How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Battlefront.com]

The RU Nat reaction is going to be extremely interesting to see unfold over the coming hours, days, and weeks.  I'm very curious what you guys think will happen.  Here's my guess to get the conversation started.

We know the RU Nats are extremely displeased with how this war has gone so far.  Obviously   Up until HIMARS they seemed to aim most of the blame on senior Russian leadership, in particular military leadership.  This was the start of a post WW1 Germany "stab in the back" excuse for losing the war, but it was also a way for the RU Nats to construct a fantasy that the war could be salvaged if Putin ordered full mobilization and got rid of Shoigu.  Therefore, the RU Nats have focused on building up and maintaining this fantasy in order to keep hope of victory alive.

Then came HIMARS.

Once Ukraine started blowing things up well behind the frontlines, something that Russian forces couldn't either counter or respond to in similar fashion, the RU Nats have had a difficult time reconciling this obvious new threat with their fantasy path to victory.  Full mobilization and/or getting rid of Shoigu won't do anything to stop HIMARS attacks. 

We've seen various attempts by various RU Nats to minimize the impact of HIMARS on their world view.  From what we've seen posted here by Grigb, it seems most RU Nats are currently still trying to figure out how to weave this into their narrative in a way that still provides a way to winning the war.  The best I have seen so far boils down to "we are Russians, we know hardship, so we'll just move our stuff back a few tens of KMs.  A significant irritation, but we can fix this and march to Poland as soon as we have full mobilization".

Now that things are going boom in Crimea, now what?  Full mobilization won't address the problem any more than it would the shorter range attacks.  Changing out leadership won't do it either.  They seem to know that, yet they haven't expressed any other possibilities for victory except through those two actions.  So what is their reaction going to be other than outrage and/or "defeatist" talk?

Steve

[Grigb]

While we are waiting for additional news, I would like to start finally posting info regarding fighting in the settlements. Because all these large maps with arrows do not give you proper context. For example, all the fighting for Soledar looks dramatic with RU acting like they are fighting for Soledar. In reality... Well, here is the map. See for yourself. 

[Vanir Ausf B]

3 hours ago, Maciej Zwolinski said:

What do you make of the Russian claims that the UKR forces are suffering significantly heavier losses than the RUS in the Donbass fight? This claim is being repeatedly made, at least by Strelkov.

If this is correct, then the automatic assumption that RUS attacks are "frontal and costly", i.e. costly because they are frontal should be changed somewhat. They certainly are slow and require huge expenditure of ammunition, but if they protect RUS infantry, which is their most precious resource at the moment, this change of tactics is not evidence of stupidity, but quite reasonable adaptation.

Fair questions, and the interview with General Kryvonos that LLF serendipitously posted addresses those points.

_____

Kryvonos: You don’t have to be afraid of the opponent, but you have to respect him and evaluate him correctly. So here again, I say that the Russians, having a great experience of wars over the past almost 30 years, quickly draw conclusions from their mistakes and promptly adjust the tactics of their forces and means.

(I): I don’t ask for absolute numbers, the number of losses of Ukrainian troops. But I want to ask a theoretical question. And the public thinks that offensive losses must be many times greater than defensive losses. It seems to me from my couch that this was correct in the 12th century when they stormed a fortress. But in twenty-first-century wars, that’s not the case at all. And the fact that you describe the Russian offensive this way does not give us any reason to hope that our losses were many times less than the losses of the enemy.

Kryvonos: Unfortunately, that’s true because the real advantage of domination on the field of artillery duels resulted in our losses being far greater than the Russian losses. Because one might imagine war from the old movie, when people go up to the attack and go there in chains, they are shot by machine gunners. Unfortunately, in this war, it’s a bit different. There are considerably fewer shooting contacts than artillery fire. So, at the expense of the artillery advantage, the Russians suffered fewer losses than we did. And the fact that the counter-battery was not tight enough because there were simply no shells. So we were taking more casualties than the Russians. Unfortunately, we have to recognize this fact. And it is not the fault of the military; it is the fault for not creating the state’s correct military and economic capacity in the last 30 years

[keas66]

Seems like a very risky call by someone to allow these attacks on Crimea  ?  I mean - are we not all now waiting to see how Russia will react ? This seems like a red line  to me - If we cross it and continue to cross it - The Russians are rapidly running out of options  except the worst case  . I am more than a little nervous right now .

