How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[JonS]

So, which is it: Russia sux therefore Ukraine doesn't need much help to kick the rotten door in, or Russia has a competent and professional military force which will require the entire civilised world fighting in a giant coalition to overcome.

Because it can't be both, and you can't take one preposition but apply the other deduction to it.

Edited August 19, 2023 by JonS

[MikeyD]

Interesting how you typed 'it can't be both' as though the statement is generally acknowledged received wisdom.

Edited August 19, 2023 by MikeyD

[kevinkin]

1 hour ago, JonS said:

And yet, 6 months later, here we are.

And the US lead NATO is prepared to give Ukraine just enough rope to hang themselves. Does anyone think Ukraine will meet it's lofty symbolic land objectives in an armchair general's war during the US political season? POTUS has to make the case otherwise. But that is not happening.

Maybe POTUS should just say we are prepared to turn Russian into "North Korea" and Ukraine into "South Korea" for as long as it takes. We will not fire until fired upon. Regime change in Russia is not a strategy when their population are zombies. Any other solution requires WW3. Something the US public can't fight without some form of cognitive leadership. Patience plays into the RA hands given the current correlation of firepower. 

The CIA might know better. But I would not put my money on their assessment.  

At this point, Ukraine is as likely to fall into the authoritarian sphere than the free sphere. The cultural differences are not so severe - Hatfield vs Mccoy. A civil war with corruption, interpersonal networks the West can't comprehend or disrupt to its advantage.

America needs to tell Ukraine we are all in or who guys need to dig in (and reproduce).    

Edited August 19, 2023 by kevinkin

[danfrodo]

1 hour ago, JonS said:

Amusing.

Last year people in this thread were saying exactly the same thing "lol, silly Russians. The Ukrainians will blow past that in a day." And yet, 11 months later, here we are.

I assume that even the Russians are professional enough to recognise that ditches across open paddocks aren't the only element of a defence line they are going to need. The funny thing about ditches under tree cover is that they're not very photogenic.

The tricky aspect of photographic analysis is interpreting what you can't see from the things you can. The Luftwaffe radar installation at Bruneval, for instance, was first identified because of long grass of all things. The Germans had ringed the site with barbed wire because they were worried about a ground attack or raid, or randos wandered up and having a butchers. The problem with barbed wire is that it's really hard to mow the grass in and around it, so over the course of six months or so a distinctive ring of tall grass sprouted up in the middle of an otherwise nondescript paddock in front of the manor house. "Now why would that happen" the British photo interpreters asked themselves, and working from there - and combining their suspicions with other intelligence threads - realised that they'd found a Würzburg , which led to Op BITING.

IIRC, a similar process was used to delimit the boundaries a number of the minefields in Normandy before D-Day.

Interpreting what you can't see based on what you can is also one of the reasons so much effort is put into studying enemy doctrine.

So, putting all that together, and relating it to 2023: we can see ditches. Great, in themselves they're no great shakes. But based on doctrine and experience over the last 6-12 months, what else should the Ukrainians expect on and around these new positions.

Ditches which are in the middle of open paddocks and perpendicular to the expected axis of advance are probably pretty dumb. The only thing dumber than that would be to assume that ditches in the middle of open paddocks perpendicular to the expected axis of advance are the only things the Russians are building.

I think you are misunderstanding my point.  Everyone keeps drawing lines based on ditches and assuming they are defenses.  I was simply saying same thing as you -- they are just ditches unless mined & manned & observed & covered w artillery.  Yet every time RU digs a ditch, it's a 'new defense line' according to most of the maps, yet we have no idea what it really is other than a ditch..

