How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[panzermartin]

3 hours ago, The_MonkeyKing said:

 

 

Ukrainians seem to be as eager to drive into mines as were the Russians in the winter.

Yes I know, all the regular caveats apply, but still hurts my hopium-filled brain to see this from the Ukrainians.

I know this is a probe but Ukraine cannot afford to lose hard trained crews and armored vehicles so easily. 

As for the lack of RA fire it's really hard to tell from this angle and maybe attack helicopters and mines /artillery are enough to initially stop these breakthroughs.

[Kinophile]

 

 

[Kinophile]

 

 

 

Edited June 7, 2023 by Kinophile

[Harmon Rabb]

Can't vouch for the accuracy of this poll, but if it is accurate NATO and Ukraine are winning the information war in the U.S.

Very important, with how much blatant disinfo Russia is pumping out these days. You know with Ukrainians supplying "Javelins" to the cartels and fictional zoos being flooded.

[RandomCommenter]

9 minutes ago, Harmon Rabb said:

Can't vouch for the accuracy of this poll, but if it is accurate NATO and Ukraine are winning the information war in the U.S.

Very important, with how much blatant disinfo Russia is pumping out these days. You know with Ukrainians supplying "Javelins" to the cartels and fictional zoos being flooded.

I would be concerned at that 35% of Americans who have an unfavorable view of NATO. In fact that tracks quite closely to a hardcore 35% who support "you know who" no matter what (for example I believe him when he says he could shoot someone on 5th Ave and not lose support).

So what I am saying is 35% opposition to NATO in the US, with the potential for people representing that view getting control of Congress or the White House is a worry to me.

I hope I don't start the thread going off topic (again) into US politics here but I just assumed that support for NATO in the US was higher than this.

[Eddy]

8 minutes ago, RandomCommenter said:

I hope I don't start the thread going off topic (again) into US politics

So do I

Looks like Russians fighting Russians in Russia is still a thing:

 

 

[Battlefront.com]

4 hours ago, The_MonkeyKing said:

 

 

Ukrainians seem to be as eager to drive into mines as were the Russians in the winter.

Yes I know, all the regular caveats apply, but still hurts my hopium-filled brain to see this from the Ukrainians.

The video is typical confused muddle intended to make it look like a single large push was slaughtered.  To me it looked like maybe 3 separate operations, perhaps related perhaps not.  This is in support of Russia's ridiculous narrative that a) the counter offensive has started and b) it is already defeated.

I do take the videos for what they are worth, which is it's showing us exactly what we should expect to see more of... Ukraine suffering significant losses due to minefields and preregistered artillery.  Ukraine has no silver bullet for these things and anybody that thought they would just roll to Crimea without some very difficult fights is just kidding themselves.  I don't think anybody here is in that group.

Ukraine faced similar problems when taking back Kherson and it succeeded.  It is probable that Ukraine didn't become less capable than last year, and I for sure don't think Russia became more capable.  Difficult days are ahead, but I am confident the outcome will be a positive one.

Steve

[cesmonkey]

https://t.me/rybar/48158

Quote

A couple of hours later, the Armed Forces attacked the positions in Lobkove again. This time, the assault group was covered by two tanks that entered the village from the north side. Now there is a fight going on in the village.

In addition, separate formations of the enemy went down to the settlement of Zherebyanki , trying to push the Russian troops out of the two villages. At the moment, the clashes continue.

At the same time, accumulations of APU were noted in Kamenskoye and southeast of it. Most likely, the Ukrainian command keeps them as a reserve, ready to advance to support or consolidate on the borders.

 

[Ales Dvorak]

Maybe it will be interesting to someone.....

 

[cesmonkey]

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss-senators-back-overhaul-of-weapons-exports-rules/48573400

Quote

One of the two parliamentary chambers has approved a plan to allow buyers of Swiss weapons to re-export them to third countries – like Ukraine – under certain conditions.

This content was published on June 7, 2023
June 7, 2023

 

[BlackMoria]

36 minutes ago, RandomCommenter said:

I would be concerned at that 35% of Americans who have an unfavorable view of NATO. In fact that tracks quite closely to a hardcore 35% who support "you know who" no matter what (for example I believe him when he says he could shoot someone on 5th Ave and not lose support).

