How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[sburke]

2 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

MMmm I can read German and this is what he said. : At best, he sees “counterattacks that can be used to win back locations or individual sections of the front, but not to push back Russia on a broad front”. Even the approaching winter will “not reduce the suffering – on the contrary”. The Ukrainian army acts "wisely, rarely offers a broadside and conducts operations confidently and very flexibly".
 

 

 

I can read BS and he's definitely speaking it.

[Elmar Bijlsma]

"They need a numerical superiority of at least 3 to 1."

 

Yes. Locally, you dumb arse. Even a certain corporal had better military sense then this uni(n)formed clown.

 

 

[FancyCat]

Long thread, but it basically boils down to lying at every level of the Armed Forces, such that the picture is so distorted by the time it gets to Putin, it is not reality whatsoever. It is so distorted, that any action, whether it be artillery fire, air support, a push by infantry or armor, anything whatsoever, is marred by lying, and so despite it being reported a successful strike opened the war for a advance, the infantry and armor that move out get a boatload of lead and retreat, except the commander reported his units are intact, succeeded and have more fighting strength than true so then a supporting attack goes underway with the same poor result....

There is a real possibility the Russian General Staff supposed their Izyum and Kharkiv front was perfectly manned, when in reality, everyone was just lying and covering their own behind. 

 

 

Edited September 15, 2022 by FancyCat

[chuckdyke]

20 minutes ago, sburke said:

I can read BS and he's definitely speaking it.

The truth is Ukraine can't pursue the Russian army inside Russia. What I understand Kherson to Kharkiv are three parts where the counter offensive took place and near Kharkiv the Russian army was routed. He basically agrees with the Ukrainian strategy. Sorry I can't disagree with him. We all like to see the Russian get their *sses kicked and they suffered a major defeat but not yet a total defeat. Even near Kharkiv Russia on their side of the border can plan a counter strike. Like the Germans did in the winter of 1944. Zelensky likes to get Leo 2 Germany itself got only 2000 operational. I don't know how easy it is to train T72 crewmen for the Leo 2 standard. At best they could supply Ukraine with 500 Leo 2. They would need them to take Kherson as the terrain is open tank country.

Edited September 15, 2022 by chuckdyke

[FancyCat]

3 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

The truth is Ukraine can't pursue the Russian army inside Russia. What I understand Kherson to Kharkiv are three parts where the counter offensive took place and near Kharkiv the Russian army was routed. He basically agrees with the Ukrainian strategy. Sorry I can't disagree with him. We all like to see the Russian get their *sses kicked and they suffered a major defeat but not yet a total defeat. Even near Kharkiv Russia on their side of the border can plan a counter strike. Like the Germans did in the winter of 1944. Zelensky likes to get Leo 2 Germany itself got only 2000 operational. I don't know how easy it is to train T72 crewmen for the Leo 2 standard. At best they could supply Ukraine with 500 Leo 2. They would need them to take Kherson as the terrain is open tank country.

I'm not sure what your getting at, but Kherson and Kharkiv can be classified as fronts, and the advances made in Kharkiv certainly qualify for broad front movement, pending on whether Kherson verifies, broad movement taking place there as well.

Movement on a broad front certainly does not mean total defeat either. 

[chuckdyke]

10 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

Kharkiv certainly qualify for broad front movement,

Really? It was something like a succesfull Market Garden. A Broad Front is success from Kherson till Kharkiv in this context you must read the German's analysis. The German attack on the Soviet Union it was North Leningrad, Centre Moscow and South Kiev. They were three German fronts along all of the Soviet border. All of the Ukraine was one front which gets divided again in theatres. Here was a German General communicating to accuse him of taking sides with the Russians is down right ridiculous.

Edited September 15, 2022 by chuckdyke

[danfrodo]

I saw some excellent RU nat propaganda yesterday and today.  It's amazing.  I'll sum it up by saying it would be similar to Goebels saying this:

"We now have two russian armies trapped with their backs to the Oder after having crossed the river and fallen into our long planned trap!"

