How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Beleg85]

Ukrainians trolling in high-quality CGI (yup, there are people believing in this...)

11 minutes ago, Grigb said:

Rybar claims RU pushed UKR back from Gorokhovatka (south bridge). Currently fighting at Yasinovate.

RU did not take Senkove (North bridge) but shelling it.

Kupyansk bridge is heavily damaged.

Claim RU has diverted serious forces to this direction.

Curious which units they used in this counterattack. Local reserves from Izyum front did "about face" or some newly arrived.

[Artkin]

Lol well they're asking for it. I'm sure the Ukrainians won't mind taking over the A-10 fleet at some point.. now or after. 

[Seedorf81]

Elephant in the room?

 

If there is going to be a collapse of the Russian Army, be it only at Kherson or near Kypiansk or on a much bigger scale, I suspect that the chance that the Russians will resort to the use of a tactical nucleair weapon increases considerably.

Nobody wants that, I hope, but I have an ominous feeling that the Russians (Putin) won't swallow a massive rout easily. And somehow will retaliate.

What happens if a tactical nucleair is dropped?

- How big are those booms?

- Will one tactical nuke suffice?

- Is it very useful against a fluid Ukrainian Army?

- Will it make a real difference on the battlefield? (Not talking about politic repercussions or Nato retaliation).

 

 

[dan/california]

 

[riptides]

1 minute ago, Seedorf81 said:

Elephant in the room?

 

If there is going to be a collapse of the Russian Army, be it only at Kherson or near Kypiansk or on a much bigger scale, I suspect that the chance that the Russians will resort to the use of a tactical nucleair weapon increases considerably.

Nobody wants that, I hope, but I have an ominous feeling that the Russians (Putin) won't swallow a massive rout easily. And somehow will retaliate.

What happens if a tactical nucleair is dropped?

- How big are those booms?

- Will one tactical nuke suffice?

- Is it very useful against a fluid Ukrainian Army?

- Will it make a real difference on the battlefield? (Not talking about politic repercussions or Nato retaliation).

 

 

I think tac-nukes are off the table. The situation is so fluid there is no "mass" that will allow anyone to gain anything from their use. The cities are still under Russian "control", and I am sure those Russian units in the field are really hard pressed to actually report their positions at the moment, let alone where they will be in 8-24 hours.

 

 

[Beleg85]

7 minutes ago, Seedorf81 said:

Elephant in the room?

 

If there is going to be a collapse of the Russian Army, be it only at Kherson or near Kypiansk or on a much bigger scale, I suspect that the chance that the Russians will resort to the use of a tactical nucleair weapon increases considerably.

Nobody wants that, I hope, but I have an ominous feeling that the Russians (Putin) won't swallow a massive rout easily. And somehow will retaliate.

What happens if a tactical nucleair is dropped?

- How big are those booms?

- Will one tactical nuke suffice?

- Is it very useful against a fluid Ukrainian Army?

- Will it make a real difference on the battlefield? (Not talking about politic repercussions or Nato retaliation).

The issue was discussed here not long ago. Putin would gamble with it too much. NATO would not stay idle and watch in that case.

 

Also nice thread about RU soldiers making photos...

 

Edited September 9, 2022 by Beleg85

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, billbindc said:

Having strong flashbacks to Croatia's 1995 Operation Storm...which is a thing I've been thinking about quite a bit for the last couple of months but superstitiously didn't mention. Not in the details, mind but in the essentials. 

Yeah, didn't think of that one.  I was more thinking about the last phase of the last phase of WW2 in Western Europe.  It went from "Fortress Germany" to "hey, Berchtesgaden is a nice place!" rather quickly compared to the years of fighting that came before it.

The speculation that Russia is further reducing it's forces in Izyum to stop what's going on north of it indicates that Russia is in a "death spiral".  The forces there have already been picked clean for the failed offensive in the Donbas and then to reinforce the failing bridgehead in Kherson.  All around Izyum is a Ukrainian force that has proven itself highly capable in this area and has NOT been stripped of forces.