So what I am saying is 35% opposition to NATO in the US, with the potential for people representing that view getting control of Congress or the White House is a worry to me.

I hope I don't start the thread going off topic (again) into US politics here but I just assumed that support for NATO in the US was higher than this.

Don't read too much into the poll.    Studies show that many participants in polls don't understand the questions at times or the subject matter of the poll for that matter. They answer anyway and usually to the negative, even if they have no idea what is being asked, rather than admitting they don't know.  That is why so much effort goes into making poll questions understandable and why unscrupulous pollsters can stack the deck with how questions are worded.   

If you asked someone for a opinion on NATO and they never heard of it, people are going to say NATO bad rather than say they have no idea what NATO is.  Really good pollsters try to vette their respondents, such as asking early in the poll interview if the respondent has some familiarity with the poll subject.  No point including that person in the poll pool if they are clueless to the poll subject. 

You don't know the fidelity and methodology of the poll.  Maybe the results are accurate.  Maybe the fidelity is outright rubbish.

Edited June 7, 2023 by BlackMoria

[DesertFox]

Interesting analogue to get a feeling of how much explosives would have been necessary to blow the other dam (Kakhovka).

 

 

[billbindc]

Of interest: https://jamestown.org/program/succession-in-russia/

[Kinophile]

20 minutes ago, BlackMoria said:

Don't read too much into the poll.    Studies show that many participants in polls don't understand the questions at times or the subject matter of the poll for that matter. They answer anyway and usually to the negative, even if they have no idea what is being asked, rather than admitting they don't know.  That is why so much effort goes into making poll questions understandable and why unscrupulous pollsters can stack the deck with how questions are worded.   

If you asked someone for a opinion on NATO and they never heard of it, people are going to say NATO bad rather than say they have no idea what NATO is.  Really good pollsters try to vette their respondents, such as asking early in the poll interview if the respondent has some familiarity with the poll subject.  No point including that person in the poll pool if they are clueless to the poll subject. 

You don't know the fidelity and methodology of the poll.  Maybe the results are accurate.  Maybe the fidelity is outright rubbish.

It's Pew,  so should be reasonably accurate. But you're correct,  read the actual questions first. 

[DesertFox]

After 48-72 hours we might get a clearer picture

 

 

 

[sburke]

3 hours ago, FancyCat said:

It's ridiculous to suggest Ukraine would destroy the dam. The negatives for Ukraine are exceeding vast.

this is exactly the point.  People suggesting Ukraine would blow the dam are viewing this in the most simplistic terms of what may or may not help Ukraine in the current military conflict. Ukraine however has to view the consequences for the nation as a whole and the cost in human lives as well as the economic consequences post war.  While I could see the idiots in the Kremlin making a stupid decision on this scale, not so with Kiev.

[Battlefront.com]

4 hours ago, The_Capt said:

This one is really weird.  Making a water obstacle harder cuts both ways, now the UA can also also thin out in this sector because the RA is also not going to be able to threaten it.  As to IDPs, I am wondering how many people were living close to this river to start with as it is essentially a front line?  I am sure there are some but have we seen mass columns of refugees?

Finally, without data on how fast that river is moving it is hard to say just how much harder this stunt made a river crossing operation.  The width of the obstacle just went up and one is seeing more debris but this was likely a ferry crossing operation to begin with - the RA withdrawal but now the UA attacking.  Blowing the dam made defending the RA bank a lot harder as well.  Any minefields they laid on the bank approaches are likely well buried under water and silt, so now ineffective.  Positions would have been moved back (an easy way to see who did this, just track who moved OPs before the explosion - if no one did, it was likely unplanned).  And by blowing the dam you are also redrawing the river in very unpredictable ways.  One could wind up making new viable landing sites.  One thing is certain, the RA was worried about UA action across that river if this was deliberate, and they probably should still be.

