break itself in a city of that size (which they know after Mariupol). 

On the trapped rats, this is why Sun Tzu said, depending on the translation you like best, "Throw your soldiers into positions whence there is no escape, and they will prefer death to flight. If they will face death, there is nothing they may not achieve" and "When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe too hard.” So for the UA to leave an escape route would be preferable, all the more so if the escape is largely on foot and devoid of heavy weapons.

On the "break itself", if the UA knows that they would 'break' on Kherson, which as you say they have to, then artillery Russian style would be tempting.  This creates a similar risk in that the Western public, seeing the UA destroy Kherson, their own city, with artillery and other munitions provided by the West, might get cold feet. 

Also, destroying the ship-building facilities with indiscriminate artillery would hurt post-war recovery.
 

1 hour ago, Haiduk said:

Russians place additonal "wooden armor" in weakened zones

Kindling...

 

 

On another note, the Economist has some book recommendations:

https://www.economist.com/the-economist-reads/2022/07/19/what-to-read-to-understand-modern-warfare

Not having read the books all I can say is the Economist has a good track record for such recommendations.

 

[Battlefront.com]

23 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Not really a disagreement to be honest.  Troops with nowhere to go and belief that surrender is not an option tend to fight a lot longer and harder just to stay alive one more day.  

If they believe in what they are fighting for, that is.  I don't think that's a given for these guys.

Think of the differences between the waning days of WW2 in Europe.  The behavior pattern of German forces on the Western Front was very different than Eastern.  On the Western Front entire units melted away when they came under significant pressure, but in the East they often fought to the point of annihilation.  Two reasons for this. 

First, the Germans believed that they had to stop the Soviets from taking their homeland, but were more ambivalent about Western Allies taking ground.  Second, they knew there would be a massive difference between going into captivity with the Western Allies vs. Soviets.  So much so that in the final weeks and days of the war entire large scale units in the East fought their way westward and southward so they could surrender to Western Allies.  Huge example is the German forces in Italy surrendered as a whole ahead of anywhere else because continued fighting or even retreating wasn't going to improve their situation.

23 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Now if the RA has an “out”, even just walking out over foot bridges I also expect them to crumble based on the quality of troops they have been pushing.  Or if the UA can convince them surrender is a good idea etc.

I think there will be both.  There's little chance that all of Russia's soldiers will manage to get over the river, especially the ones further north.  Those units, BTW, might be the first to do something that is noticeable to us.  Withdrawing, fleeing, surrendering... they are the most exposed.

23 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Either way, it will be a test for the RA one way or the other and a very public one.  I also think full operational collapse is a possible outcome, we should know once we see big bold blue arrows actually happening.  

Yup.  And I think we'll not have to wait too long for that to happen.

23 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

The risk though is Kherson soaking up too many UA resources in urban fighting, which does not require a whole lot of the RA to make it happen (see Mosul).  

I just don't think Russia has that sort of fight in them.  Plus, Ukraine doesn't need to fight house to house on a Putinesque timetable.  They could just wait them out.  Ukraine has sufficient forces in place right now to make that happen, so no distractions from other fronts.

23 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

First we need to see what this UA offensive looks like, if it indeed is happening.  

Absolutely.  It's all pretty speculative until we see if there is an offensive in motion.  I'm very convinced there is, but it could be much slower paced than I'm thinking of.  Could be Ukraine lets Russian forces spend a week questioning their resolve to fight before moving in.  Could be that Ukraine won't do anything major until it senses Russians are abandoning their positions.  No way to know right now what is what.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

9 minutes ago, acrashb said:

On the "break itself", if the UA knows that they would 'break' on Kherson, which as you say they have to, then artillery Russian style would be tempting.  This creates a similar risk in that the Western public, seeing the UA destroy Kherson, their own city, with artillery and other munitions provided by the West, might get cold feet. 

Yup, this is yet another reason to not engage in costly house to house fighting.

We must also remember that there are a LOT of civilians in Kherson and they majority seem to be looking forward to liberation.  They can do things to accelerate that.

