How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Kraft]

2 hours ago, Teufel said:

Few updates of actual events

Freely translated/summarized

It is necessary to turn on the light at the end of the tunnel, to understand what is slow\fast. At the current pace of the offensive, the Armed Forces will reach Azov in 60-65 days. Excellent. I will live with this.

Maybe my sense of time is warped  but 65 days seems entirely wrong with the current rate of progress, assuming an infinite amount of equiptment can be used. 

[Battlefront.com]

Summary of Ukraine's deep strike activity over the course of July (28 Russian warehouses, 34 bases, and 3 other military infrastructure facilities):

Note that the hit on the Chonhar bridge confirms that Storm Shadow capabilities are back in action after Russia's (probably) successful base hit.

Steve

[Teufel]

1 hour ago, Kraft said:

Maybe my sense of time is warped  but 65 days seems entirely wrong with the current rate of progress, assuming an infinite amount of equiptment can be used. 

50km to fire control over shores of Sea of Azov and we assume that Tokmak and/or Zachativka are on the way there. Average progress needs to be less than 1km/day for those 60-65 days. Even if slower at current rate, as previously mentioned the fall of rail junctions will most probably increase that rate. But even if grind continues on average <1km/day the math adds up.

Not suggesting that is guaranteed, matter of perspectives in the current debate that the offensive failed/stalled/been defeated.

If you don’t agree with that rationale, please share your own thoughts in numbers.

Edited August 1, 2023 by Teufel

[Bulletpoint]

7 minutes ago, Teufel said:

50km to fire control over shores of Sea of Azov and we assume that Tokmak and/or Zachativka are on the way there. Average progress needs to be less than 1km/day for those 60-65 days. Even if slower at current rate, as previously mentioned the fall of rail junctions will most probably increase that rate. But even if grind continues on average <1km/day the math adds up.

Not suggesting that is guaranteed, matter of perspectives in the current debate that the offensive failed/stalled/been defeated.

If you don’t agree with that rationale, please share your own thoughts in numbers.

I'm not seeing them advancing 1 km a day though. Maybe 1 km on a good day, and then 1-2 weeks until next good day.

[Battlefront.com]

5 hours ago, kevinkin said:

Well that's one hell of a way to fight a war. Thinking like that got McClellan fired.

Except you're mixing several different conversations together as if they are the same one.  Let's look at this again...

We had some people starting to slip into the usual "Russia might win this war, somehow" that we always see when Ukraine isn't overtly winning.  A bunch of arguments were made to show that it is premature to be saying this, as it has been since the start of the war whenever they come up.  Since there is no straight forward response to this, the definition of "win" gets distorted to the point of it losing all meaning.  Included in this line of argument is confusing Ukraine's future difficulties with Russian victory of some sort.  I jumped into the conversation around that point.

I made the case that there's no way for Russia to "win" this war in any historically relevant use of that term.  Russia has already long since lost this war and that means Ukraine will remain an independent state.  By most rational views of history, this is a loss for Russia and a win for Ukraine.  However, the form of loss and win for each is not clear cut and is still undecided.

To make my point, I took a worst case scenario for this war ending from Ukraine's perspective and carried it forward to show that whatever Ukraine doesn't secure (under that worst case scenario) it will likely achieve at some point in the future because Russia won't be able to stop it.

This war between Ukraine and Russia has been going on for hundreds of years in some form or another.  Getting hyper focused on this tiny slice of time as if it is the ONLY thing that matters shows ignorance of this long term struggle as well as the steady progress Ukraine has made, especially recently.

Now, would the best outcome for the world be Russia's total defeat on the battlefield and some form of radically positive long term change within Russia's power structures?  Absolutely.  Would the best outcome for the world be Russia's total defeat on the battlefield and a radically negative breakup of Russia's power structure that could, in fact, result in some form of nuclear war?  Probably not.  The West's concern is that by working towards the first outcome it may in fact achieve the second outcome.  Therefore, treading carefully is smart in theory.  In reality I think it is very safe to argue that the execution of the strategy needs significant improvement.

Steve

[cesmonkey]

 

[Battlefront.com]

23 minutes ago, Teufel said:

50km to fire control over shores of Sea of Azov and we assume that Tokmak and/or Zachativka are on the way there. Average progress needs to be less than 1km/day for those 60-65 days. Even if slower at current rate, as previously mentioned the fall of rail junctions will most probably increase that rate. But even if grind continues on average <1km/day the math adds up.

Not suggesting that is guaranteed, matter of perspectives in the current debate that the offensive failed/stalled/been defeated.

If you don’t agree with that rationale, please share your own thoughts in numbers.

