How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[acrashb]

1 hour ago, Grigb said:

RU Nat forces around Lyman

For me, and likely others who are not 'tuned in', what is an RU Nat?

Google gives me this guy - nAts - VALORANT Esports Wiki (fandom.com) - who, while he may well have been press-ganged into being a drone operator, is not single-handedly holding back the UA at Lyman.

I thought the "RU Nat"s were a movement, political philosophy, loosely-affiliated birds-of-a-feather, but apparently they are much more than that.

Are they:

• their own thing, self-sufficient armed forces with it's own chain of command?  If so, who pays and arms them? What is their citizenship? How do they derive legitimacy and/or not get unwanted attention from the Russian security forces?
• a chunk of the Russian armed forces with command elements staffed - infiltrated? - by people sympathetic to RU Nats (whoever they are) goals?  Again, how do they avoid disappearances and balcony falls?
• a political party with its own armed forces?  That would be odd, and they don't show in this.

If the answer is lengthy and there is some internet reference, happy to have that and I'll read up.

 

31 minutes ago, DesertFox said:

They mean the other Kiev, you know? Not that Kiev...

They mean this Kiev:

[Cederic]

10 hours ago, Kinophile said:

 

While the instruction to 'Russian warship' caught the hearts and emotions of the world, I do think "I need ammunition, not a ride" may be the defining statement of this entire war.

It hit the heart, it hit the head, it showed self-sacrifice, it demonstrated belief and it made it very very clear that Ukraine weren't going to roll over and surrender.

[Huba]

Solovyov's program. Guest openly says, even highlights, that they are in fact at war. He argues that RU should recognize existence of Ukrainian nation and negotiate peace ( not give back "liberated" territories though). I'm speechless:

 

[danfrodo]

8 minutes ago, Huba said:

Solovyov's program. Guest openly says, even highlights, that they are in fact at war. He argues that RU should recognize existence of Ukrainian nation and negotiate peace ( not give back "liberated" territories though). I'm speechless:

 

1.  these kind of things can become a flood.  First it's some legislative councils in St Pete & Moscow.  Then it's people on TV telling the truth, totally freaking out the true believers and validating those that were already (quietly) opposed.  Most of the criticism is still on the commanders, not Putin, but some is now on Putin.  More tea leaves w the tea getting stronger.

2.  Advancing northward toward Lyman, et al, has to cross the awful river drainage terrain of swamps & forests that we saw when RU was trying to push thru these areas.  So no surprise it's slow.  And UKR might decide it's too costly.  We'll know within next few days if they can breakthrough.

3.  Kherson: I believe it's important to keep pushing to get this kessel to collapse ASAP.   UKR then has this entire front's forces to re-deploy.  And it's just a relatively short trip thru Zaporizhe to reach Melitipol axis.  Meanwhile RU's entire Kherson front gets redeployed to prison camps.  So net result is big new force advantage for UKR.

[kevinkin]

I understand why Crimea is hugely important to Russia, but what a tenuous position it would be. Just bottle it up with a large number of Russians and pop the boil at the time of your choosing. Not only the population would need to be provided for (even water), but the RA also. Imagine the siege of Crimea being on a Russian nightly news; do they have a the equivalent of a Ted Koppel? 

[CAZmaj]

7 hours ago, Bennie said:

Austria's insistence on sending teachers to Serbia is what started WWI.

What? Please kindly provide details?

[Huba]

8 minutes ago, kevinkin said:

I understand why Crimea is hugely important to Russia, but what a tenuous position it would be. Just bottle it up with a large number of Russians and pop the boil at the time of your choosing. Not only the population would need to be provided for (even water), but the RA also. Imagine the siege of Crimea being on a Russian nightly news; do they have a the equivalent of a Ted Koppel? 

Another Siege of Sevastopol, here we come! I also imagine push through Perekop being a mother of all artillery battles...