[Grigb]

19 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

The RU Nat reaction is going to be extremely interesting to see unfold over the coming hours, days, and weeks.  I'm very curious what you guys think will happen.  Here's my guess to get the conversation started.

So far, their reaction:

1. FTW is going on?
2. That's bad!
3. Interestingly they look like they received command to ignore it and switching to other news - Nikolaev explosions, Mali military training, UKR wheat in Levant. Girkin is still silent. 
4. Now it looks like RU propagandists are trying to peddle version it is sabotage!

Edited August 9, 2022 by Grigb

[The_Capt]

17 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Then came HIMARS.

Trick to game-changers is to be able recognize one when it comes along.  Whole lotta pundits called it the "weapon of the week" but they were missing the fact it was the "last piece of the puzzle".

[The_MonkeyKing]

3 minutes ago, keas66 said:

Seems like a very risky call by someone to allow these attacks on Crimea  ?  I mean - are we not all now waiting to see how Russia will react ? This seems like a red line  to me - If we cross it and continue to cross it - The Russians are rapidly running out of options  except the worst case  . I am more than a little nervous right now .

Crimea was declared free fire zone from the start by the US.

And how would Russia exactly manage to escalate this in its favor?

[Battlefront.com]

A reminder that even inaccurate, but deliberate, artillery fire can have tactical influence.  In this video a Russian tank had to abandon its original position and then several others because it was obvious someone wanted them blown up.  Eventually they just give up and drive off:

And once again... a single tank, all on its own, probably responsible for an entire sector of front.  That shows not only Russia's acute manpower shortage, but also its shortage of armored vehicles.

Steve

[The_MonkeyKing]

So this airbase strike, couple of options:

- New HIMARS ammo given in secret

- commando raid

- sabotage 

- GMLRS armed HIMARS sneaked close enough (might even be on a ship)

- Russian blow themselves up (two separted explosions, unlikely?)

Hard to say which

EDIT: add made in Ukraine equipment like Neptune

Edited August 9, 2022 by The_MonkeyKing

[keas66]

Just now, The_MonkeyKing said:

Crimea was declared free fire zone from the start by the US.

And how would Russia exactly manage to escalate this in its favor?

Well the concern is  that they will respond in an extreme  manner  ( nukes )  - which is  in nobodies  interest - including the Russians -  Someone has decided that they won't do that -  I consider that a risky decision - I guess we will see what happens next .

[The_MonkeyKing]

3 minutes ago, keas66 said:

Well the concern is  that they will respond in an extreme  manner  ( nukes )  - which is  in nobodies  interest - including the Russians -  Someone has decided that they won't do that -  I consider that a risky decision - I guess we will see what happens next .

well, I hope they use nukes. That would seal Russia's fate.

[Grigb]

Civilian "Girkin" (Nesmyan)

Quote

What happened in Crimea raises two questions, the answer to which is not contained in the official version. If this is a detonation of ammunition, then what caused it? Bungling of airfield personnel or sabotage? Which, in general, also refers to bungling, but already security. If this is shelling, then what exactly? It has not been publicly announced about the supply of medium-range missiles to the territory of Ukraine, but in the end, no one is obliged to report. You'll find out on arrival. And again the question is — where is the missile defense in this case?

In any case, there is a failure.