[sburke]

13 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

Really? It was something like a succesfull Market Garden. A Broad Front is success from Kherson till Kharkiv in this context you must read the German's analysis. The German attack on the Soviet Union it was North Leningrad, Centre Moscow and South Kiev. They were three German fronts along all of the Soviet border. All of the Ukraine was one front which gets divided again in theatres. Here was a German General communicating to accuse him of taking sides with the Russians is down right ridiculous.

actually if you really want to split hairs and play semantics there was an eastern front and a western front so only the complete defeat of an enemy along the entire contiguous conflict zone would qualify.  Either way the guy is just wrong and trying to make his poorly predicting butthurt self feel better.

This isn't WW2, trying to use that war to bolster a flawed argument isn't gonna work.

and who says the UA can't cross that border?  This is a war.  If Russia launches assaults at the border you can be pretty darn sure UA won't feel particularly afraid of doing what it has to do.  They've already made clear they will counter use of Russian arty firing across the border.  This isn't 2014.

Edited September 15, 2022 by sburke

[chuckdyke]

He sees the region from Kherson to Kharkiv as one and the Ukraine was succesful in one area. These are simple facts. I advise anybody to take up LOTE (Language Other Than English) in this case German and make up your own mind. I honestly can't read anything wrong of what he said. 

[chuckdyke]

Ich bin mit den Begriffen vorsichtig. This means he is careful with the definition. (counter-offensive) Quoting something out of context is dangerous. 

[sburke]

16 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

He sees the region from Kherson to Kharkiv as one and the Ukraine was succesful in one area. These are simple facts. I advise anybody to take up LOTE (Language Other Than English) in this case German and make up your own mind. I honestly can't read anything wrong of what he said. 

That there is the problem.  He's defined the area to fit his view.  It's called bias.. or just BS when you define things to conform to your own flawed view.  Why are you defending a guy that.. well let's quote the post this came from
 

Quote

At least he admits that he was completely wrong as recently as two weeks ago when he thought that whole Donbas would be in Russian hands within 6 months

Geez man why is anyone even listening to him anymore?

[sburke]

an alternate view of the implications of Ukraine's counter offensive

Ukraine Is Fast Becoming Putin's Waterloo | Opinion (msn.com)

 

Quote

Although it is early to assess the scope of the rout that has been described in many news reports over the past weekend, it makes clear that the Ukrainian army is superior in leadership tactics and morale to the Russian army. With continuing supplies from the West—primarily the United States—the Ukrainians can drive the Russians out of their country.
There is absolutely no chance for a negotiated settlement. The atrocities committed by the Russians in their few months of occupation—including the wanton destruction of schools, homes, and cities—makes a negotiated settlement with the Ukraine impossible. Just as the Allies in World War II could seek nothing but unconditional surrender from Germany and Japan, the Ukrainians cannot accept anything from the Russians except the unconditional surrender of all their claims to Ukraine.

 

Edited September 15, 2022 by sburke

[The_Capt]

So a bit of a semantics argument really:

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter-offensive
 

This is debating technicalities really - strategic vs operational.  I would argue the good general is being too narrow in his definition - not sure why but could be simply German doctrine.

When talking scale and context Kharkiv and Kherson are each operational counter-offensives; however when take together, they sum to strategic.  The strategic objective appears to collapse the RA back to 2014 lines before the weather turns.

It also has another strategic military objective, directly supporting political - demonstration that the UA is capable of seizing the strategic initiative and conducting successful complex operational offensives.

So of one is extremely narrow, then technically Kharkiv on its own is not a strategic counter-offensive; however when taken with everything else going on it easily meets the current doctrinal definitions.

Edited September 15, 2022 by The_Capt

[sburke]

Former Soviet states eye opportunities as Russia suffers Ukraine rout (msn.com)

[Battlefront.com]

13 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

This is debating technicalities really - strategic vs operational.  I would argue the good general is being too narrow in his definition - not sure why but could be simply German doctrine.

I had the same impression, with a slightly different spin.

There is a school of thought out there that we shouldn't be congratulating Ukraine for winning the war until it has shown that it can end the war.  The BW General is, in a way, saying "that's nice that you kicked the attacker in the balls and then broke his nose, but let's not get carried away with the congratulations because he's still there raping your kids".