History has shown that civilians sometimes manage to convince occupiers to put down their weapons and hide with them until the battle is over.  They are also more likely to have communications with Ukrainian forces and could help facilitate surrenders.  Again, there is historical precedent for this sort of thing.  Hell, the local German commanders handed over all of Paris to the advancing Allies much to the dismay of Hitler.

Just got to make the conditions so dire that you get Russians thinking there's a way out and there won't need to be any urban warfare.

Steve

[Beleg85]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

• F This!" - there are some pretty poor quality units filling the lines in areas north of Kherson and, for all I know, in Kherson itself.  They are not in-it-to-win-it.  These guys will leave their posts sooner rather than later, en mas or in single numbers in the middle of the night.
• "Maybe All Is Not Lost!" - these are the guys who believe that they can stay and fight without dying or being captured, but only so long as the fear of authority and/or naive beliefs in relief and/or not knowing the true situation holds out.  With a quick turn of events they will switch to the "F This!" mentality.
• "Glory To The Fatherland!" - every group of soldiers has fanatics who, for a variety of reasons, believe that victory is possible or that they can take out enough of the enemy so they can retreat with their heads held high.  Whatever the motivation, they will stay and fight until they think there's absolutely no hope.

Not sure where put Kadyrovtsy Tik Tok commando here. They will probably be needed more than ever to do their NKVD-sque things, but knowledge that their fate in case of capture is rather bleak one (let's face it, nobody will spare them or worse- they will be given to pro-Ukrainain Chechens who just announced small jihad against Kadyrov and his moviemakers) will probably make them feel very uneasy if this scenario start rolling. Actually, they may even crack before it happens.

Oh Boy, I would like to see it so much...One Final Shot. The Last Cadre. Imagine the dramaturgy seeing them running for their lives.

 

On other note- this article about UA strike on Wagner base is quite detailed and worth reading. It really seems they could lost several hundred people there:

https://kyivindependent.com/national/exclusive-inside-ukraines-covert-operation-to-take-out-elite-wagner-group-mercenaries-in-donbas

Edited July 21, 2022 by Beleg85

[Battlefront.com]

This is an interesting interview of one of Russia's top "thinkers".  It shows how deeply ingrained the Russian paranoia, reality distortion, and over inflated sense of self importance that circulates even amongst Russians that have an IQ significantly higher than those on Russian TV channels.  It is why we should not have much hope of a friendly Russian state emerging after Putin is gone, whenever he is gone.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/19/opinion/russia-ukraine-karaganov-interview.html?campaign_id=249&emc=edit_ruwb_20220720&instance_id=67157&nl=russia-ukraine-war-briefing&regi_id=77867169&segment_id=99062&te=1&user_id=06eb42ecc9056dd32ea63af0c30707b6

Since it is behind a paywall, I'll just give you a sample:

Quote

When the military conflict started, we saw how deep Ukraine’s involvement with NATO was — a lot of arms, training. Ukraine was being turned into a spearhead aimed at the heart of Russia. Also we saw that the West was collapsing in economic, moral, political terms. This decline was especially painful after its peak in the 1990s. Problems within the West, and globally, were not solved. That was a classic prewar situation. The belligerence against Russia has been rapidly growing since the late 2000s. The conflict was seen as more and more imminent. So probably Moscow decided to pre-empt and to dictate the terms of the conflict.

 

This conflict is existential for most modern Western elites, who are failing and losing the trust of their populations. To divert attention they need an enemy. But most Western countries, not their presently ruling elites, will perfectly survive and thrive even when this liberal globalist imperialism imposed since late 1980s will vanish.

 

This conflict is not about Ukraine. Her citizens are used as cannon fodder in a war to preserve the failing supremacy of Western elites.

Notice how backwards this is from a factual standpoint.  Europe is in decline, not Russia, which is why Europe made sure that Russia would invade Ukraine so that it could weaken an otherwise powerful Russia.

Wow.