On the other hand, sooner or later, but it had to happen. There is no doubt about Kiev's statement: the goal of reaching the state border as of the beginning of the 14th year has been set. Therefore, the inclusion of Crimea in the fighting was a matter of time. For the Kremlin, this is certainly a rather difficult situation, since from its point of view, the Russian territory has already been attacked (however, attacks in the western regions occur regularly and no special reaction should be given to them. How is Crimea better in this case?)

Crimea, of course, will be more sacred than some Voronezh or Belgorod, but the Kremlin has an understandable limitation: a strike on Kiev as retaliation will secure the escalation of the conflict. The problem of cessation of hostilities will arise sooner or later, but the more violent the fighting becomes, the more illusory the prospect of at least some kind of completion becomes, even at an intermediate stage.

In general, so far we have to pretend that everything is in perfect order, a minor technical problem. If we admit that it is not a minor, not technical and not a discrepancy, then the consequences will be much more serious.

It is reported that there is a big traffic jam at the exit from the Crimea long before the Crimean Bridge. Whether it is normal or related to what is happening is unknown. But the Crimeans' season is clearly under threat.

 

[The_MonkeyKing]

 

[Zeleban]

19 minutes ago, keas66 said:

Seems like a very risky call by someone to allow these attacks on Crimea  ?  I mean - are we not all now waiting to see how Russia will react ? This seems like a red line  to me - If we cross it and continue to cross it - The Russians are rapidly running out of options  except the worst case  . I am more than a little nervous right now .

Why were you not afraid when Ukraine in May shelled the territory of the Belgorod region, which from time immemorial was Russian territory, but are afraid of the shelling of Crimea, which the Russians captured only a few years ago?

[keas66]

Just now, Zeleban said:

Why were you not afraid when Ukraine in May shelled the territory of the Belgorod region, which from time immemorial was Russian territory, but are afraid of the shelling of Crimea, which the Russians captured only a few years ago?

Russian Naval Base -->  Russian Black Sea Fleet  . Historical meaning of Crimea to the Russians  - a bunch of reasons which seem to me  to make Crimea more of a hot spot for the Russians than  Belgorod . But don't worry about me - I'm only  just a little concerned about the initiation of WW3 ... I'm sure The Russians will take this in good humor and won't do anything silly  ,  right ?

[akd]

32 minutes ago, keas66 said:

Seems like a very risky call by someone to allow these attacks on Crimea  ?  I mean - are we not all now waiting to see how Russia will react ? This seems like a red line  to me - If we cross it and continue to cross it - The Russians are rapidly running out of options  except the worst case  . I am more than a little nervous right now .

Ukraine already attacked the airbase at Rostov in Russia proper months ago…

[keas66]

1 minute ago, akd said:

Ukraine already attacked the airbase at Rostov in Russia proper months ago…

I mean sure - I was aware of this - But even the Russians themselves  have been making  ridiculous threats  about what would happen .

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/medvedev-wests-refusal-recognise-crimea-russian-is-threat-2022-07-17

Those who obviously know better - have decided that this is just  empty noise - and have proceeded to launch attacks  into Crimea .  One hopes they guessed right .

[Battlefront.com]

6 minutes ago, keas66 said:

I mean sure - I was aware of this - But even the Russians themselves  have been making  ridiculous threats  about what would happen .

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/medvedev-wests-refusal-recognise-crimea-russian-is-threat-2022-07-17

Those who obviously know better - have decided that this is just  empty noise - and have proceeded to launch attacks  into Crimea .  One hopes they guessed right .

I think Keas66 is correct in that the attack on Crimean soil is, in some ways, more provocative than places like Belgorod and Rostov.  Girkin said the same thing.

The reason is that Russia knows that Ukraine has no intention of invading Russian territory, even if it strikes there.  Russia has no such illusions about Crimea.  Ukraine has openly said, and the West has openly backed, retaking Crimea from Russia.  Striking Crimea is a reminder of that, therefore it is symbolically different than the hits on definitively Russian soil.

Russians know this as well, at least intuitively.  Seeing Ukraine start to do something about taking Crimea away from Russia, even if extremely early stage, will have an effect.  And that means Russia will need to figure out a response.