Edited August 19, 2023 by danfrodo

[chris talpas]

3 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

I'm posting this simply to remind us of how important it is for Ukraine to take back significant terrain this year.  Because US support for Ukraine is only assured until the 2024 elections.  After that it all depends (oddly enough) on Democrats holding power in the White House because the most likely Republican presidential possibilities are not supportive of Ukraine.  Even if the Democrats retake the House and hold the Senate, losing the Presidency is likely fatal to Ukraine's ability to fight a high intensity war against Russia.  Some NATO countries will continue to support Ukraine with all they can, but let's face it... some will welcome a change in US policy towards appeasement.

Steve

I’m not sure how much congressional support will even exist once the primaries start since the rank and file Republicans may not want to offend the front runners and their enthusiastic supporters (I’m trying to be diplomatic),

Ronald Reagan and John McCain must be spinning in their graves -God rest their souls

I would have never imagined the Republican Party being the pro Russian dictatorship party.  

Sorry for rant

[kevinkin]

31 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

Everyone keeps drawing lines based on ditches and assuming they are defenses.

That is why linear mine fields are poor. They are against economy of force and combat where you draw the attacker into kill zones. Fire sacs. You would use linear fields only if setting up a border to be defended sort of like the Berlin War or a DMZ defined by negotiation. A hedgehog defense is not one of desperation - more of "rope a dope" when in capable hands it can turn the table on the attacker. But again, the RA is just full of dopes. 

Edited August 19, 2023 by kevinkin

[Battlefront.com]

3 hours ago, JonS said:

Amusing.

Last year people in this thread were saying exactly the same thing "lol, silly Russians. The Ukrainians will blow past that in a day." And yet, 11 months later, here we are.

This is about the "dragon's teeth" defenses.  I still laugh at them.  They represented a large expense of resources for something that isn't likely to make much of any difference.  The same concrete, transportation, and labor would have been much better invested into pre-made fighting positions.  Which, of course, Russia has been making and using.

So, I for one stand by laughing at those dragon's teeth.  I was NOT laughing about the defenses in the south.  Not after seeing what happened in Kherson last year and knowing how much time the south had to prepare for this attack.  We did see OSINT for months beforehand that they were reinforcing positions, so it was no surprise to anybody paying attention.

Now we have a new situation to ponder.  Which is how good are Russia's 2nd and 3rd lines of defense in the south?  We don't know and the longer it takes to reach them the answer is probably "better than they were the day before".

Dan's point, though, is that just because Russia says it has positions and there's some scars on the landscape that can be seen from a satellite doesn't tell us much.  It would be a mistake to presume they are as good as what they had in the first line of defense.  This gets back to the traditional dangerous ground of presuming Russia is stronger than it is and backing down because of it.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

3 hours ago, kevinkin said:

And the US lead NATO is prepared to give Ukraine just enough rope to hang themselves.

What nonsense.  How is Ukraine bleeding Russia's forces to death, destroying decades worth of expensive military production, and even regaining ground "hanging themselves?"  Even if Ukraine stopped tomorrow out of exhaustion, they are in a better position than they have ever been since this war started.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

From ISW's August 18th report.  ISW seems to be getting as frustrated by the pessimism as am I:

Quote

It is unclear from published reports why US intelligence analysts have reportedly concluded that seizing Melitopol is the only way Ukraine can sever the Russian land bridge. ISW has, in fact, assessed that Ukraine has many options for severing critical Russian ground lines of communication along the northern Sea of Azov coast of which the seizure of Melitopol is only one.[3] US Secretary of State Antony Blinken notably offered a diverging opinion from the alleged intelligence assessment on August 15, stating that the prospects for Ukraine’s counteroffensive to make significant “strategic gains” will remain unclear for at least a month or longer.[4]

It is premature to make assessments about the overall success of ongoing Ukrainian counteroffensive operations occurring along several lines of advance toward several different apparent objectives. ISW has consistently assessed that the Ukrainian counteroffensive will be a protracted, non-linear series of operations, which will likely continue to occur in phases of differing tempos.[5] The Ukrainian counteroffensive is not a discrete set of scheduled operations, and current counteroffensive operations are likely setting more favorable conditions for larger significant operations.[6] ISW continues to assess that Ukrainian counteroffensive operations are significantly degrading defending Russian forces and that the overall degradation of the Russian defensive line creates opportunities for any Ukrainian breakthrough to be potentially operationally significant.[7]

Basically... anybody who thinks it is already time to declare the counter-offensive a lost cause needs to take a step away from commenting for a month and let others, who understand what is going on better, do the prognosticating.