I've seen an (official?) estimate that the reservoir will be dry in 3 more days.  By that I am sure we're talking about the reserves of water, not bone dry as the dams upstream are still obligated to release water.

The flood crest is supposed to be some time today.

For sure it will take a little while for the water to recede and the ground to dry up, however I do not expect the conditions for a crossing to be adversely affected for very long.  As I said in an earlier post, it could be that Ukraine wasn't planning on doing serious amphib ops until much later anyway.  There's also the very real possibility that we've discussed that Ukraine NEVER planned on major amphib ops EVER.  Which would not only mean that the Russians shot their bolt too soon, but for no reason.

As for the Russian's preparedness for the flood, sources seem to agree that the frontline units were not alerted ahead of time.  Either because of OPSEC, crap coordination, some combo of both, or that they didn't mean to have the dam go catastrophic.  There's a couple of videos of Russians getting plucked out of the water and, in one video, trees:

https://twitter.com/GirkinGirkin/status/1666461768116326401

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarRoom/comments/1437g7c/were_drowning_blt_but_were_leaving_blt_whine_the/

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarRoom/comments/142xzyx/russian_terrorists_were_so_happy_about_the/

Steve

[panzermartin]

27 minutes ago, Ales Dvorak said:

Maybe it will be interesting to someone.....

 

Don't know if he is in russian payroll as many claim, but each of his points are sound. Especially these ones:

1.The russian fortified left bank is more affected. Minefields are gone, trenches are gone, fortifications are gone... Why they would blow a dam *after* they have fortified those positions and flood them with water? They must have already killed some of their troops.

2. Once the water dries out( and the hot summer is ideal for that) Ukraine will have much better chances to reach and reinforce breakthroughs to the south. 

3.Ukraine has targeted the dam before with high precision weapons like HIMARS. 

I'm sorry, also the Nord Stream latest reveals contradicts the belief the Russians did that in the first place. 

So, I'm being more than skeptical now...

[sross112]

10 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

So let's take this and run with it.

While there is some uncertainty if Russia intended to blow the dam NOW, I think we can safely presume it was never going to let Ukraine retain it.  Therefore, even if the dam burst all on its own, it was most certainly doomed to be breached at some point.

Now we have the example of Russia trying to blow up an ammonia pipeline.  Obviously it is really hard to effectively destroy a piece of infrastructure like this, but Russia has a long history of such actions in this war going all the way back to 2014.  The attacks on Odessa's harbor after being held up in Kherson is an easy example.  So nothing new here.

Russia most likely has a list of things it does not want to let Ukraine keep in the event of a withdrawal.  So are we now seeing them tick things off that list proactively?  If so, what does this say about Russia's level of confidence that it will keep terrain in the south?  Further, what does it say about Russia's confidence that it will even have an opportunity to blow up infrastructure once the counter offensive properly starts?

I'm wondering if Russia has concluded, at least at the very top, that the south is going to be lost and could be lost very suddenly.  If that is true, then perhaps Russia is planning on a Kherson type withdrawal more than a defense in place strategy.

We should all keep our eyes open for more additional key infrastructure going Boom.

Steve

We have looked at the military aspects of the damn blowing and what that means for both sides. Is it possible it is more of a political move by Russia? By destroying the damn Ukraine will no longer be able to irrigate a bunch of farmland. Estimates are that the wheat harvest would already be around 50% of normal, this will cut yields even further. A large chunk of the developing world depends on Ukrainian and Russian wheat. If in conjunction with the lower production from Ukraine, Russia can hold its wheat exports hostage.

If Russia does this and uses the impending famine of millions as a bargaining chip ("We can't export what we have until a ceasefire is put in place because the shipping will be at risk from Ukrainian harpoons." or something like that) to press for a ceasefire? 

They know they are in trouble and will probably lose the land bridge. They likely really don't care that much about Luhansk and Donetsk, but several times on this thread people have predicted that the loss of Crimea could be the straw that breaks the regime. Most of us doubt that Ukraine will take back all of the occupied territories and Crimea this summer, but there is a good chance by the end of next summer they could be back to their 2014 borders. They also know that no one other than Russians really gives two small poops about Russia and most of the world wants to see them lose. This means they have to manufacture pressure that affects someone other than themselves in order for the world to press Ukraine for a ceasefire. 

