How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[The_Capt]

57 minutes ago, Tux said:

They have to have a goal though, right?  If they are advancing because, for example, they want to get within x-distance of the coast so that the whole land bridge can be taken under fire then that’s one thing.  If they’re advancing because they can but they understand that defensive primacy has re-emerged and they know they have no hope of making major gains then they should stop and put their manpower to more efficient use, no?

I’m sure they do still have a goal but at this point I don’t think it could realistically be very spectacular.

Ah now we hit upon the most significant issue of this entire war - clearly identified endstates.  Both sides have been wrestling with what their exact goal really is.  For Russia we clearly see the re-setting of the goal posts pretty much from day one.  They now have settled in on Crimea, Donetsk (such that it is) and land bridge.  I do not think Putin or Russia realistically see half or all of Ukraine as a strategic goal at this point in time.  My bet is they are seeking frozen conflict to buy time for a reload and then coming back to this in ten years or so.  However, I also suspect they know that the west will likely establish some binding security arrangements with Ukraine and Putin will likely be dead in ten years.

For Ukraine…?  What are the strategic objectives?  Independence is an easy one.  Free from Russian threats both above and below the waterline? And establishing territorial integrity?  But where is that?  The objective of “all of pre-2014” territory was pretty ambitious and had no small risks associated with it (see: insurgency debate).  

For the West….WTF?!  We have never presented a coherent set of strategic objectives in this thing.  Beyond “free Ukraine” the west has never declare what it wants out of all this.  I suspect it is because we are looking at different answers for different people.  US wants an international order win to flavour next internal fight.  Canada wants international order win because without that international order we are screwed in our current position.  Europe?  Baltics?  Contain Russia?  Contract Russia?  Regime change? No one has really ever come out and stated “what winning looks like for the West” so we really have no clear idea of what our sacrifice looks like.

And then there is the rest.  China, Iran and India for example.  They want western contraction that much is clear.  But they do not necessarily want Russian expansion.  They likely want a weak Russia and a weak West.

Ok, so what?  Well Operational objectives are driven by strategic ones - we live in a top down world (for now).  So if the overall endstates is the survival of Ukraine as an independent nation then the Operational objective would be to hold on and position for defence.  If it is to liberate all pre-2014 territories then offence makes sense.

Strategy and the Art of War is keeping all these things aligned - Options, Decisions and Effects to Outcomes.  What we are not really seeing is a coherent strategy from either side in all this.  In fact the only coherent strategy may be coming out of China: support Russia, but not too much and take advantage of the chaos.  

I suspect Ukraine is going to be forced to do a strategy re-set much like Russia did.  Sucks but this is war, can’t count on much.  The overall strategic goal will remain a free and secure Ukraine but it may have to re-set the bar of military objectives to achieve that.  

[The_Capt]

6 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

 

I died a little inside as soon as I typed it….

[LongLeftFlank]

55 minutes ago, Kraft said:

I guess this is living proof russian s̶e̶w̶e̶r̶ Cesspool® level propaganda works? 

Fixed that for ya.

@sburke, can you gently herd the old timer back to the Peng thread?

[Tux]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

Ah now we hit upon the most significant issue of this entire war - clearly identified endstates.  Both sides have been wrestling with what their exact goal really is.  For Russia we clearly see the re-setting of the goal posts pretty much from day one.  They now have settled in on Crimea, Donetsk (such that it is) and land bridge.  I do not think Putin or Russia realistically see half or all of Ukraine as a strategic goal at this point in time.  My bet is they are seeking frozen conflict to buy time for a reload and then coming back to this in ten years or so.  However, I also suspect they know that the west will likely establish some binding security arrangements with Ukraine and Putin will likely be dead in ten years.

For Ukraine…?  What are the strategic objectives?  Independence is an easy one.  Free from Russian threats both above and below the waterline? And establishing territorial integrity?  But where is that?  The objective of “all of pre-2014” territory was pretty ambitious and had no small risks associated with it (see: insurgency debate).

