How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[FancyCat]

 

 

[Battlefront.com]

24 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Was it even getting into harm's way? Visiting Kyiv is pretty low risk.

Even if Putin knew the exact location, he would find it very difficult to strike at Biden there. Too much AA, not enough missiles. Visiting Bakhmut would be a different thing.

Also, Putin would gain absolutely nothing by killing Biden. Quite the opposite.

You are missing the point about this being about Russian public perception, not reality.  Russians are told that Ukraine is under Russian domination, that fear pervades.  The capital of the enemy is constantly being struck by mighty Russian missiles.  Everybody, in fact, fears the great Russian bear!  Oh, and victory is near at hand!

Oops... but then again, Biden is seen strolling along in Kyiv with nothing more than sunglasses for protection.

The contrast between the characterization in Russian media and Kremlin statements doesn't really line up with the video feed coming out of Kyiv.  And that is problematic for the Kremlin.

Aside from that, US Presidents do not generally visit war zones.  I'm also wracking my brain to think of the last time a US President visited a war zone that was not being run by the US military.  I'm sure this isn't the first instance, but off the top of my head I can't think of another one.  I doubt the Russian people aren't conscious of this fact, however subconsciously their brains might register how unusual this is and add that to the mix.

Steve

[billbindc]

49 minutes ago, kevinkin said:

God forbid if we are voting on funding this war in November of 2024. What will be left of Ukraine at that point? Better if the US and Ukraine kick Russia out and the fighting stops on the west's terms now. An ongoing war is only a winner for some:

https://www.grid.news/story/global/2023/02/20/the-unexpected-winners-of-the-war-in-ukraine-the-people-companies-and-countries-that-have-benefited-from-the-turmoil/

I can see voting on reconstruction support, but the war itself better be over. The administration will look pretty impotent after the POTUS's visit. The war would be a messy issue in 2024 and don't think any side would come out a clear winner in American politics. Dems = "not enough money" Reps = "it's and debt, stupid". Same old same old. 

We will be voting on funding this war...or it's near aftermath...in November of 2024 and it will correctly be defined as the most important decision we have made as a global power since the early Cold War. Ukraine will be on the ballot and it's quite likely to be the decisive factor. 

[Ultradave]

7 minutes ago, billbindc said:

We will be voting on funding this war...or it's near aftermath...in November of 2024 and it will correctly be defined as the most important decision we have made as a global power since the early Cold War. Ukraine will be on the ballot and it's quite likely to be the decisive factor. 

The only positive of this is that while there is a vocal "anti" minority in the House, the Senate seems to be in bi-partisan agreement that aide must continue.

Dave

[billbindc]

28 minutes ago, Ultradave said:

The only positive of this is that while there is a vocal "anti" minority in the House, the Senate seems to be in bi-partisan agreement that aide must continue.

Dave

The two most likely GOP nominees right now have both come out as something between skeptical to outright hostile to supporting Ukraine in this war while their majority of their voters and those that represent the GOP in Congress are supportive. It's obviously exploitable fault line that Biden's campaign is already mining.

[Hister]

How likely is that war on Ukrainian land ends this year? Am I too eager if I say until autumn?

Is it even possible for Putain to be owerhrown/killed/moved into a nice datcha and away from power the way he has structured his state machine where nobody has enough power to be able to do anything against him and where each player is played against the other by Putin? I would imagine losing Crimea could trigger the highest chance for that to happen, but ... - what do you guys think? Who has the highest chance to off him, which clan? Will it be military coup, a popular uprising, a silent poisoning, or a silent removal? 

How likely it is Ukraine besides Crimea goes also after Luhansk and Donetsk? 

I am positive these questions have been discussed ad nauseum here already so I apologise but I have since the last month and a half not had the time/energy to follow the posts. 

[kevinkin]

2 minutes ago, billbindc said:

The two most likely GOP nominees right now have both come out as something between skeptical to outright hostile to supporting Ukraine in this war while their majority of their voters and those that represent the GOP in Congress are supportive. It's obviously exploitable fault line that Biden's campaign is already mining.