I'm not an expert on Russia, but this looks like something that would be in their play book. Create a problem that they have a solution for in order to trade the solution for something they want. "We would love to export these millions of bushels of wheat to keep the children of the developing world from starving, but these evil Ukrainians will sink the ships without remorse unless there is a ceasefire. As soon as you can get them to stop killing us we will resume exports and save the world because we are the good guys." Or something like that.

[MikeyD]

No, Russians did Nord Stream. If you go back far enough on this very  thread you will see Russian ships being tracked directly over the explosion site before it happened.

[FancyCat]

7 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

Don't know if he is in russian payroll as many claim, but each of his points are sound. Especially these ones:

1.The russian fortified left bank is more affected. Minefields are gone, trenches are gone, fortifications are gone... Why they would blow a dam *after* they have fortified those positions and flood them with water? They must have already killed some of their troops.

2. Once the water dries out( and the hot summer is ideal for that) Ukraine will have much better chances to reach and reinforce breakthroughs to the south. 

3.Ukraine has targeted the dam before with high precision weapons like HIMARS. 

I'm sorry, also the Nord Stream latest reveals contradicts the belief the Russians did that in the first place. 

So, I'm being more than skeptical now...

If I were Russia and I expected to lose control of the dam very soon, and I didn't mind killing civilians, destroying the dam, i.e, destroying the social and economic potential in a region I don't expect to hold and expect to shortly be liberated and used for my enemy....

Well, I might just blow the dam.

[Battlefront.com]

52 minutes ago, Ales Dvorak said:

Maybe it will be interesting to someone.....

 

No thanks.  I've watched enough Scott Ritter to satisfy my curiosity of how closely linked mental illness and the pro-Russian point of view are.

Scott Ritter is a well known nutjob.  Nothing he has ever said has panned out because, well, insanity doesn't tend to produce good analytical results.

[EDIT] OK, for entertainment purposes I watched right up until the point where he said exactly what I knew he would say.  And how did I know he was going to say this?  See above commentary on Ritter's mental health status and see link to the entertaining statement below:

Steve

[DesertFox]

Orc POWs (location unconfirmed). Might still be recon in force activity.

https://twitter.com/PStyle0ne1/status/1666446081255677957?s=20

https://twitter.com/PStyle0ne1/status/1666447708708560901?s=20

 

 

Edited June 7, 2023 by DesertFox

[sburke]

Sunflowers for Peace is doing a specific campaign for evacuees from the flooded areas.  Seems the founder is from Nova Kakhovka.

Support Victims of Kakhovka Dam Flood (sunflowerofpeace.com)

[kevinkin]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

This is in support of Russia's ridiculous narrative that a) the counter offensive has started and b) it is already defeated.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraine-situation-report-offensive-going-better-than-expected-u-s-says

Administration officials “were encouraged by better-than-expected progress Monday, as Ukrainian units pushed through heavily mined areas to advance between five and 10 kilometers in some areas of the long front,” Washington Post columnist David Ignatius reported Tuesday. “That raised hopes that Ukrainian forces can keep thrusting toward Mariupol, Melitopol and other Russian-held places along the coast.”

Joe says it's so ..

Biden administration officials say the offensive began on Monday with a Ukrainian thrust south along multiple axes, Ignatius reported, echoing what we reported Monday. 

The White House, however, said it is too early to tell how the destruction of the Nova Kakhovka dam across the Dnipro River will affect the counteroffensive.

“I won't speak to Ukrainian military operations in any way whatsoever,” White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby told reporters Tuesday afternoon. “But right now- too soon to assess what kind of impact [the dam destruction] is going to have on the battlefield."

And perhaps the best data possible: 

Not surprisingly, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu had a very different take than Ignatius on the state of play. He said, as usual offering no proof, that the counteroffensive was crushed and Ukraine lost a tremendous amount of troops and equipment as it staged attacks over three days in several different directions. 

Let's put our seat belts on and pray the war ends soon.