I was talking more about operational-level "goals" but of course this is where the discussion ends up, anyway.  We can quibble about how easy it might be for Putin to sell "Crimea, Donetsk and land bridge" as a win within Russia but there's no need and ultimately I agree that's likely where they are now.  If they've got their heads screwed on, they'll be looking for a way to freeze things.

We've seen Russia, Ukraine and NATO (to varying extents) commit and lose large amounts of their existing weaponry stockpiles.  Everyone's warehouses and depots (certainly in Europe) have more moths than shells in them and so we are into the second phase; that of building new equipment based on experience gained.  Short term production capacity of existing systems is limited and we don't yet know exactly which 'new' kit we should bet the farm on mass-producing (see recent 'What Drone?' discussions, ect.).  So I think, as things stand, Ukraine can maintain a coherent strategy that acknowledges all the above and still focuses on territorial integrity:  If they think Russia want to freeze along existing(ish) front lines and if they can get confidence in ongoing Western support and supply of key weapon/ammunition types, then I think it's clear that they should settle down and focus on corroding Russia's entire occupation force on the land bridge from range.  Talk to allies and focus all efforts on production of artillery pieces, 155mm ammo, PGMs, drones and ISR.

They might not be able to evict the Russians but they can certainly charge an eye-watering rental fee.

 

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

For the West….WTF?!  We have never presented a coherent set of strategic objectives in this thing.  Beyond “free Ukraine” the west has never declare what it wants out of all this.  I suspect it is because we are looking at different answers for different people.  US wants an international order win to flavour next internal fight.  Canada wants international order win because without that international order we are screwed in our current position.  Europe?  Baltics?  Contain Russia?  Contract Russia?  Regime change? No one has really ever come out and stated “what winning looks like for the West” so we really have no clear idea of what our sacrifice looks like.

Yeah it's because the West is a group of independent nations and not dominated by the USA quite to the extent that it is sometimes portrayed.  Ultimately though I think everyone's goal is maintenance of the Rules-Based Order 'platonic ideal' even if each country might be looking at a different projection of it.  For example I think the UK likely wants to settle some scores with Russia while appearing to be strong and leadershippy without EU membership and simultaneously setting ourselves up for a long, close friendship with Ukraine after the war (because we need some friends now we don't have EU membership).  Those incentives all reflect different facets of the same Rule-Based Order that the US, Canada, Poland and France want to protect, if for different specific reasons.

 

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

And then there is the rest.  China, Iran and India for example.  They want western contraction that much is clear.  But they do not necessarily want Russian expansion.  They likely want a weak Russia and a weak West.

I think China, Iran and India have already 'won' as much as they were ever going to, to be honest.  The Rules-Based Order was challenged (*tick*); Russia was weakened and left dependent on them for support (*tick*); clues as to the way conventional near-peer war is evolving are freely available, allowing them to try to sidestep US dominance of traditional warfare domains in their own force designs (*tick*); and there's more.  Funnily enough I think that, insofar as they want to affect the war, they might want to err towards prolonging it more than Russia does.

 

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

Strategy and the Art of War is keeping all these things aligned - Options, Decisions and Effects to Outcomes.  What we are not really seeing is a coherent strategy from either side in all this.

Exactly why I think Ukraine may need to stop advancing, since advancing seems like it may soon start to reduce their Option space rather than expand it, simply through force attrition.  They should maintain sufficient force coherence at the front such that an advance may still be an Option but instead elect to Decide that Russia can not expand its land bridge, Undecide that Russia can maintain efficient and unmolested control of the land bridge and focus their Effects on the Russians' willingness and ability to sustain the occupation.

That seems to me to be as good a holding pattern as any until they/we can properly solve for offense.

Edited November 7, 2023 by Tux

[kimbosbread]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

My bet is they are seeking frozen conflict to buy time for a reload and then coming back to this in ten years or so.  However, I also suspect they know that the west will likely establish some binding security arrangements with Ukraine and Putin will likely be dead in ten years.