The original post that started this is quite meaningless, therefore we shouldn't be treating it as if it has merit.  Even if Ukraine consistently advances 5km a day on average, it has to do it all in one place and broadly enough to create a corridor wide enough to sustain movement to Azov within 60 days.  There is absolutely no signs of this being the case, therefore the timeframe in that post holds no value.

As has been said since long before this counter offensive started, it is most likely going to start with very little to modest territorial gains.  If it goes well this will dramatically change to massive and rapid gains.  If it goes really well, those gains will take Ukraine down to the Sea of Azov.  When all is said and done, the territorial gains plotted on a chart will look like a nearly flat line for months and then a sudden spike upwards.  One can not predict the spike based on the flat bit.  It just doesn't work like that.

Steve

 

[Kinophile]

21 hours ago, poesel said:

Ireland

You summoned me,  m'lud?! 

Ref this,  it's not really the ocean,  it's the terrain. Attacking though the Korean mountains is a complete bloody nightmare, as every single account relates. It's doable, obviously,  but it costs a lot of lives. 

Ireland has...Bogs. And a few tall hills pretending to be mountains (I jest, of course). Nothing to remotely stop armored warfare. 

NK has the most perfect terrain to turtle up inside and create a psychopathic ****ty little monarchy. There are very few other places on earth with that combination of mainland and littoral topography. NK is living proof of Diamond's thesis that terrain is a formative factor in the nature of a given society. 

Same with Ireland. Rough coast line for a part of it,  but once you're ashore it's piss easy to move about. 

Edited August 1, 2023 by Kinophile

[Teufel]

1 hour ago, Bulletpoint said:

I'm not seeing them advancing 1 km a day though. Maybe 1 km on a good day, and then 1-2 weeks until next good day.

Just some numbers, starting in least fortified line of attack - Mariupol direction. Current position Staromaiorske, distance to main line of fortification is 10 km at Heorhiivka/directly west of Novopetrykivka.

Topological map shows that going through the first one gives elevation of -50 to -100 meters vs the hills to the west. Terrain maps show that valley also has the Mokri Yaly river running through it with swampy terrain.

Can we agree that the assault will probably go through the hills from first line of defense?

If so, next target is assumed Zachativka due to east-west railway junction - distance after first line of defense is 25km across the hills. No settlements and no rivers in that line for the entire stretch. All settlements are down in the valley below.

Terrain is primarily fields and treelines in this area, the later primarily along the north west - south east direction. Following the line of advance from first line of defense across the hills to Zachativka.

From there it’s more densely populated areas, but in direction of Rozivka the distance is 10 km to the T0803. Terrain is again elevated in this direction if following the railway. Two settlements Azov and Myrne before reaching Rozivka. Railway covered by treelines on both sides and Myrne is on hills in relation to closest settlement 5 km away - Lystivianka.

And once reaching the road, which would greatly reduce the impact of rain, mud and impact of “rasputica”. Then the next stop is 30km along the road to Nikolske that my guess would be necessary to have fire control of roads passing Mariupol east to west. Last 12-13 km of those are without settlements.

I might be speaking out of my behind here, but this is my guess of line of advance from here on out. Might be completely wrong but at least I will not be able to say I predicted anything that I didn’t share.

Assuming hills will not suffer as much from rain and mud as valleys below until T0803 is reached my guess is we can bet on possible operational window of 80-90 days of operations from today. If 60 is a stretch, might be one more month available.

Anybody want to try predictions of your own? Why or why not your scenario would be feasible or mine unreasonable is more important than opinions of “it won’t work”. Crystal ball is hazy so wouldn’t bet my house on this prediction but let’s see in three months how far off this post is. Have at it!

Edit: if this is fact becomes the actual line of advance the distance is 65-70km. Across the hills and assuming the fights for the settlements will be by those following main advance.

One more thing, how much of the reserves have Ukraine committed yet? Anybody who can weigh in on that?

Edited August 1, 2023 by Teufel

[TheVulture]

44 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

Ireland has...Bogs. And a few tall hills pretending to be mountains (I jest, of course). Nothing to remotely stop armored warfare. 

Ah, The Few Tall Hills of Mourne. One of my favourite songs. And you often hear "The Bogs of Athenry" echoing around Lansdowne Road.

[Bearstronaut]

1 hour ago, Kinophile said:

You summoned me,  m'lud?! 

Ref this,  it's not really the ocean,  it's the terrain. Attacking though the Korean mountains is a complete bloody nightmare, as every single account relates. It's doable, obviously,  but it costs a lot of lives. 

Ireland has...Bogs. And a few tall hills pretending to be mountains (I jest, of course). Nothing to remotely stop armored warfare. 