Edited September 13, 2022 by Huba

[Beleg85]

25 minutes ago, Huba said:

Solovyov's program. Guest openly says, even highlights, that they are in fact at war. He argues that RU should recognize existence of Ukrainian nation and negotiate peace ( not give back "liberated" territories though). I'm speechless:

 

Looks like blaming game, strawman of "fallen belief" or most probably litmus paper to measure public reactions. Also note that those programms often have "opponents" or Kremlin-certified liberals as side of discussion. They may rather want to release some pressure, this is not dumb Stalinist propaganda but "smarter" post-modern one .Too early to tell if this is some kind of wider trend.

Edited September 13, 2022 by Beleg85

[Fenris]

No idea about the context of this clip but obviously something else that will be lending some urgency to what UKR are doing at the moment

 

[Battlefront.com]

8 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

Looks like blaming game, strawman of "fallen belief" or most probably litmus paper to measure public reactions. Also note that those programms often have "opponents" or Kremlin-certified liberals as side of discussion. They may rather want to release some pressure.Too early to tell if this is some kind of wider trend.

There are guardrails on what the "opponents" say on these shows, but it seems they are widening.  You could not say "war", you could not even hint that Russia was being defeated, you definitely couldn't acknowledge that Ukraine exists.  Three things that this guy had no problems saying.

The problem with Putin's pressure relief system is that it's been allowing less relief and more pressure for some time now.  While it is impossible to say what exactly is going on, there seems to be a change and it definitely isn't something we saw earlier in the war.

Steve

[pavel.k]

46 minutes ago, Huba said:

Solovyov's program. Guest openly says, even highlights, that they are in fact at war. He argues that RU should recognize existence of Ukrainian nation and negotiate peace ( not give back "liberated" territories though). I'm speechless:

 

Millions of Russians just heard for the first time, that Ukraine can defeat them and it can lead to collapse of Russia Federation? It has to be a huge shock.

[danfrodo]

17 minutes ago, Fenris said:

No idea about the context of this clip but obviously something else that will be lending some urgency to what UKR are doing at the moment

 

I noticed in the latest videos that it's been raining.  This is a really bad omen.  Go from powder soil to impassable mud w just a little rain.

[Beleg85]

17 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

There are guardrails on what the "opponents" say on these shows, but it seems they are widening.  You could not say "war", you could not even hint that Russia was being defeated, you definitely couldn't acknowledge that Ukraine exists.  Three things that this guy had no problems saying.

The problem with Putin's pressure relief system is that it's been allowing less relief and more pressure for some time now.  While it is impossible to say what exactly is going on, there seems to be a change and it definitely isn't something we saw earlier in the war.

Steve

Yup, a lot of it is true. If we see more of this, it would look like they could return to pre-war toxicity levels. Note that they switched on their true warmongering mode very late, barely 2-3 days before invasion began, to the point it actually deceived Western analytics. We also had "bloopers" in them earlier, like Russian military who barely hold his tears of comrades fallen at war or M.Khodarionk (still common guest) who happened to tell the truth about sorrow state of Russian preparedness. Such things happens from time to time.

Even if it will become a common trend now, it still does not necessarly tell us that Kremlin wants withdrawal. They may simply change propaganda strategy. Or set stage for new pro-mobilization and anti-mobilization "debate" (in Russian sense, i.e. probing population reactions to both).

Hard to say now, if within a week we will see more of those narratives then we may be fairly sure Kremlin is upto something new.

Edited September 13, 2022 by Beleg85

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, acrashb said:

For me, and likely others who are not 'tuned in', what is an RU Nat?

Google gives me this guy - nAts - VALORANT Esports Wiki (fandom.com) - who, while he may well have been press-ganged into being a drone operator, is not single-handedly holding back the UA at Lyman.

I thought the "RU Nat"s were a movement, political philosophy, loosely-affiliated birds-of-a-feather, but apparently they are much more than that.

Are they:

• their own thing, self-sufficient armed forces with it's own chain of command?  If so, who pays and arms them? What is their citizenship? How do they derive legitimacy and/or not get unwanted attention from the Russian security forces?
• a chunk of the Russian armed forces with command elements staffed - infiltrated? - by people sympathetic to RU Nats (whoever they are) goals?  Again, how do they avoid disappearances and balcony falls?
• a political party with its own armed forces?  That would be odd, and they don't show in this.