I don't agree with this mentality, BTW, but I don't think it is necessarily wrong.  I've seen it quite frequently and there is a legitimate point to be made, however context is important and this mentality lacks context.

The fact is that very few, including this specific BW General, thought that Ukraine would do anything more than get run over.  The fact that it could hold the Russians to just a few KMs of gain for months and then BOOM... take back almost 25% of what the Russians took since the war started AND did it in a couple of days AND while conducing a second offensive... well, I think that is praise worthy for any country, especially one that wasn't expected to survive a week.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

4 hours ago, acrashb said:

Steve, thanks.  That was both comprehensive and colourful.

Thanks!  I'm gratified to see that I got the Grigb stamp of approval on that summary.  This thread is a great teaching tool and I'm learning a lot from the input of others, either through discussion or by recommended links to check out.

4 hours ago, acrashb said:

So when Grigb says "RU Nat forces around Lyman" I'll take that to mean elements of the RA that have volunteered, rather than been drafted, and are aligned with the RU Nat commentators we've been hearing from.  One assumes the elements can cluster by asking for transfers to parts of the RA aligned with their views.

For the most part when speaking of RU Nats at the frontlines he's talking about DLPR forces (i.e. "separatists").  They might be Ukrainians by and large, but they believe themselves to be part of Russia and are nationalists, hence RU Nats.  Though they do have some unique qualities which can be thought of as a "faction" within the broader RU Nat community.

On top of this there are Russian citizens who have fought in the Donbas or aided the fighting.  Those guys are, for the most part, RU Nats.

Separate from this are Russian citizens who have volunteered for duty in Ukraine as part of either Russian government organized fighting battalions or signed up for a PMC.  These guys are LIKELY in it for a combination of ideology and money, not just one or the other.  So again, RU Nats with their own factional considerations.

4 hours ago, acrashb said:

Strikes me as an internal fifth column, and the most likely contender for post-Putin leadership.  Because they appear to be more organized than the opposition, and that is how you win.  See any number of states in turmoil - or see Lenin.

This is the thinking of some, including a number of our posters here (me included).  However, it's really unknown how much direct impact they can have on the Putin regime.  Some (me included) think that they are in too many positions of power, in particular "middle management", to not be a threat to Putin.  However, they are also likely lacking strong representation within the masses.  If they take over it is not assured the people will be pleased with the outcome.  They weren't in 1991 when Soviet "hardliners" tried a power grab.

4 hours ago, acrashb said:

And on the Russia surviving pool:

As defined by Russia still having an ISO-3166 country code, I'm in the Russia will still be around in ten years camp.  I think it will be greatly diminished, a rump state; the CSTO will be gone or exist only on paper; current restive regions with physical distance from Moscow (leading to command and control issues - shipping and supporting troops to quell disturbances or goods and services to placate a populace and their power brokers becomes expense across distance) will be gone and China encroaching on the areas with ethnic Chinese (Han?) majorities.  I don't think it will devolve into warlord regions, there appear to be power structures in waiting to prevent that.

If you disagree and I'm wrong, look me up in ten years and I'll buy you a beer  or sumfink.

You have just described what we're calling "breakup", so you need to pick a date when European Russia becomes a "rump state" in order to play the game

I don't think anybody here, or anybody that I've read or heard from, believes that the Russian Federation will become as small as the Independent Republic or Russia (i.e. a different ISO country code).  I certainly don't think so.  Most administrative units will likely want to stick with the current arrangement, even if modified to their advantage, because it makes a lot of sense to.  Other areas, however, will not see it that way and will go for independence.

Steve

[FancyCat]

11 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

I had the same impression, with a slightly different spin.

There is a school of thought out there that we shouldn't be congratulating Ukraine for winning the war until it has shown that it can end the war.  The BW General is, in a way, saying "that's nice that you kicked the attacker in the balls and then broke his nose, but let's not get carried away with the congratulations because he's still there raping your kids".

I don't agree with this mentality, BTW, but I don't think it is necessarily wrong.  I've seen it quite frequently and there is a legitimate point to be made, however context is important and this mentality lacks context.