When the interviewer put it like this:

You said recently that Russia had to fight back against Western efforts to “take out Russia.” The tragic irony is that Russia is taking itself “out” through this war; the West has become united in its condemnation of the carnage in Ukraine; Sweden and Finland are joining NATO; and Russia will be regarded as a pariah and a serious threat for many years. Does this not indicate that the war was a terrible miscalculation?

The response was this:

Quote

The Russian-Western relations have been deteriorating for a decade and a half. There is nothing to lose from the collapse of the last months. Now Russia will contain and deter the West without any second thought and hopes left. We shall wait for what will happen within the West.

Taking into consideration the vector of its political, economic and moral development, the further we are from the West, the better it is for us. At least for the coming decade or two. Hopefully, afterward it will recuperate, the elites will partially be changed, and we shall normalize relations. We are not going to insulate ourselves suicidally from the rest of the world, which is developing largely in the right direction and is becoming larger and freer, while the West is rapidly shrinking. Only history could judge whether the decision to unleash an open confrontation was right. Maybe the decision should have been made earlier. And Covid postponed it.

Yesh.  So in his view this is all good for Russia and bad for the West.  Soon Russia will choose to re-start relations with the West after it becomes "freer" from its elites and becomes more like Russia (e.g. Orban in Hungary and PiS in Poland)

And these gems:

Quote

And I regret that tens of thousands of I.T. specialists have decided to leave for a better life. Though I know, as you do, that most Russian emigrants of intellect and dignity are left unhappy.

 

Quote

I am reiterating in most of my writings and public appearances that we should preserve freedom of thinking and intellectual discussion, which is still much wider than in many other countries. We do not have the cancel culture or impose the deafening political correctness.

 

Quote

But, of course, we are not closing ourselves to European culture. Moreover, I suspect that with cancel culture now on the rise in the West, we could remain one of the few places that will preserve the treasure of the European, Western culture and spiritual values

 

Quote

Ukraine is an important but small part of the engulfing process of the collapse of the former world order of global liberal imperialism imposed by the United States and movement toward a much fairer and freer world of multipolarity and multiplicity of civilizations and cultures.

This is as divorced from reality as one can get and still be considered sane.  It is what people like Girkin and "civilian Girkin" believe.  This is what we have to look forward to even after the war is over.  These guys are not young, therefore they won't be around much longer, but they have poisoned enough minds that there are younger Russians that will fill their shoes when they are gone.

Steve

[Harmon Rabb]

First North Korea now Syria...How will Ukraine go on without diplomatic relations with such respected countries?

 

Edited July 21, 2022 by Harmon Rabb

[Battlefront.com]

11 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

Not sure where put Kadyrovtsy Tik Tok commando here.

I thought about this when I wrote the post you commented on.  I'd put them in the middle category.  They'll probably not break right away, especially because they're in the rear already.  However, as soon as they think they're either going to die or become a captive, I think they will withdraw en mas in a largely cohesive way.  They will shoot anybody that gets in their way if it comes to it.

Partly I think this way because I doubt the Chechens in Kherson are willing to fight to the death, partly because I think Kadyrov will order them withdrawn with or without permission.  These guys report directly to Kadyrov, not whomever is in nominal control of Russian forces there and not to Putin.

This is a pretty big difference between units of the Waffen SS and Heer.  As superior and different as Waffen SS units thought of themselves compared to their Heer brothers, they were fully integrated into the chain of command and loyal to the supreme commander (Hitler), not their branch commander (Himmler).  This was the same with the NKVD in WW2, who were loyal to Stalin and since the chain of command led directly to him they did what was ordered of them.  This is absolutely NOT the case with Kadyrov's units.

Steve

[Lethaface]

10 hours ago, Harmon Rabb said:

Really does look like some kid operating a tank in a video game for the first time.

welcome to Ukraine

[Harmon Rabb]

I did not want to post this because frankly I'm tired of this clown, but since the name Kadyrov was brought up here is his latest statement.