Freezing the conflict has an interesting benefit for Ukraine that we’ve touched on in the past- a bunch of traumatized demobilized soldiers trying to re-integrate with the rest of Russian society. Putin can’t just have them all killed so they don’t cause trouble because he does need young men for the next fight, and whoever succeeds him in the next 10 years will have to deal with a nasty demographic decline.

[Harmon Rabb]

Because missiles and fighter aircraft are really cool, especially when used for a righteous cause. 

Edited November 7, 2023 by Harmon Rabb

[Battlefront.com]

3 hours ago, Ales Dvorak said:

Not looking good....

https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses/38198

I've said it before and now I have to say it again... you really, really, really need to work on your propaganda detecting skills.  You can start by putting whatever you see/read into the context of everything else seen/read.  The more the thing you're looking at is out of alignment with everything else, the greater the chance that what you are looking at is either completely fake or an anomaly.

The notion that Ukrainian forces have barrier troops holding them back is a steaming pile of BS.  That should have been your first indication that what you're watching isn't what it is reported to be.  Second, the thought that Ukraine hires foreigners to keep its forces in the line is so obviously pro-Russian propaganda it makes by butt hurt just thinking about it.  And yet you fell for both.

What does this video show?  Well, first possibility it is faked.  I mean, what are the chances that such an event was captured on video AND uploaded?  Russians love faking things and rely on people with poor skills at detecting their fakes to pass them along.  This is standard social media behavior, but the Russians have been doing this for longer any of us here have been alive and those skills were passed down to the Russians.

The second possibility is that it's real.  This sort of crap happens in all wars.  Scared and armed people are a dangerous combination.  Add to it someone who has possibly already killed people at close range and you get an even more dangerous combination.

Regardless, the purpose of putting the video up is to promote the Russian narrative of the war.  Plane and simple, you are falling for an obviously extremely biased and unreliable source of information.  Look at the guy's Telegram feed... it's so painfully clear that the guy is either a brainwashed anti-West zombie or he's a "cutout" for Russian intelligence services.  There's no third possibility.  Given this, the chances of anything posted on this guy/organization's Telegram channel being relevant "news" is just about zero.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

3 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

(This is after all Page 3003)

...I think this video has been around before. I have no idea where it came from, or whether it's real or faked (trying to order around terrified guys whose language you don't speak is probably chancy in any army) but the entire idea of foreign barrier detachments keeping Ukrainian mobiks in line is utter tosh.

Typical Russian second grade schoolyard propaganda:  Well, YOU'RE blocking detachments times TWO!

I love how the "foreigner" with the Go-Pro camera gets killed straight away and falls perfectly so that we can all watch the "Ukrainian" execute the other "foreigner".  Didn't fall forward, didn't fall with his head tipped in another direction, nope... perfectly positioned.  And apparently the running "Ukrainian" was able to fire from the hip so perfectly that the "foreigner" was hit in the head instead of the body armor or an extremity.

Putting aside the other obvious red flags (of which there are MANY) this is the one that made me laugh out loud when I watched it.

The chances of this being a real video are about as good a chance that Azov Brigade crucified children back in 2014.

Steve

[Harmon Rabb]

Is it me or do Russian actors in these ads get much better kit than a lot of Russian soldiers do on the real battlefield?

I think that is an Aussie Bushmaster, would be cool if Australia could send some more over to the AFU in response to this classy recruitment ad.

 

Edited November 7, 2023 by Harmon Rabb

[Battlefront.com]

5 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

I like him too, but SecretSqrl has also been caught out in some Chuck Pfarrer/Igor Sushko level wayyyy-over-the-skis exaggerations in the past, so all his claims, including retweets, should be taken with significant salt.

That said, his map analysis is pretty good, which I think is his mil background. 

Mind you, it would be nice if the map grogs in general could use smaller icons for Bn or Bn-strength formations, to distinguish them from  parent formations, and perhaps 'blur' or dotted outline deployments that are only rumoured.