Steve

[kevinkin]

34 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Even if Ukraine stopped tomorrow out of exhaustion, they are in a better position than they have ever been since this war started.

You are crazy. Look at the country where tens of thousands Ukrainians will never return to. That's Putin's strategy. This is the thinking of a shallow wargame developer who never put themselves in harms way. 

 

[Battlefront.com]

5 minutes ago, kevinkin said:

You are crazy. Look at the country where tens of thousands Ukrainians will never return to. That's Putin's strategy. This is the thinking of a shallow wargame developer who never put themselves in harms way. 

 

Holy crow man, you really need to stop posting at night.  And in this case, testing the limits of my patience by attacking me while at the same time showing how out of touch you are with the facts on the ground.

Fact... every day this war goes on Russia winds up with less of Ukraine's terrain to prevent Ukrainians returning home to.  Is it regaining terrain as fast as Ukraine would like?  No.  Could the US and its allies do more to help speed this up, or reduce the costs?  Yes.  But to say that the West's collective efforts are making Ukraine WORSE OFF than it would otherwise be is, to throw a back at you, "crazy".

Now, decide if you want to retain posting privileges before you post again.  Because given your last response, I am not entirely sure you wish to.

Steve

[kevinkin]

26 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Basically... anybody who thinks it is already time to declare the counter-offensive a lost cause needs to take a step away from commenting for a month and let others, who understand what is going on better, do the prognosticating.

Steve

The thread has turned authoritative. So unless we agree with the almighty we are asked to shut up. Nice.  

Edited August 19, 2023 by kevinkin

[kevinkin]

2 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

attacking me

I did not attack you. Why so defensive? You are a tactical thinker, I think strategically. That's why you love videos of bodies being blow up and I don't. 

[Battlefront.com]

2 minutes ago, kevinkin said:

The thread has turned authoritative. So unless we agree will the almighty we are asked to shut up. Nice.  

I was parsing ISW's position.  I do happen to agree with it, though.  As I do Zelensky, who asked people for patience. 

The amount of emotionally driven nonsense that is creeping into discussions (here and elsewhere) reminds me of early last year when people were convinced Russia was going to win for X reason, with X changing every time it was proven wrong.

The sky is not falling.  It is heavy.  It is sad.  But patience is still warranted.

Steve

[billbindc]

8 minutes ago, kevinkin said:

The thread has turned authoritative. So unless we agree will the almighty we are asked to shut up. Nice.  

Speaking of appeals to authority...

 "This is the thinking of a shallow wargame developer who never put themselves in harms way." 

 

[danfrodo]

I remember some months ago I wrote here that I had stopped thinking of 'the counteroffensive' and instead in terms of the 'campaigning season'.  We are still very much in the campaigning season, and UKR is campaigning, mostly via corrosion but with a few axes of attack.  It's not made the territorial progress many of us had hoped and predicted, that does not make us blind-believing fools.  There was good info to believe RU was more brittle than it has been so far.  

But there's still a lot of season left, probably 8 weeks or maybe 10.  Let's be patient and not start either panicking or playing "I told you so" for a while yet.  Right now I am not hopeful for a big breakthrough, but it is still in the cards.  We simply do not know yet.  None of us do. 

But we can talk about what evidence supports "can do" and what evidence supports "can't do" without getting all ego-involved.  We are all speculating in the dark based on the evidence as it becomes available (or at least alleged evidence).  

[Battlefront.com]

24 minutes ago, kevinkin said:

I did not attack you. Why so defensive? You are a tactical thinker, I think strategically. That's why you love videos of bodies being blow up and I don't. 