Steve

[dan/california]

 

9 minutes ago, keas66 said:

I mean sure - I was aware of this - But even the Russians themselves  have been making  ridiculous threats  about what would happen .

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/medvedev-wests-refusal-recognise-crimea-russian-is-threat-2022-07-17

Those who obviously know better - have decided that this is just  empty noise - and have proceeded to launch attacks  into Crimea .  One hopes they guessed right .

If they wanted to start WW3 they should have done it when they still had a functional land army. At this point the Finns will take St Petersburg in week. And there is still the fascinating question of how many of their missiles would make it off the launcher. Be a bit embarrassing to to start the third world war with a fizzle.

[danfrodo]

Wow, what a night:

1.  crimea attack:  tactically lovely because it reduces RU air power in the south.  Strategically, lots of fun -- If Putin admits it's UKR attack and rants about retaliation, etc, he's also showing how increasingly powerless he is.  Good times for Putler.  If UKR starts hitting all the airfields then RU aircraft will have to stage pretty far away, dramatically reducing number of sorties per day during (hopefully) coming offensive.  

2.  I'm going to Roger Waters house to take all his best musical gear.  Any one want in on this?  We'll duct tape him to a chair then say "cease fire!" once all the good stuff is safely packed away in our van.  I bet he's got some great vintage stuff.  

I agree that war is bad.  I am anti-war.  But Waters' posturing is so sickeningly naive.  What would Hitler have given for a cease fire after June 1940?  After December 1941?  November 1942?  Yes, let's do this, where aggressor takes whatever he wants and then just yells 'cease fire'.  Starting w Waters' house.  Way better than actually having to work to pay for things.  

3.  I must correct my posts from yesterday where I stated RU had only gained ~1km.  They have gained ~10km.  And are stuck.  

[danfrodo]

Just now, dan/california said:

 

If they wanted to start WW3 they should have done it when they still had a functional land army. At this point the Finns will take St Petersburg in week. And there is still the fascinating question of how many of their missiles would make it off the launcher. Be a bit embarrassing to to start the third world war with a fizzle.

I think Finns don't want St Petersburg.  They'll just stop at the 1939 border like last time.  I wouldn't want any part RU.  Oh, except that oily part.

[Battlefront.com]

32 minutes ago, The_MonkeyKing said:

 

Interesting that a Ukrainian military official said that the weapon used was of Ukrainian manufacture.  I have to say I don't believe it.  Maybe a Ukrainian modification of a Western supplied munition... OK, maybe they figured out how to launch something in a way that the original weapon wasn't intended to do.  But coming up with a totally home built precision guidance system of this sort?  I'd love for this to be true, but I don't think so.

What we need to know is how many hits were there and if the explosions we saw were primary or secondary effect.  Because if Ukraine really did cobble something together, I doubt it was 10 of them (one report speculated 10 hits).  And if the huge explosion was a primary explosion, then it would need to be a pretty big munition.  However, if the explosion was secondary then I suppose something like a Harpoon hit was on an aviation fuel or munitions depot would produce the effect we saw.

We also need to tie this into the slightly earlier strike that was just north of Crimea.  The two are most likely related in terms of the weapon used and an intended message for Russia.

It's in Ukraine's best interest to keep everybody guessing or assuming it was HIMARS.

Steve

[DesertFox]

Seems like someone got a new set of toys. Supposed to be Saky base, Crimea.

 

 

[Battlefront.com]

Special Kherson Cat has some nice videos posted, including this one of what the Kerch bridge looks like right now.  I wonder what proportion of these vehicles are from tourists bailing out of their cheap Crimean holiday and how many are rats leaving the sinking ship.

 

[Beleg85]

It's not only Walters. Steven S. visited Olenivka camp, where he theatrically inspected fragments of "GMLRS shell"...Jesus, what a shmonc without a grain of integrity.