The fact is that very few, including this specific BW General, thought that Ukraine would do anything more than get run over.  The fact that it could hold the Russians to just a few KMs of gain for months and then BOOM... take back almost 25% of what the Russians took since the war started AND did it in a couple of days AND while conducing a second offensive... well, I think that is praise worthy for any country, especially one that wasn't expected to survive a week.

Steve

There is a notable context to his remarks as well, and I find it wrong precisely because it is being used to stop aid to Ukraine, as the article notes, the entire context of this is him defending the lack of further weapons to Ukraine, justifying it as "Germany needs to uphold its NATO and EU defense obligations when Russia looks at Europe again" and "Ukraine's ability to end the war militarily is impossible", in that sense, his underplaying of the Kharkiv and Kherson offensives, his overplaying of Russian ability to open additional fronts are just excuses to provide political cover to those in Germany reluctant to anger Putin and wishing to conduct rapprochement sooner. 

This is the main theater of war, Ukraine, not Poland or the Baltics or Finland, smash Russia by providing Ukraine with weapons and NATO and the EU are safe in the future. Allow Ukraine to militarily win the war and you prevent a grinding, long term conflict that turns Ukraine into a basketcase for Europe to hold.

This is just bull**** designed to let Ukraine falter, Germany to loudly decry the stalemate and call for Minsk III and then the gas can flow again. 

 

[Battlefront.com]

23 minutes ago, sburke said:

Former Soviet states eye opportunities as Russia suffers Ukraine rout (msn.com)

Yeah, who didn't see that coming in the first week of the war?  I know I wasn't the only one to point this out here, that's for sure.  In fact, Azerbaijan already "tested the waters" pretty early just after Russia withdrew many of its peacekeepers for duty in Ukraine.  Quick check... March 24th Azerbaijan entered the village of Farukh and Russian's interceded on behalf of Armenia.  They claimed they had an agreement for the withdrawal, then said Azerbaijan withdrew.  This was an outright lie and Azerbaijan said so and is, apparently, still in the village.  So much for Russia having the ability to control the situation!

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

8 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

There is a notable context to his remarks as well, and I find it wrong precisely because it is being used to stop aid to Ukraine, as the article notes, the entire context of this is him defending the lack of further weapons to Ukraine, justifying it as "Germany needs to uphold its NATO and EU defense obligations when Russia looks at Europe again" and "Ukraine's ability to end the war militarily is impossible", in that sense, his underplaying of the Kharkiv and Kherson offensives, his overplaying of Russian ability to open additional fronts are just excuses to provide political cover to those in Germany reluctant to anger Putin and wishing to conduct rapprochement sooner. 

This is the main theater of war, Ukraine, not Poland or the Baltics or Finland, smash Russia by providing Ukraine with weapons and NATO and the EU are safe in the future. Allow Ukraine to militarily win the war and you prevent a grinding, long term conflict that turns Ukraine into a basketcase for Europe to hold.

This is just bull**** designed to let Ukraine falter, Germany to loudly decry the stalemate and call for Minsk III and then the gas can flow again. 

 

Yes, that is the fairly obvious intent to people who have been following the German political debacle over how to handle the end of Ostpolitik.  It's the latest version of "we shouldn't help Ukraine because Russia is too strong" argument.  In the German context, it is a thin excuse to do nothing.

Steve

[sross112]

33 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

I had the same impression, with a slightly different spin.

There is a school of thought out there that we shouldn't be congratulating Ukraine for winning the war until it has shown that it can end the war.  The BW General is, in a way, saying "that's nice that you kicked the attacker in the balls and then broke his nose, but let's not get carried away with the congratulations because he's still there raping your kids".

I don't agree with this mentality, BTW, but I don't think it is necessarily wrong.  I've seen it quite frequently and there is a legitimate point to be made, however context is important and this mentality lacks context.

The fact is that very few, including this specific BW General, thought that Ukraine would do anything more than get run over.  The fact that it could hold the Russians to just a few KMs of gain for months and then BOOM... take back almost 25% of what the Russians took since the war started AND did it in a couple of days AND while conducing a second offensive... well, I think that is praise worthy for any country, especially one that wasn't expected to survive a week.