NK has the most perfect terrain to turtle up inside and create a psychopathic ****ty little monarchy. There are very few other places on earth with that combination of mainland and littoral topography. NK is living proof of Diamond's thesis that terrain is a formative factor in the nature of a given society. 

Same with Ireland. Rough coast line for a part of it,  but once you're ashore it's piss easy to move about. 

I spent a lot of my free time in South Korea hiking the mountains near Seoul. Those were relatively small and were still a pretty exhausting climb wearing civvies and a camelbak. Assaulting an entrenched position while wearing full battle-rattle in the hot, humid Korean summer sounds worse than miserable. The mountains in the north are even more rugged.

[Battlefront.com]

22 minutes ago, Bearstronaut said:

Assaulting an entrenched position while wearing full battle-rattle in the hot, humid Korean summer sounds worse than miserable.

Well, you could do it in the middle of winter.  It's been done before, but I don't think it was an improvement

Steve

[poesel]

1 hour ago, Kinophile said:

You summoned me,  m'lud?! 

I would have put money on Florida tripping someone, but maybe the idea of Florida becoming a dictatorship is not alien enough.

Anyway, what I meant about terrain is the ability to keep your population _inside_. Not defend versus an outside aggressor. The dictator of the Irish island would just have to close the ports and airports and make the possession of a boat a death penalty. Done.
For Russia, that's impossible. Too much of a border where you could just walk away.

[Battlefront.com]

Almost on cue, here is a lengthy report from Chatham House about how the West should be viewing this conflict at a long term strategic level.  Their view is the same as ours here... this is an opportunity to eliminate Russia's long term threat to the world, but that the West isn't investing enough to make that happen:

https://www.chathamhouse.org/2023/06/how-end-russias-war-ukraine

I haven't had a chance to do more than read the preamble, but it looks very interesting for sure!  I'm going to block out some time to read it thoroughly.

Steve

[Bearstronaut]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

Well, you could do it in the middle of winter.  It's been done before, but I don't think it was an improvement

Steve

I actually preferred hiking in the winter. 

[kevinkin]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

I haven't had a chance to do more than read the preamble,

Thanks for the report. I jumped to the conclusion and the writer seems to be advocating pushing Russia to the brink of nuclear war in an effort to call their bluff. 

Only an overwhelming Ukrainian military victory can deliver what Ukrainians themselves reasonably demand. This can only be achieved with external military support, in particular from the US. The arguments against providing Ukraine with advanced weaponry are spurious. What is needed is a greatly enhanced commitment by all of Ukraine’s backers to providing war-winning materiel as swiftly as it can be delivered and absorbed by Ukraine’s armed forces. This should include more air defence systems, long-range missiles, combat aircraft, advanced main battle tanks, and other such weapons systems as may be identified as essential to victory. Half-measures short of this will prolong the conflict, at a continuing cost in Ukrainian lives and also at great cost to the long-term prospects for the security of Europe.

Right or wrong this is a credible position to take and those that are pushing for it should be taken seriously. Unlike other reports, the writer does bring up the key element of time:

Most publications of this nature seek enduring relevance, a ‘shelf life’. Not here. US assistance remains decisive, but America is approaching another momentous electoral fork in the road, with a stark choice between an administration currently doing the right thing – albeit hesitantly and with one foot on the brake – and one that would wish to abandon Ukraine or, if possible, Europe altogether. This, then, is the decisive year in which to give Ukraine the necessary military assistance to win, before the 2024 US election distracts from and constrains Western action – or, in the event of a victory for Donald Trump or his fellow travellers, hands victory to Russia. Far too much time has already been lost to timidity and misplaced fears of Russian escalation.120 This delay could well prove tragic. If the recommendations in this report – principally to ensure Ukraine’s military victory and the reduction of Russia as a future threat – are not taken up within months, all is potentially lost.

The writer seems to be inferring the US election and results could be a factor. Well yes they are. But that should not drive the overall strategy. I don't think the policymakers in DC are going to "abandon Ukraine or, if possible, Europe altogether". There is too much money to be made. So in my view an analysis of time relates more closely to the rate of losses both side are incurring - not who wins next year's election. POTUS says the good guys are running out of ammo. That does not sound a like of ultra partisan statement to me. It's a sad fact. 

 

Edited August 1, 2023 by kevinkin

[Der Zeitgeist]

"These Ungrateful Ukrainians": Polish edition.