If the answer is lengthy and there is some internet reference, happy to have that and I'll read up.

 

They mean this Kiev:

RU Nat is a catchall for Russian who wake up, go about their business, and return to bed with nationalism foremost in their thoughts.  They are fanatics who have a highly distorted sense of entitlement and greatness that is all out of proportion to reality. 

Ever seen comments on YouTube about how the latest bit of metal stuck to a T-90 means the Abrams is obsolete?  That's an RU Nat.  Ever seen someone say that after Russia is finished with Ukraine it's on to Poland next?  That's a RU Nat.  How about those lovely people that think the West should be nuked because they dare to interfere with Russia's divine right to rule over whomever it pleases?  RU Nat.

While they come in various degrees of sanity, the common element is that they believe Russia is superior and (most importantly) deserves to be so.  Everything that challenges that belief is viewed as a lie, incorrect, or not relevant.  Critical thought is not a RU Nat's strong suit, that's for sure

Milder forms of this exist within Russian society, largely driven by long term conditioning by autocratic governance, propaganda, and normal Human shortcomings.  The milder ones might think NATO is a threat, but they also love visiting New York City or London.  The more mild they are, the more contradictions you'll find.  The more hardcore they are, the less.

Who are they in terms of power?  I touched on this a bunch of pages ago.  They are, like any movement, spread out all over Russian society.  Because of their loyalty to Putin and to Russia's greatness, they are likely represented within Russian state institutions to a greater degree than they are outside of it.  A RU Nat might repair your car in Moscow or be an officer in the FSB, but there's probably a higher percentage of fanatical RU Nats within the FSB than in car repair shops.  If true, then then hardcore RU Nats are over represented in positions of power and under represented within the populace as a whole.

As with any ideological group there are factions.  The "Guardians" are those who are loyal to Putin first, Russia second.  What I call the "Ultra Nationalists" are the ones who put Russia first, Putin second.  For a long time both factions felt they were getting what they wanted out of Putin, but for the Ultra Nats that's been on the decline for many years.  2014 planted a lot of seeds that did not sprout.  They were bitter about that going into this war and were elated when Putin acted.  Now they see him screwing everything up so that's likely putting strain on factions.

What I have seen happening for a long time is the Ultra Nats pushing to oust Putin.  If they are successful the Guardians will likely say "hey, we were with you the whole time" and, on the whole, unite like they were before.  Because neither faction wants to see Russia defeated, even if they don't agree on the details.  Both will support full mobilization and martial law as they will exempt themselves from the immediate consequences.  Hey, privileges of power!

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

8 minutes ago, pavel.k said:

Millions of Russians just heard for the first time, that Ukraine can defeat them and it can lead to collapse of Russia Federation? It has to be a huge shock.

Add to that something else.

“For us, this defeat may prove fatal.  We need to understands this to because it might lead to the defeat of the country.”

Something we've talked a lot about here, with quite a lot of pushback against that happening.  But it seems this guy, at least, believes it is quite possible.

Steve

[chuckdyke]

Russian Newsreader: By masterly strategically regrouping our forces Russia guarantees supply to our forces in the field. The pathetic pursuit by undisciplined looting Ukranian forces is proven to be futile. 

[Battlefront.com]

This thread is worth a read (commentary in English).  Ukraine has a bunch of paperwork to sift through in the captured areas, but one interesting find has already been made.  Letters written by officers serving in Izyum asking to be released from their military contracts and sent home.  They were all dated August 30th, I think.  They knew the real strength of their positions was terrible:

 

[Battlefront.com]

Another media clip.  Guy we saw the other day breaking with the normal blather is once again at it.  In this clip he argues that it is not clear that Russia has the equipment available to create a larger army.

Russia most likely had the basics for doubling the size of their field army prior to the start of the war.  It would have likely consumed all that they had, and some would be issued horribly outdated stuff, but based on what they've replaced so far I think it's possible.  Now?  Definitely not.  They'd struggle to equip a large amount of light infantry.  Not to mention find anybody to train or lead them into battle.

Steve

[billbindc]

7 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Another media clip.  Guy we saw the other day breaking with the normal blather is once again at it.  In this clip he argues that it is not clear that Russia has the equipment available to create a larger army.