Both sides will put a wet finger to the wind and see how it's blowing in the Spring of 2024. This issue is like sailing: when one boat tacks, so does the other. That way they nullify each other and try to make the race over whatever national issues are hot at the time. Arguing over the amount of money for Ukraine will not drive people to the polls. All bets are off if US troops are on the ground. Then Americans might take notice and figure out where on earth the Ukraine actually is. What a potential candidate says so far out is just noise given how fickle they can be.   

[dan/california]

3 hours ago, Der Zeitgeist said:

I see his framing like this:

Stablizing Russia's economy and society as a nation in perpetual war and finding a new normalcy in its self-inflicted autarky. In a way, it's a similar approach to the "Juche"-Ideology of North Korea.

Overall, still playing for time and hoping that the West gives up first.

Putin's entire strategy at this point comes down lasting until the U.S. election in 2024

41 minutes ago, billbindc said:

We will be voting on funding this war...or it's near aftermath...in November of 2024 and it will correctly be defined as the most important decision we have made as a global power since the early Cold War. Ukraine will be on the ballot and it's quite likely to be the decisive factor. 

Putin's only meaningful chance to salvage even a little of what he wants out of this war is this.

32 minutes ago, Ultradave said:

The only positive of this is that while there is a vocal "anti" minority in the House, the Senate seems to be in bi-partisan agreement that aide must continue.

Dave

And since the adults in the room seem aware of this...

2 minutes ago, billbindc said:

The two most likely GOP nominees right now have both come out as something between skeptical to outright hostile to supporting Ukraine in this war while their majority of their voters and those that represent the GOP in Congress are supportive. It's obviously exploitable fault line that Biden's campaign is already mining.

So Putin is betting on the children's' table. The FSB, and it Chinese equivalent, are going to do their absolute utmost to drag the isolationist wing of MAGA over the finish line. DeSantis just outright said he would abandon Ukraine, and implied he was quite willing to throw Taiwan over the side. I don't know how else to interpret his remark about "Not worth irritating the Chinese". The stakes in the election couldn't be any plainer.

Biden clearly understands this in theory, i just can't figure out why he is still bleeping around with things like ATACMS, and DPICM. He just bet the farm on winning in Ukraine, that means putting the Kerch bridge in the water, and simply killing more mobiks than Russian morale can stand. M26 rockets deleting grid square after grid square would move that right along. Every bit of Ukraine that has been fought over is going to have to de-mined at enormous cost and effort, that hip sailed months ago.

[sburke]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

You are missing the point about this being about Russian public perception, not reality.  Russians are told that Ukraine is under Russian domination, that fear pervades.  The capital of the enemy is constantly being struck by mighty Russian missiles.  Everybody, in fact, fears the great Russian bear!  Oh, and victory is near at hand!

Oops... but then again, Biden is seen strolling along in Kyiv with nothing more than sunglasses for protection.

Steve

and Putin has yet to visit anything over the border.  Hell he wouldn't even show up at that stupid event last year, he had to appear via video.

[dan/california]

33 minutes ago, Hister said:

How likely is that war on Ukrainian land ends this year? Am I too eager if I say until autumn?

Is it even possible for Putain to be owerhrown/killed/moved into a nice datcha and away from power the way he has structured his state machine where nobody has enough power to be able to do anything against him and where each player is played against the other by Putin? I would imagine losing Crimea could trigger the highest chance for that to happen, but ... - what do you guys think? Who has the highest chance to off him, which clan? Will it be military coup, a popular uprising, a silent poisoning, or a silent removal? 

How likely it is Ukraine besides Crimea goes also after Luhansk and Donetsk? 

I am positive these questions have been discussed ad nauseum here already so I apologise but I have since the last month and a half not had the time/energy to follow the posts. 