Looks like a narrative is starting to form.

https://kyivindependent.com/ukraine-summons-polish-ambassador-over-presidential-aides-call-to-start-appreciating-polands-help/

[Vet 0369]

12 hours ago, JonS said:

Meanwhile ...

https://apnews.com/article/france-china-russia-chip-technology-smuggling-66a8a4edcaf7137e109a16d6d300cd94

https://www.dutchnews.nl/2023/07/man-arrested-for-dodging-sanctions-against-russia/

https://www.justice.gov/usao-edny/pr/suspected-russian-intelligence-operative-extradited-estonia-face-charges-related

 

 

 

Unfortunately, money doesn’t just talk, it SCREAMS!

[panzermartin]

Anyone else worried about the Niger coup and the weakening of French/western influence there and the rest of African neighbors. I was never a pro colonial but I wouldn't also want to see Russian/Chinese puppets there  taking power. They are going to do the same or worse than what Europeans did a century ago. Wagner is supposedly involved. Is this a world wide exporting of the ukrainian conflict, or just small imperialist moves on the checkerboard. I can see all this shaping in a big Western  vs /ex colonial /Russo chinese hybrid war sooner than later.

Damn, World shifthing events ahead for all of us in this decade. 

[Mindestens]

Polish MOD admits two russian/belarusian choppers crossed polish border today and flew over some villages before flying back to Belarus. MOD was denying it since morning even tho multiple pictures from locals clearly shown helis close to where pics were taken and geolocated to be indeed on polish soil.

The document states that Nato partners were informed about the incident and belarusian diplomat was called to explain the situation to ministry of foreign affairs.

 

[Bufo]

Anybody knows something about this?

"Radio interception from Russian naval Ka-29 reveal successful attack of Ukraine sea Drones on Russian ships "Vasily Bykov" and "Sergey Kotov", pilot saying about wounded and dead sailors."

https://9gag.com/gag/armz6eV

Edited August 1, 2023 by Bufo

[mosuri]

5 minutes ago, Mindestens said:

Polish MOD admits two russian/belarusian choppers crossed polish border today and flew over some villages before flying back to Belarus. MOD was denying it since morning even tho multiple pictures from locals clearly shown helis close to where pics were taken and geolocated to be indeed on polish soil.

The document states that Nato partners were informed about the incident and belarusian diplomat was called to explain the situation to ministry of foreign affairs.

 

Question to the Polish members, is this something completely new or not?

In Finland we've used to the occasional "navigation error" from RUAF although I don't now recall any happening since NATO membership happened.

[TheVulture]

7 minutes ago, Bufo said:

Anybody knows something about this?

"Radio interception from Russian naval Ka-29 reveal successful attack of Ukraine sea Drones on Russian ships "Vasily Bykov" and "Sergey Kotov", pilot saying about wounded and dead sailors."

https://9gag.com/gag/armz6eV

I did see a report on telegram that the Russian MoD claimed to have destroyed 3 drones in an attack on those same two ships,  so it looks like we can be confident that an attack happened, although no confirmation of outcomes.

https://t.me/bbbreaking/161854

Tonight, the armed forces of Ukraine made an unsuccessful attempt to attack the patrol ships "Sergey Kotov" and "Vasily Bykov" of the Black Sea Fleet with three sea unmanned boats, performing tasks to control navigation in the southwestern part of the Black Sea, 340 km southwest of Sevastopol, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation.

In the course of repulsing the attack, all three unmanned enemy boats were destroyed by fire from the standard armament of Russian ships.

The ships "Sergey Kotov" and "Vasily Bykov" of the Black Sea Fleet continue to perform their tasks.

Edited August 1, 2023 by TheVulture

[billbindc]

13 minutes ago, panzermartin said:

Anyone else worried about the Niger coup and the weakening of French/western influence there and the rest of African neighbors. I was never a pro colonial but I wouldn't also want to see Russian/Chinese puppets there  taking power. They are going to do the same or worse than what Europeans did a century ago. Wagner is supposedly involved. Is this a world wide exporting of the ukrainian conflict, or just small imperialist moves on the checkerboard. I can see all this shaping in a big Western  vs /ex colonial /Russo chinese hybrid war sooner than later.

Damn, World shifthing events ahead for all of us in this decade. 

Burkina and Niger between them have something like 25k in their armed forces. In ECOWAS alone, Nigeria has over 230,000 and will be backed by French networks, special forces, Western ISR, etc if it chooses to intervene. That's a hybrid war Wagner might just be stupid enough to fight.

[panzermartin]

8 minutes ago, billbindc said:

Burkina and Niger between them have something like 25k in their armed forces. In ECOWAS alone, Nigeria has over 230,000 and will be backed by French networks, special forces, Western ISR, etc if it chooses to intervene. That's a hybrid war Wagner might just be stupid enough to fight.

Yes I know the numbers look good on paper, but I wouldn't want to see another conflict there. Not sure how the rest of Africa will welcome a sizeable western intervention there.