[Beleg85]

26 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Partly I think this way because I doubt the Chechens in Kherson are willing to fight to the death, partly because I think Kadyrov will order them withdrawn with or without permission.  These guys report directly to Kadyrov, not whomever is in nominal control of Russian forces there and not to Putin.

This is a pretty big difference between units of the Waffen SS and Heer.  As superior and different as Waffen SS units thought of themselves compared to their Heer brothers, they were fully integrated into the chain of command and loyal to the supreme commander (Hitler), not their branch commander (Himmler).  This was the same with the NKVD in WW2, who were loyal to Stalin and since the chain of command led directly to him they did what was ordered of them.  This is absolutely NOT the case with Kadyrov's units.

Steve

Yep, it is unfortunatelly most probable outcome. They will be withdrawn before. However, this time Kadyrov may be pushed hard by Kremlin to keep at least part of them by the river as a blocking force as long as possible. If mass rout happens, they would be (for the first time in whole campaign) actually truly useful for Russian army.

It is worth to add that swimming is very unpopular ability among Chechens. Just saying.

18 minutes ago, Harmon Rabb said:

I did not want to post this because frankly I'm tired of this clown, but since the name Kadyrov was brought up here is his latest statement.

Oh, no worry, he does that every 3-4 days. His threats became even quite funny. He tried to threaten also Lithuania , but he misspeleld the country name several times, somebody laugh at him so he stick to Poland. I think NAFO guys did made a raid on his Telegram or Vkontakte account as part of internet wars (I am not sure exactly which).

Edited July 21, 2022 by Beleg85

[Billy Ringo]

So you've got:

• Team Ukraine: United States, UK, Norway, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, France, Canada, Australia, Poland, Lithuania, Spain, Finland, Sweden, Latvia, Estonia, Belgium, Denmark, Netherlands, Luxemburg, Portugal, New Zealand etc.   (With apologies to any country I missed---not intentional.)

 

• Team Russia: Belarus, Cuba, Iran, Nicaruaga, Venezuela, Syria.

Sitting on the sidelines, China, India, most of the Middle East, Africa, South America, etc.

If I'm Ukraine, I like my team.

If you just look at the very rough GDP numbers for those countries---it's about a 22X difference.  And that's before Russia's economic downturn due to the war.  Then consider the logistics of non-hindered movement of goods and supplies, communication and intelligence sharing, military know-how and strategic thinking, depth and breadth of varied military capabilities, influence on non-aligned countries, etc. etc. etc.......

WTF are the Russians thinking?  Seriously, this is insane.

 

 

 

 

[Battlefront.com]

18 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

Yep, it is unfortunatelly most probable outcome. They will be withdrawn before. However, this time Kadyrov may be pushed hard by Kremlin to keep at least part of them by the river as a blocking force as long as possible. If mass rout happens, they would be (for the first time in whole campaign) actually truly useful for Russian army.

I am also wondering about what will happen after Kherson for Kadyrov.  I think this is a much more important moment than we might realize.  If Kadyrov's units die in Kherson, there's going to be problems for him back at home.  A lot of his people do not like the thought of their boys dying for Putin.  Kadyrov will definitely make whatever problems he has Putin's problems as well.

On the other hand, if his units bugger out without orders, Putin is going to face a very tough time not doing something about it.  He can spin it however he wants to, but it will be direct insubordination.  The FSB will be livid at the very least.  They hate Kadyrov with a passion.  Acting against Kadyrov is possible, and boy that will stir things up!

A third option is they get pulled before the slaughter starts.  That might not be an option anymore, depending on what happens overnight or within the next day.  But if it does happen, there will still be ramifications because it will likely be because Kadyrov threatened to pull them out on his own.  That's not quite as bad as them leaving the ship while it is sinking, but there's not going to be many in the Kremlin or within Russian field commands that will be happy about it.  Probably the least immediate bad outcomes result from this option.

As Grigb says... watch Kadyrov to see what happens to the rest of Russia.  So yeah, I'm watching this aspect of Kherson very, very carefully.