Steve

I think that might be a bit of an exaggerated estimate. The figures I've seen have the total area occupied by the RA as around 116,000 square km and the UA gain during this offensive of about 6,000 square km. That is an occupation area the size of Ohio and a liberation size comparable to Delaware (or 3 moderately sized midwest counties). On the map it looks bigger but most of time the map is zoomed in when showing results.

Now not taking away from their success and I wish them a bunch more, but reality is it isn't really that big in terms of area. They will need 3-4 more offensives of this size just to secure the rest of Luhansk Oblast. Unless they aren't done yet, pass through reserves and continue their push for more. We'll have to wait and see.  

Where I think he really misses the true success of this offensive is in the destruction of the 1st Guards Tank Army. Granted we don't know the full extent yet but from the video after video of destroyed and captured equipment in bunches I think it is safe to assume they have taken a serious whoopin'. For him not to acknowledge the importance of that, which I believe will be very big for letting Ukraine continue to push or push again after a pause, is puzzling considering he occupies the position that he does. To me it shows more of a statement to support the German political stance more than any sort of military analysis of the situation.

[FancyCat]

Put it another way, if he acknowledges Ukraine can conduct broad offensives, he must then acknowledge Ukraine has the ability to militarily defeat Russia and end the war, he must then answer why isn't Germany providing more to allow that scenario to occur. Now, every NATO state has unofficially sorta adopted the same line, the question is...why and who is pushing it to remain?

I mean lets be honest, some states are more eager than others in actions and rhetoric. Germany and Scholz absolutely screwed themselves with their statements and PR despite all NATO states adopting the same stance, therefore, Ukrainian demands will hit the weakest point to bend NATO to meet them, that is Germany. USA, HIMARS, France, even the Caesars were enough for Macron to escape most of the rhetoric, Scholz has been too mealy-mouthed and his governing coalition partners are very keen to trip him more and gain. 

Now this extends to all NATO major countries, but again, Germany is the weakest link, also is for better or for worse, the most associated with Russian rapprochement. German defense companies have been exceedingly aware of Scholz's weakness and have leaked plans for providing aid to Ukraine (whatever their unfeasibility) to his loss of public image and their gain. You don't see this elsewhere. And admittedly, there is a lot to be said about the inability to pledge or promise them upon refit to Ukraine, the Leopards 1, the Marder IFVs, despite the defense companies leaking the plans.

[sburke]

3 minutes ago, sross112 said:

Where I think he really misses the true success of this offensive is in the destruction of the 1st Guards Tank Army. Granted we don't know the full extent yet but from the video after video of destroyed and captured equipment in bunches I think it is safe to assume they have taken a serious whoopin'. 

This

As Steve has been saying for 7 months now.  The UA doesn't need ground, they need to kill Russians.  In this case they got a bit of ground too. but mainly they savaged a portion of the Russian army.

[sburke]

Russian oil output will crater by 1.9 million barrels a day after fresh EU sanctions kick in, IEA says (msn.com)

[Dragon Coder]

Could Germany just want to stay out of the crosshairs as the war grows more desperate for Russia?  What are realistic endgames for Putin? I don't see them losing the rest of their occupied territory and just being like "Shucks, we tried, good job Ukraine, you win."  
 

Edited September 15, 2022 by Dragon Coder

[sburke]

$780?  Geez really whooped him into shape.

 

Russia Takes Action Against Official Who Demanded Putin's Resignation (msn.com)

Quote

 

A Russian politician who was part of a group that appealed to the country's parliament last week to remove President Vladimir Putin from power on a charge of high treason, has been fined for "discrediting" the Russian government.
Dmitry Palyuga, a municipal deputy for Smolninskoe in St. Petersburg, was fined 47,000 rubles ($780), days after he and other members were accused of committing actions aimed at discrediting the Kremlin.

He announced the news on Twitter, adding that he intends to appeal the decision to fine him.

Four more members of the Smolninskoe local council are set to make court appearances this week. In total, seven members signed the appeal.