If the Kharkiv offensive stalls out, or even hesitates, the Ukrainian forces around Izyum and the developments north of the Siverskyi Donets could easily solve the problem.  There is no way that Russia is strong enough to defend in all directions simultaneously, even with reserves coming from wherever they can find them.

Ukraine is undoubtedly getting ready to go onto the offensive around Izyum.  They are just waiting for the timing to be perfect.  So far, Ukraine's sense of timing is excellent so I don't have any doubts they'll attack at the right moment or, if the situation changes in some way, hold off indefinitely.

As my British friends might say, "Russia is properly fooked".

Steve

[dan/california]

7 hours ago, JonS said:

I understand what you're getting at, but maybe using 'genocide' in that specific context isn't your best play?

I also feel that stealing land from one country to give it to two others while evicting the legal occupants is probably not a great way to maintain the moral high ground or credibility.

 

Of course that how this inconvenient little problem came to be.

1 hour ago, riptides said:

China needs a strong west to allow for its own economic growth.

China plays the long game, they don't back losers.

 

 

A lot riding on whether Xi is actually smart, or has just had a good run of luck at the poker table. He can double down on a losing hand and do a great deal of damage. Or he can fold on a pair of deuces, and start wait to play a new hand. Hopefully he has at least found Putin's experience with flipping over the table and starting an ugly brawl instructive.

2 minutes ago, Seedorf81 said:

Elephant in the room?

 

If there is going to be a collapse of the Russian Army, be it only at Kherson or near Kypiansk or on a much bigger scale, I suspect that the chance that the Russians will resort to the use of a tactical nucleair weapon increases considerably.

Nobody wants that, I hope, but I have an ominous feeling that the Russians (Putin) won't swallow a massive rout easily. And somehow will retaliate.

What happens if a tactical nucleair is dropped?

- How big are those booms?

- Will one tactical nuke suffice?

- Is it very useful against a fluid Ukrainian Army?

- Will it make a real difference on the battlefield? (Not talking about politic repercussions or Nato retaliation).

 

 

It isn't like Russia has a CAA sitting around to take advantage. It would be bad for about 8 hours until the first wave of NATO cruise missiles hit the first 200 targets on a continuously updated list that lives on a computer at Ramstein. The the actual planes show up...

[Grigb]

18 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

Ukrainians trolling in high-quality CGI (yup, there are people believing in this...)

Curious which units they used in this counterattack. Local reserves from Izyum front did "about face" or some newly arrived.

They said 60 separate moto rifle brigade from Izum + some attach army units

[Battlefront.com]

53 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

The key thing is,, by that point it wouldnt need much,  and UKR would still be on interior lines,able to choose where to hit and achieve local superiority.  RUS panic would be assumptive, AO wide and contagious. 

Plus UKR could then stabilize one of their flank attacks (eg Kharkiv Izium) and reinforce the center. 

Heh... I didn't read your posts until after I wrote my previous one.  We're thinking about the same thing

What we're watching now is how fronts collapse.  Pressure is put on a couple of key points and that obligates the defender to think short term.  Plugging the holes becomes the overriding priority.  If the defender has sufficient resources available in reserve, then there's a chance the front can be stabilized on more-or-less favorable terms (think Germans on the Eastern front 1941-1943).  But if the gaps can't be plugged with reserves, then the only alternative is to take a risk and strip forces from the quieter sectors of the front because not doing so ensures defeat.  It's all about risk management.

To collapse a large front the attacker works in cycles to screw with the defender's calculations for what the risks are.  You DELIBERATELY keep sectors relatively quiet so the defender deludes himself that taking forces away is not as risky as it in fact is.  Then, when the units are stripped, the attacker puts pressure on the weakened spots which causes the defender to strip forces away from other quiet sectors which then allows the attacker easier means of applying pressure on those spots.

Eventually the defender runs out of spots to strip and the attacker runs out of new places to attack.  At that point it's a general offensive.  Whatever defensive points manage to hold out doesn't matter one bit unless the attacker lacks sufficient forces to keep them isolated/cutoff.  This is the difference between the "pocket battles" on the Eastern front in 1943 vs. the aftermath of Bagration.