Well, I did ask you to think carefully before posting.  I assume you did, and therefore want to be banned.  Even though you've already received warnings about your aggressive behavior towards other members, I'm going to give you a 2 week ban and see how that works out.  When you return I suggest you not post late at night as that's when you seem to be more inclined to fight instead of contribute.

Steve

[FancyCat]

Good time for a reminder that the position Ukraine stands today is wildly out of step with what consensus considered Ukraine would be at pre-invasion (annexed). At many points between the inability for Russia to seize the country in the beginning days to today, perception of Ukraine's ability to wage war has changed, some could say drastically many times, so for me, while obviously it's a issue that Ukraine cannot achieve much in this offensive territorially, it's not a issue that should result in people insisting that NATO intervention into Ukraine is the only solution for total victory for Ukraine. I don't see any reason why the gradual support for Ukraine by the west isn't a decent strategy that will pay off sooner or later. Is it long? Yes and it should be pushed and sped up but acting like one offensive failing is the sky falling...I mean just looking at some campaigns of WWII should give you a heart attack midway thru.

[Battlefront.com]

A very good article in the WSJ exploring the "better not rock the boat" caution about destabilizing Putin's regime.  It is not behind a paywall:

https://www.wsj.com/world/russia/should-the-west-fear-putins-fall-f4e0a818?st=87uljt5ok43cr87&reflink=share_mobilewebshare

Several good, but incompatible, points are made in this article that show how difficult it is to look forward to Putin's departure from power.

Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas pointed out that the collapse of the Soviet Union was viewed by the West as unfavorable, but for the people living under Soviet rule it turned out to be highly favorable.  Kofman pointed out that while Khrushchev made major improvements for internal life, on the other hand he pursued a far more aggressive foreign policy that almost led to WW3.  Others pointed out that the new leader will likely be so preoccupied with establishing control that Ukraine will no longer be the central focus.  And yet, Kofman (again) makes an astute point:

Quote

“The majority of leaders who inherit wars continue them. They’re locked into them, and often they escalate them in an attempt to end the war that their predecessor had created,” he said. “Another leader may not have Putin’s fixation on Ukraine, but nonetheless may not have any other way out because Putin has already begun to convert the Russian economy and the Russian state onto a wartime footing, and politically it would be very risky to start converting it back.”

I'm in the "anybody that succeeds Putin will be worse" camp, however I don't think whomever it is will last very long.  I think Putin has made such a mess of things that it will be difficult to keep the war going, especially if the ultra nationalists take control because they are inherently unbalanced.  And since I think that's the most likely successor to Putin, I think any replacement is likely to head the country pretty quickly into major internal conflict.  Maybe some form of brakeup (Soviet Union), maybe messy (Tzarist Russia), or perhaps some of both.  Either way, I think Kofman's quote above needs a caveat added:

The majority of leaders who inherit wars continue them to the extent they are able to.

Russia is headed towards economic collapse.  Changing out Putin for someone else isn't likely to change the equation much.  If anything, I think it will speed it up because troubled economic conditions are rarely improved by destabilizing the political apparatus.  At least not in the short term.  And the short term is what matters most for Russia's ability to keep the war going.

Plus, what Russia's war effort needs more than tanks or artillery shells is a few hundred thousand conscripts and a top to bottom cleaning out of the Russian military leadership.  Mass mobilization is likely to further destabilize the Russian state, cleaning out the Russian military leadership would be extremely messy and also likely to further destabilize the Russian state.

I don't see a way out for Russia.  Even if Ukraine surrendered tomorrow, the economic and political problems created by decades of mismanagement and this war aren't going away.  And neither is Ukraine's resolve to take back its land.

But there I go... thinking all tactical again

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

5 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

obviously it's a issue that Ukraine cannot achieve much in this offensive territorially

Not obvious to me   See previous discussions as to why.