For the war to end on anything like decent terms for Ukraine, either the Russian army or the Russian regime are going to have to crack. Putin is clearly not going to discover a rational cost benefit analysis of his epically disastrous SMO at this late date. I think i can say that the 'board consensus", if there is such a thing, is that the army will crack before the regime does. So it really is about killing mobiks until they would rather shoot their officers than face Ukrainian artillery. 

Will it happen this year, I don't know. I just know we need to ship Ukraine everything we physically can, and build a whole bunch of industrial capacity to build more of virtually every kind of munition in inventory. This war has proven AGAIN, that peace time estimates of things like ammunition consumption ares simply laughable.

[Huba]

Biden is speaking in Warsaw now. There wasn't anything specific announced yet, but damn this guy has the energy!

 

[danfrodo]

2 minutes ago, dan/california said:

For the war to end on anything like decent terms for Ukraine, either the Russian army or the Russian regime are going to have to crack. Putin is clearly not going to discover a rational cost benefit analysis of his epically disastrous SMO at this late date. I think i can say that the 'board consensus", if there is such a thing, is that the army will crack before the regime does. So it really is about killing mobiks until they would rather shoot their officers than face Ukrainian artillery. 

Will it happen this year, I don't know. I just know we need to ship Ukraine everything we physically can, and build a whole bunch of industrial capacity to build more of virtually every kind of munition in inventory. This war has proven AGAIN, that peace time estimates of things like ammunition consumption ares simply laughable.

I think Steve put it best (paraphrase):  all the conditions are in place for a regime collapse, doesn't mean it will happen soon or at all.  All the conditions are in place for a military collapse, doesn't mean it will happen soon or at all.  But we've all seen what collapse looks like.  Things are tense and there's pressure and somehow the system holds, defying all expectations, until suddenly is doesn't.  

A UKR offensive (ISR/corrosion/actual troops) that cuts supply lines to the western end of Kherson Oblast would probably cause a nice collapse of the Dnieper front, w units scurrying back to Crimea as fast as possible.  This is totally possible, especially if UKR gets missiles to the cut the Crimea bridges.

A breakthrough to Starobilsk from Svatove would probably cause a front collapse all the way down past Kreminna.  

But those items above are both nasty fights, probably.  

 

[danfrodo]

1 minute ago, Huba said:

Biden is speaking in Warsaw now. There wasn't anything specific announced yet, but damn this guy has the energy!

 

Stay on script, Joe, stay on script.  No winging it w so much on the line.  I hope I have this much punch at 80. He wasn't my first choice be dang he's done an amazing job w UKR support ('cept we wanted more, faster).  Poland and Biden and UK Johnson & Baltics really set the stage.

[kevinkin]

18 minutes ago, dan/california said:

time estimates of things like ammunition consumption ares simply laughable.

You are right when it comes to a huge continental land war. However, this is the first in many years and NATO and US have fallen asleep using expeditionary warfare to project power. Ammo consumption and production was OK for that and we never seriously contemplated overstocking to arm Ukraine. I am not sure where else in the world such an expenditure of bullets and shells would take place over this length of time. Pretty sure the belt way will have countless AARs on this. If there ever is an after. 

Edited February 21, 2023 by kevinkin

[The_Capt]

54 minutes ago, Hister said:

How likely is that war on Ukrainian land ends this year? Am I too eager if I say until autumn?

Is it even possible for Putain to be owerhrown/killed/moved into a nice datcha and away from power the way he has structured his state machine where nobody has enough power to be able to do anything against him and where each player is played against the other by Putin? I would imagine losing Crimea could trigger the highest chance for that to happen, but ... - what do you guys think? Who has the highest chance to off him, which clan? Will it be military coup, a popular uprising, a silent poisoning, or a silent removal? 

How likely it is Ukraine besides Crimea goes also after Luhansk and Donetsk? 

I am positive these questions have been discussed ad nauseum here already so I apologise but I have since the last month and a half not had the time/energy to follow the posts. 