In this war we are beginning to see systematic pressure by Ukraine to collapse the whole front.  Let me emphasize... THE WHOLE F'N FRONT.  This is no longer just Kherson and Kharkiv, not even just Izyum.  This is about everything. 

Predictions coming in next post.

Steve

[riptides]

20 minutes ago, dan/california said:

 

Twitter is saying "Ukraine has blown the bridge to Kupyansk"

Telegram has some Russians saying it too.

Edited September 9, 2022 by riptides

[kevinkin]

1 hour ago, riptides said:

China needs a strong west to allow for its own economic growth.

China plays the long game, they don't back losers.

- They have a unique way of showing it given its speedy military build up and cold relations with the US. "I need you until I don't". 

-  Cropsey does not account for or see Putin's potential downfall. China could care less and see Russia's vast landmass and resources regardless of the who ultimately is in charge after Putin. And with belt and road, China appears to be very happy bottom feeding. So while Russia flounders, they look for advantages. 

 

[Grigb]

Readovka Video from Kupyansk is not from Kupyansk.

Edited September 9, 2022 by Grigb

[Grigb]

5 minutes ago, riptides said:

Twitter is saying "Ukraine has blown the bridge to Kupyansk"

Telegram has some Russians saying it too.

UKR heavily damaged bridge inside Kupynsk. Supply of western part is difficult now.

[dan/california]

Allow me to take this opportunity to repeat the greatest quote of Von Runstedt's career " Make peace you fools", It was good advice then, and it is good advice now.

[Grigb]

RU - It is NATO generals that command the operation. NATO signature.

[Beleg85]

 

 

7 minutes ago, Grigb said:

RU - It is NATO generals that command the operation. NATO signature.

Ukrainians are cheating again.

 

UA sources say it was Lt.Gen. Sirsky who planned the operation, but we should wait as people are still in amoc.

Edited September 9, 2022 by Beleg85

[Grigb]

RU - UKR are fighting (mobile units bypassing settlements and avoiding small combat to reach objectives) according to USSR/RU doctrine.

[Huba]

Just now, Grigb said:

RU - UKR are fighting (mobile units bypassing settlements and avoiding small combat to reach objectives) according to USSR/RU doctrine.

8 minutes ago, Grigb said:

RU - It is NATO generals that command the operation. NATO signature.

NATO generals command UA forces according to USSR doctrine? 

[Beleg85]

1 minute ago, Huba said:

NATO generals command UA forces according to USSR doctrine? 

Sounds like Polish or Czech mercenaries.

[Grigb]

2 minutes ago, Huba said:

NATO generals command UA forces according to USSR doctrine? 

RU propaganda did not send yet the main memo.

[Grigb]

RU local soldier asking -  given Kupynsk bridge is blown up, to where RU reinforcements are arriving now?

[sburke]

1 minute ago, Grigb said:

RU local soldier asking -  given Kupynsk bridge is blown up, to where RU reinforcements are arriving now?

Hell I believe,

[Butschi]

1 hour ago, dan/california said:

It isn't like Russia has a CAA sitting around to take advantage. It would be bad for about 8 hours until the first wave of NATO cruise missiles hit the first 200 targets on a continuously updated list that lives on a computer at Ramstein. The the actual planes show up...

I read that or something similar quite a few times in this thread. Honest question: What makes you think that tactical nukes trigger a NATO intervention? I mean logically, not what you would like to see. Currently NATO does everything to prevent a) becoming directly involved in the war and b) nuclear war.

Let's ignore wether or not tactical nukes are in fact a realistical option. If the Russians start using them they have just shown that backed into a corner they are willing to escalate to nuclear. How would a NATO intervention not mean backing them into a corner even more? All out nuclear war suddenly becomes so much more realistic and all of a sudden, NATO is now directly involved and has a nuclear war - there very things they wanted to prevent all the time.

In addition: Tactical nukes on Ukrainian ground do not trigger article 5. So at best, it would be some NATO countries on their own but possibly now with a lot of trouble from the rest of the NATO members who never wanted to escalate beyond delivering weapons.

Edited September 9, 2022 by Butschi
Corrected atrocious grammar, typos, missing or double words...

[Grigb]

RU claim UKR advancing toward Krasny Liman (grain of salt)