Russia most likely had the basics for doubling the size of their field army prior to the start of the war.  It would have likely consumed all that they had, and some would be issued horribly outdated stuff, but based on what they've replaced so far I think it's possible.  Now?  Definitely not.  They'd struggle to equip a large amount of light infantry.  Not to mention find anybody to train or lead them into battle.

Steve

Normally in the clips you see of Russian tv propagandists, you hear lots garbled buzzwords (the classic "we will take both *tactical* and *strategic* measures to solve the problem of Nazi Azov forces") that are designed to make the speaker sound like Zhukov without saying anything practical about the war. Which made sense because any practical statements would have run afoul of Kremlin dictates. This is a bigger sea change than calling it a war or saying they are losing. He's specifically and in plain words explaining why mobilization won't work. He's bluntly saying Russia may be too weak to win. 

If he's still on tv tomorrow or the next day, we'll know the Kremlin is losing some grip. If not, I hope he enjoys cold winters.

[Battlefront.com]

Someone asked if there was an animation about the Kharkiv offensive.  Here's one that's about 2 days out of date, but it's the only one I know of.  The author keeps updating it.  Haiduk says there's some problems with it, but at the very least it gives a sense of how the front changed over time:

 

[Battlefront.com]

3 minutes ago, billbindc said:

Normally in the clips you see of Russian tv propagandists, you hear lots garbled buzzwords (the classic "we will take both *tactical* and *strategic* measures to solve the problem of Nazi Azov forces") that are designed to make the speaker sound like Zhukov without saying anything practical about the war. Which made sense because any practical statements would have run afoul of Kremlin dictates. This is a bigger sea change than calling it a war or saying they are losing. He's specifically and in plain words explaining why mobilization won't work. He's bluntly saying Russia may be too weak to win. 

If he's still on tv tomorrow or the next day, we'll know the Kremlin is losing some grip. If not, I hope he enjoys cold winters.

Damn!  I had sub-consciously noticed the lack of Regime "key words", but hadn't thought about it specifically!  The guys we just saw clips of are still careful to say things that show they are loyal and not looking for leadership change (even Shoigu), but these guys at least aren't spouting off the usual BS.  I'm curious what the rebuttals sounded like.  That would be interesting to see, but they aren't in these clips.  Night have been plenty of references to Nazis and what not.

Steve

[Beleg85]

15 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Someone asked if there was an animation about the Kharkiv offensive.  Here's one that's about 2 days out of date, but it's the only one I know of.  The author keeps updating it.  Haiduk says there's some problems with it, but at the very least it gives a sense of how the front changed over time:

Yes he is Polish account (he is open to change this video if wrong, though, so if somebody has better info you can send him). There was discussion as to crucial question of what "elements" of a brigade actually means in context of this offensive. Most of our analytics seem to operate with nice full pre-war brigades templates, usually flying over the facts that:

1. they absorbed ****load of different auxiliary subunits.

2.elements of one brigade can fight in different places at once.

There are of course problems with various wartime units, like International Legion which seems to operate in small detachments on different fronts. Or specops who are everywhere.

 

Good thread by Schlottman about Russian lossess. Hard to say for 100%, but they were not so casualty-fruitfull as we would like them probably (I frankly silently counted for several thousands of POW's  who would add to Ukrainian "exchange fund").

 

Edited September 14, 2022 by Beleg85

[Vic4]

@Battlefront.com et al..

How viable is the retaking of Mariupol now?

If the UA could pull it off:

- politcal coup de gras for Putin? 

- tremendous symbolic & strategic victory for UKR = utter humiliation for RU and Nat meltdown material 

- cuts the "land bridge" decisively

Thoughts? Appreciated...

[Artkin]

Marioupol is faaar. I imagine that will be one of the last places to be reclaimed, given it's nearly right on top of the Russian border, and it's already pretty beat up, and is probably little importance besides being a major population center

[billbindc]

Someone is organizing this: https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/russia-ukraine-war-news-09-13-22/h_b439762c2fb1cc0a92457f4214601e58