My honest “guess” right now-

As soon as weather gets right and the UA is ready there will be a diversionary offensive, likely in the east on the Luhanks front.  This will be followed by a main effort offensive in the centre towards the Azov to cut the Russia theatre - best guess is Melitopol.

Once the UA does that they can threaten the Crimean bridge with what they have and start to choke out Crimea, which will likely contract a la Kherson back to 23 Feb lines and try to hold on.  They will then start to box up Donbas.  This will be a decision point as to how far the UA is going to take this thing.  Do they tie it off and freeze the conflict back at the 23 Feb lines, or do they keep going? I think they can do the Tie Off option by this year. The Whole Pierogi may take the whole thing to the ‘24 election, but a whole lotta “conditions based” stuff in there that could dramatically shift things.

We can (and have) debated the goods and bads of both options at length.

[Harmon Rabb]

18 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

Stay on script, Joe, stay on script.  No winging it w so much on the line.  I hope I have this much punch at 80. He wasn't my first choice be dang he's done an amazing job w UKR support ('cept we wanted more, faster).  Poland and Biden and UK Johnson & Baltics really set the stage.

I can't say I agree with all the positions of Biden, Johnson or Duda. But as far as their support for Ukraine goes, I'm convinced history will judge them kindly. All three men will be remembered as being on the right side of history.

[Beleg85]

Ok, first thoughts after Biden adress:

- Very, very strong announcement of long-term commitment to Ukraine.

- Framed as binaries between democracy vs. despoty; very clear references to Putin as autocrat, dictator, and war criminal- they seem to be now regular terms used by this administration, not just slips of Biden's himself.

-A lot of "what we stand for"; surprsingly, quite clear and devoid of too much pathos (personal opinion, but this is rare time where "Saving Private Ryan" type of narraton is at its place and does not sound too bombastic, at least in the eyes and ears of people in CEE).

-Adressing domestic issues ("There can not be democracy without providing people with basic needs")

-Very specific mentions of Finland, Belarussian opposition and Moldova. Interesting.

-Dangers looming on horizons (China...) and that "we need to leave a world that is better for our kids and grandchildren"; next 5 years "will be decisive".

 

Now since it was in Poland I may be biased, but frankly I loved it, as well as my family and friends here. Very clear message West is standing where it was, on the top of bold trip in Kyiv- all of it couldn't be more opposite to sleepy, boring Putin's "defence adress". Some peole are complaining it was devoid of concretes, but this is not the type of announcments one makes in adress of that type.

Edited February 21, 2023 by Beleg85

[Aragorn2002]

18 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

Ok, first thoughts after Biden adress:

- Very, very strong announcement of long-term commitment to Ukraine.

- Framed as binaries between democracy vs. despoty; very clear references to Putin as autocrat, dictator, and war criminal- they seem to be now regular terms used by this administration, not just slips of Biden's himself.

-A lot of "what we stand for"; surprsingly, quite clear and devoid of too much pathos (personal opinion, but this is rare time where "Saving Private Ryan" type of narraton is at its place and does not sound too bombastic, at least in the eyes and ears of people in CEE).

-Adressing domestic issues ("There can not be democracy without providing people with basic needs")

-Very specific mentions of Finland, Belarussian opposition and Moldova. Interesting.

-Dangers looming on horizons (China...) and that "we need to leave a world that is better for our kids and grandchildren"; next 5 years "will be decisive".

 

Now since it was in Poland I may be biased, but frankly I loved it, as well as my family and friends here. Very clear message West is standing where it was, on the top of bold trip in Kyiv- all of it couldn't be more opposite to sleepy, boring Putin's "defence adress". Some peole are complaining it was devoid of concretes, but this is not the type of announcments one makes in adress of that type.

That man did more to restore my faith in the US than Fire and Rubble.

[kevinkin]

24 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

boring Putin's "defence adress".

Saw a report just now the address went dark across the country due to a "hack": Breaking. 

"web links of main state channels which are part of All-Russian State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company [VGTRK ] were taken down as he spoke."