...Otherwise, all these icons are just eye candy (it's probably too much to expect actual unit frontages from OSINT sources given Opsec), if not downright misleading as to relative force strengths (hmm, there seem to be more little red boxes than blue ones, therefore....?)

P.S.  I miss our own @Grigb's mapwork from last fall. That was quite outstanding, giving the terrain context for the movements and positions.  Shout out, brother, let us know you're OK?

When analyzing why even modest predictions for this counter-offensive didn't come to pass, it is important to look at what information was true and not before assessing further.

For the most part I believe that OSINT was correct about two things:

1.  Russia doesn't have tactical or operational reserves, probably not even strategic reserves, to commit to battle.  If it wants to do something it has to be done mostly by the forces already in place or by thinning out some area to favor another.

2.  Few Russian units are fighting at anything even close to their nominal (paper) strength.  The larger formations were rarely at theoretical strength even when the war started, but it seems many are down to battalion size.  The independent battalions, such as BARS, are more likely closer to their theoretical strength simply because anything less can't function.  Due to the massive losses of actions like Avdiivka, there are probably quite a few units that are currently in the "non-functional" category, but likely tasked with non-offensive roles while they take in new personnel.

Many of us (including me) predicted this would be the state of the Russian forces by this point in the year.  So on that count we got it right.  What we got wrong was two things:

1.  Russia somehow could find enough volunteers to keep its forces from collapsing without doing another mobilization.

2.  That Ukraine wouldn't be capable of exploiting areas where Russian forces are thin.

As a result it seems that Ukraine's offensive capacity this year was slightly less than Russia's ability to keep its forces from dissolving in front of them.  Had Russian defenses been a little less strong or Ukraine had another 20,000 fresh troops available, things might have turned out very different.  In other words, I think Russia's plans for defending BARELY worked, but in the end their defenses were sufficient enough to hold their lines despite being thinned down significantly.

The question in front of us now is how much can Ukraine bleed out the Russian forces next year AND will Russia be able to avoid mobilization again?

Steve

 

[sburke]

3 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Fixed that for ya.

@sburke, can you gently herd the old timer back to the Peng thread?

I'm sorry but as a lowly apprentice of the cesspool, I am allowed only a few interactions with Ye Olde Ones

Refreshing their drinks

Lighting their cigars

providing an ash tray if desired or sweeping the floor if it isn't

Wiping their arses.  They are such glorious arses.. err I mean they HAVE such glorious arses.  ahem.  However I can direct you to my Leige, the rootinest tootinest shootinest Leige one can have in the Cesspool!

The one, the only @Joe Shaw

[Kinophile]

5 hours ago, Ales Dvorak said:

Not looking good....

https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses/38198

Yeah right.

The second I read about UKR Barrier detachments I turn off. Everything after that will be propaganda drivel, everything before that, same and really, you should know better. At least highlight the blatant RUS bias, with implied or noted caveats.

Dammit, Ninja'd by Steve, Kraft et al

Edited November 7, 2023 by Kinophile

[Beleg85]

6 hours ago, Ales Dvorak said:

Not looking good....

https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses/38198

Still far from the level of famous clip of German mercenary doctors removing organs from wounded AFU patients.

https://voxukraine.org/en/public-health-fakes-ukrainian-military-man-witnessed-the-work-of-black-transplant-specialists-at-the-front-issue-33

Also some month age there was one great in-depth interview with DPR soldiers by one of Russian "journos", who described in detail how they killed so many american mercs, that BlackHawks hoovered constantly at night, crossed the frontline and managed to take their bodies back to "giant, secret freezer  in Poland". Further they even claimed they shot down one helicopter, but remains where immediatelly bombed by Ukrainian artillery, so unfirtunatelly no wrecks to show.

As you see, in Russia Americans are in the same time extremelly dumb and ungodly clever. Very difficult enemy for Ivan.

Perhaps action was planned by Boris "Tactical" Johnson himself.