Steve

[Beleg85]

Yep, all of it is very true. There are some smaller detachments of Chechens (mainly from Moskow diaspora) that are only loosely loyal to Kadyrov and rather part of regular army/security apparatus than belonging to his hosts. It's hard to tell which ones given how fluid loyalities there can be, but they certainly do exists (even druing 2008 war only half of Chechens were Kadyrovites). Old loyalties based on teips are no longer that valid, in large cities/diasporas people are more affiliated by close cousins or personall bonds.

The fact that Kadyrov apparently tried to install some AA defences may indicate he:

1.Learn a thing or two about security of his residence from drones (many assasination attempts were tried by those years)

2.May be something bigger indeed that show some cracks in Russian power structures.

Hard to tell for now.

Also, perhaps whole Kherson offensive will stop in its tracks and we will see even more grind in Donbas and Kharkiv. I hope you are right however, and there will be major breakthroughs here.

Edited July 21, 2022 by Beleg85

[The_Capt]

2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

If they believe in what they are fighting for, that is.  I don't think that's a given for these guys.

This, plus this

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

This is an interesting interview of one of Russia's top "thinkers".  It shows how deeply ingrained the Russian paranoia, reality distortion, and over inflated sense of self importance that circulates even amongst Russians that have an IQ significantly higher than those on Russian TV channels.

Has me questioning what the average Russian soldier thinks.  They have been fed a diet of “Ukrainian Nazis” and “Manifest Motherland Destiny”, there is likely a percentage that actually buy in.  Now whether that translates to actually hard fighting while cut off…?

2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Just got to make the conditions so dire that you get Russians thinking there's a way out and there won't need to be any urban warfare.

And here we are in full agreement, it was what my original point was trying for - avoid urban combat, especially if you have not shaped it.

[The_Capt]

2 hours ago, FancyCat said:

Do we have any evidence that RU forces won't surrender to UKR forces? Maybe our Russian speakers can enlighten us, but I'm under the impression that RU forces don't consider UKR forces to be "bloodthirsty" especially with the frequent reports of prisoner exchanges, including the Azov whom one would probably consider to be the most likely to get hung by Russia, have been exchanged. 

Maybe the fear of being tried for warcrimes? but i dunno if thats the same as being executed. 

Very good question.  We have not seen any really big prisoner grabs in this war (or I missed them).  We have seen some prisoner exchanges but also some nasty rhetoric as well (e.g. tweets about not taking prisoners), along with possible (and some definitely confirmed) warcrimes.

This is a nasty war, nothing clean about it.  Russian soldiers are being fed a diet of BS to dehumanize and vilify Ukrainians.  Ukrainians only need have access to an internet account to see some of the medieval stuff the Russians are doing.

This is not an environment of widespread mutual trust of one’s captors sticking to the LOAC.  Especially as thing drags out and becomes more vicious.  If we are talking Kherson, we could be talking a month or two from now, after more terror strikes on Ukrainian civilians…so there is that.

Now Ukraine has been pretty smart and restrained in all this, considering.  I guess we will see.  

[dan/california]

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

 The risk though is Kherson soaking up too many UA resources in urban fighting, which does not require a whole lot of the RA to make it happen (see Mosul).  

 

How much will the very hostile population Kherson effect the Russians ability to resist? I can envision the Russians not being able to move anything, anywhere in Kherson with less than a full company of infantry once the battle is fully engaged. And if the Ukr special forces can smuggle in a truck or two of platter EFPs and those nifty German off route mines, the Russian troops could be effectively unable to maneuver. All of this entails unfortunate civilian casualties, but near as I can tell NOTHING is worse than being occupied by the Russians. A full uprising at the same time the AFU push hard ought to just end it.

[FancyCat]

3 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

I don't know what the strike on Skadovsk might mean.  An indication that Ukraine is able to do a lot more if it wants to?

I would say considering they blew up a supply dump tonight (I think? twitter is confused but something is exploding there), the Podlet radar a few days ago in a town west of Skadovsk, Ukraine is giving the Russian units reinforcing Kherson a warm welcome that Haiduk talked about a few pages ago.