It will only be obvious to me that this counter-offensive has no chance of retaking large amounts of territory when we reach the end of September.  That is the lesson drawn from Kherson last year... months of grind with small gains, then within days all territorial objectives secured.  I have absolutely no idea how likely this is to happen again, but I see no reasonable argument that rules it out.  For now.  Again, end of September it becomes a very different discussion if Russia's front hasn't collapsed.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Whoa.  OK, we've all seen some impressive uses of drones, but this one really underscores how much they have changed warfare forever:

If it can be spotted it can be targeted.  If it can be targeted it can be hit.  Even if it is a small tripod mounted system peaking out of a 7th story window behind enemy lines. 

The really vexing thing about a drone is that it doesn't require speed to strike a target.  It can, under certain circumstances, slowly and precisely move into an optimal kill position before detonating.  And if that position isn't reached the first time, then it is at least theoretically possible to hold off detonating, reposition, and then detonate.

It is difficult to say for sure, but I think this particular drone was remote triggered instead of impact detonated.  If it wasn't remotely triggered, there is no reason why it couldn't have been.  Instead of a grenade being dropped, the grenade could stay on the quad copter and the pin could be released instead.  Very easily done, especially by the ever clever Ukrainians.

What's more, a drone team knowing what they are attacking before they launch can customize their drone for that target.  Much like a WW2 carrier aircraft being loaded for attacking with bombs or torpedoes depending on the target.

Steve

[dan/california]

26 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Not obvious to me   See previous discussions as to why.

It will only be obvious to me that this counter-offensive has no chance of retaking large amounts of territory when we reach the end of September.  That is the lesson drawn from Kherson last year... months of grind with small gains, then within days all territorial objectives secured.  I have absolutely no idea how likely this is to happen again, but I see no reasonable argument that rules it out.  For now.  Again, end of September it becomes a very different discussion if Russia's front hasn't collapsed.

Steve

I fully agree with the general point here, but the issue isn't the calendar, it is the weather. And the weather is getting screwier by the day, almost. Raise your hand if you had Hawaii burning down on your bingo card for 2023? Anybody? The curtain could come down on the offensive in the middle of September, or the middle of November. The is just no way to tell until we get there.

I don't think Ukraine is trying to do it this way intentionally, but it would actually be somewhat advantageous if the weather went to heck and made offensive operations impossible right after they had achieved their major objectives.

[dan/california]

18 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Whoa.  OK, we've all seen some impressive uses of drones, but this one really underscores how much they have changed warfare forever:

If it can be spotted it can be targeted.  If it can be targeted it can be hit.  Even if it is a small tripod mounted system peaking out of a 7th story window behind enemy lines. 

The really vexing thing about a drone is that it doesn't require speed to strike a target.  It can, under certain circumstances, slowly and precisely move into an optimal kill position before detonating.  And if that position isn't reached the first time, then it is at least theoretically possible to hold off detonating, reposition, and then detonate.

It is difficult to say for sure, but I think this particular drone was remote triggered instead of impact detonated.  If it wasn't remotely triggered, there is no reason why it couldn't have been.  Instead of a grenade being dropped, the grenade could stay on the quad copter and the pin could be released instead.  Very easily done, especially by the ever clever Ukrainians.

What's more, a drone team knowing what they are attacking before they launch can customize their drone for that target.  Much like a WW2 carrier aircraft being loaded for attacking with bombs or torpedoes depending on the target.

Steve

Either the Ukrainians have come up with an FPV system with longer range in enough quantity to use them on towed D-30s, Or they have figured out some sort of mothership set up. Either way they just get better by the day.

I think Haiduk said Ukraine had FINALLY gotten Switch Blade 600s in limited quantity, but I am not sure towed artillery is a high enough priority to use those on. Maybe somebody in Eastern Europe has just started making out and out copies of Lancets?

[dan/california]

 

[dan/california]

A lot of interesting pics tonight, can't wait to see the geo locate on this one.