Edited February 21, 2023 by kevinkin

[Beleg85]

There are news about Ukrainian counterattack near Avdiivka- interesting, since this are was held defensively for a long time:

https://twitter.com/TrOMunich/status/1627940548513333248 (Russian AFV's, could be from earlier fights, though).

Updated map, still to be condirmed:

 

[danfrodo]

7 minutes ago, kevinkin said:

Saw a report just now the address went dark across the country due to a "hack": Breaking. 

"web links of main state channels which are part of All-Russian State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company [VGTRK ] were taken down as he spoke."

which country went dark??

[kevinkin]

Russia. Let's see. 

[sross112]

1 hour ago, kevinkin said:

You are right when it comes to a huge continental land war. However, this is the first in many years and NATO and US have fallen asleep using expeditionary warfare to project power. Ammo consumption and production was OK for that and we never seriously contemplated overstocking to arm Ukraine. I am not sure where else in the world such an expenditure of bullets and shells would take place over this length of time. Pretty sure the belt way will have countless AARs on this. If there ever is an after. 

The first one that comes to mind is Korea. It actually surprises me that the stocks and production capacities are so low when there were real possibilities of conflict in Korea that we should have been thinking about. I just read a book on the battle of Pork Chop Hill and the US forces expended over 30,000 artillery rounds in 3 days supporting a reinforced company sized defensive position. That is a crazy amount of ordnance for such a small area, but it was a pretty intense fight.

Anyway, I'd think that someone in the Pentagon would have it figured out that they need x amount on hand for y expenditure rates in a conflict like Korea in order to sustain high intensity ops for z amount of time before production could ramp up to provide n amount of ammo per day. Probably like you said though, 50 years of low intensity expeditionary conflicts skews what is seen as "realistic" needs. Couple that with the expense and it probably explains the lack of logistical preparedness for a conflict like this. Just surprises me though and please don't make too much fun of me for having faith in our military/government to have thought and planned ahead. I know that sometimes I'm blissfully naïve.  

[The_MonkeyKing]

Just found this footage from Kherson offensive: 
https://old.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/10muegb/ru_pov_a_single_russian_t72b3_with_artillery/

"The tank crew of a Russian T-72B3 from the 124th Independent Tank Battalion part of the 76th Guards Air Assault Division engages two Ukrainian motorized companies supported with a platoon of T-72M tanks moving in parallel with one another. This took place near the village of Kostromka.

Interesting to note that one of the Ukrainian crews of a YPR-765, out of panic and disorganization, begin shooting at their friendly column of BMPs moving in parallel with them.

The footage shows the Russian tank taking out 3 YPR-765 vehicles, 2 BMPs as well as a direct hit on a T-72M. Another 3 Ukrainian vehicles were destroyed in this engagement after the video ends. Afterwards, the Russian tank drove off to safety, leaving the battlefield."

[The_MonkeyKing]

3 minutes ago, The_MonkeyKing said:

Just found this footage from Kherson offensive: 
https://old.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/10muegb/ru_pov_a_single_russian_t72b3_with_artillery/

"The tank crew of a Russian T-72B3 from the 124th Independent Tank Battalion part of the 76th Guards Air Assault Division engages two Ukrainian motorized companies supported with a platoon of T-72M tanks moving in parallel with one another. This took place near the village of Kostromka.

Interesting to note that one of the Ukrainian crews of a YPR-765, out of panic and disorganization, begin shooting at their friendly column of BMPs moving in parallel with them.

The footage shows the Russian tank taking out 3 YPR-765 vehicles, 2 BMPs as well as a direct hit on a T-72M. Another 3 Ukrainian vehicles were destroyed in this engagement after the video ends. Afterwards, the Russian tank drove off to safety, leaving the battlefield."

Really starting to notice that anything that shows UKR in bad light or losing is downvoted to oblivion on the most popular sites. Even if the footage is just from a Russian POV it gets downvoted. /r/UkraineRussiaReport/ is a pretty good counter to this.

https://old.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/