[Harmon Rabb]

The irony is that I am almost positive that these "Journalists" got these ideas from watching old Hollywood movies. Sounds like a mix of Black Hawk Down and name your favorite 90s action movie story involving elite mercenaries doing bad things.

If memory serves me and you already talked about the influence that American pop culture has on Russian propaganda in the passed.

 

[acrashb]

2 hours ago, sburke said:

Wiping their arses.  They are such glorious arses.. err I mean they HAVE such glorious arses. 

So, instead of being an Esquire, you're an Arsquire.   Interesting career choise.

Edited November 7, 2023 by acrashb

[The_Capt]

2 hours ago, sburke said:

I'm sorry but as a lowly apprentice of the cesspool, I am allowed only a few interactions with Ye Olde Ones

Refreshing their drinks

Lighting their cigars

providing an ash tray if desired or sweeping the floor if it isn't

Wiping their arses.  They are such glorious arses.. err I mean they HAVE such glorious arses.  ahem.  However I can direct you to my Leige, the rootinest tootinest shootinest Leige one can have in the Cesspool!

The one, the only @Joe Shaw

[Jr Buck Private]

21 hours ago, poesel said:

I have a question regarding mine clearing with rollers: why do mine clearing vehicles have to be tanks?

The survivability of mine clearing tanks in this conflict seems to be abysmal. So why bother with armor, and instead use mass.
Attach a barrel to a civilian vehicle (4WD or small truck), fill the barrel with water, relieve valve and make that vehicle remote controlled (nothing fancy, just forward, left, right) - you have your el-cheapo mine roller.
Works only in light terrain, and doesn't survive any decent shelling. But you can have a lot of them as they are very cheap.

This must be a stupid idea because nobody is doing it, but why?

I thinking about a cast iron rolling pin, about 20 feet in diameter.   I'm still in the design phase on that ....  

[Harmon Rabb]

School's out.

 

[sburke]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

Don't worry, he likely won't respond.  His Dallas Cowboys left Phila on the loser bus because despite the NFL painting huge white lines to denote the end zone and field boundaries, the Cowboys couldn't seem to figure out what they meant in game terms.

[Kinophile]

https://en.defence-ua.com/news/the_ground_forces_command_showed_the_work_of_archer_system_for_the_first_time-8448.html

Archer chomping away already. 

Edited November 7, 2023 by Kinophile

[Kinophile]

https://euromaidanpress.com/2023/11/06/ukroboronprom-ukraines-kamikaze-drones-with-1000-km-combat-radius-in-mass-production/

 

[Battlefront.com]

6 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

https://euromaidanpress.com/2023/11/06/ukroboronprom-ukraines-kamikaze-drones-with-1000-km-combat-radius-in-mass-production/

 

Holy crap.  Well, Ukraine's options for spreading the pain deep into Russia is about to get a boost.

With this Ukraine can hit anything from St. Petersburg to the southern borders in the Caucuses.  Anybody know where Russia's main missile and drone production facilities are?

Steve

[Ultradave]

On 11/6/2023 at 2:21 PM, Harmon Rabb said:

Tis But A Scratch.

Yeah, that'll buff right out. I little Bondo, a little elbow grease. 

Dave

[sburke]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

Holy crap.  Well, Ukraine's options for spreading the pain deep into Russia is about to get a boost.

With this Ukraine can hit anything from St. Petersburg to the southern borders in the Caucuses.  Anybody know where Russia's main missile and drone production facilities are?

Steve

We'll likely be able to tell from the pyres.

[Carolus]

1 hour ago, Kinophile said:

https://en.defence-ua.com/news/the_ground_forces_command_showed_the_work_of_archer_system_for_the_first_time-8448.html

Archer chomping away already. 

It's beautiful but Europe needs 600 and 300 need to go to Ukraine.

In my crackpot fantasy, I imagine this thing for the motorized (wheeled) formations and the PzH2000 for the mechanized (tracked) formations of the European arm of NATO. The latter gained a good rapport In Ukraine.

Edited November 7, 2023 by Carolus