How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Holien]

We note all the fires in Russia, but the war is hitting home ground.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68899130

Russia can always find useful idiots for money...

Quote

Two British men have been charged with helping Russian intelligence services after a suspected arson attack on a Ukraine-linked business in London.

Dylan Earl, 20, from Elmesthorpe in Leicestershire, and Jake Reeves, 22, from Croydon, were investigated following a fire at a warehouse in east London in March.

Three other suspects linked to the fire have been held on other charges.

There was a fire at an Ammo production facility in Wales recently too...

[Holien]

6 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

No need to be hyperbolic,

He wasn't, you are creating a straw man.

Calm down...

[FancyCat]

Something else to note, all accounts by foreigners serving or served in Ukraine, describe a conflict and warzone of unparalleled difficulty and scale outmatching certainly any conflicts the West has engaged in recently, with equality of arms being the most equal since Vietnam? Or more likely Korea? The experience in Ukraine has been attested to as very much different than the superiority enjoyed in the GWoT. 

Ukrainians are on the back foot, and I certainly can’t begrudge any person staring at the months long drought of U.S support with anything but dread at joining the defense. 

Which is why I’ve mentioned that political considerations are essential to success in the war, sure, Ukraine has littered Southeast Ukraine with the wrecks of Russian equipment but the overwhelming narrative favors Russia still, evidently the wrecks of Russian equipment aren’t defeating the headlines of “Russian advances” and while long term this may spell the defeat of Russia, the evident goal of Russia is to persuade the West to cut off aid in the short term, and for Ukraine to surrender, demoralized by lack of aid and enemy advances.

This is why Ukraine needs wins now. And considerations of the now, of the near term are important for Ukraine to make it long term.

[The_Capt]

28 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

Let’s not overstate the foreign numbers, while certainly there are foreigners serving in the Ukrainian military, the vast majority of personnel are Ukrainian. Quick google search brought up 20k foreigners, with 200k total on the low side of personnel on the frontlines, that’s still just 10 percent of the soldiers defending Ukraine are foreigners. No need to be hyperbolic, end of the day it is Ukrainian blood spilled to defend Ukraine.

“Only 20k”?!  Let’s not be hypoboblic either.  10% of a field force is no small measure.  The point of my original post is that there are young Ukrainian men running away from the fight while (only) 20 thousand foreigners are there doing the dying.  That ain’t right.

[The_Capt]

36 minutes ago, Holien said:

My Grandad was white feathered during WW2.

He was castigated by quite a few folk in Doncaster a northern industrial town in Yorkshire.

But what those doing it didn't know was he was an electrician and he was refused when trying to join up and had to serve maintaining the electrics in the vital factories in the area. My grandmother never forgave those that attacked him and spat at him, they had their son's dying and saw him as a draft Dodger.

That young lad you mentioned could better serve his country being back home. He can serve behind the front lines...

In fact Ukraine should be looking at what was done by the UK to encourage folk to fight during WW2, it was as vital as any fighting done as if you don't have the recruits you can't fight...

 

 

The tradition pre-dates WW1 by the look of it.  I know in WW1 it was used in the colonies.  This sort of micro-social pressure has tremendous power, both good and bad.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_feather

Sure the young man could still serve behind the lines but right now he is whining about losing consular services on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean.  Plenty of work and not all of it fighting.  But, as has been stressed many times here, the UA is running low on fighting troops.  The answer to this is not tell every 18-30 year old Ukrainian male (not sure what the Ukrainian policy is on women in combat) “Gee, sorry to bring it up but you might have heard Russia is intent on destroying our nation. They are also willing to do so in a brutal and criminal manner.  If you feel like it, we would very much appreciate it if you would consider fighting for your nations freedom.”  

There will always be a slice of the fighting age population excluded from combat for various reasons but they should be contributing as directly as they can regardless.  For Ukraine this is a whole of society war, not a “those that kinda want to” war…you know the ones we in the West have been fighting for 30 years.

[Maciej Zwolinski]

4 hours ago, The_Capt said:

From a military viewpoint, objectively, both sides have been conducting small tactical actions and taking bites of what is essentially wasteland.  Neither side has been able to create the conditions for operational breakthroughs or collapse since Fall of ‘22.  From an operational and strategic point of view this conflict has been pretty static.  With this surge of new support we might see Ukraine re-take a few kms etc but unless these turn into something more it won’t mean anymore than costly Russian gains this winter.

I agree -obviously-  with the part about Russian slow tempo of advance. However, there are some other elements, which make the recent Russians offensive actions more dangerous than the earlier ones, regardless of the low tempo.

1. The mere possibility of breakthrough. I won't quibble whether it would be an operational breakthrough or a smaller one, but people report that there could have been a breakthrough and transition to exploitation by Russians. That is significant. The last time it happened for Russian was after Severodonetsk 2 years ago. In the meantime they could not, and now they can again.

2. The sheer repeatability of the RUS set piece attack method,. They have been redoing the same approach again and again in Avdieyevka, Bachmut/Chasiv Yar, Ocheretovate and elsewhere. Each time it works in the same way, the Russians finally drive the UKR away. Obviously, time and casualties are hugely important variables in this equation. But the outcome is not really in doubt.  If the UKR receive ammunition for artillery, they will be able to fire defensive barrages and counterbatery fires, possibly suppress Russian artillery and hopefully screw up their method that way. But even then they will have nothing against the gliding bombs.  I doubt that the UKR have even a shadow of an idea, how to counter them. If I were Shoigu, I would order conversion of 3/4 of the fighter force to gliding bomb tossers and have them fly multiple delivery missions, as much as the airframes can stand.

3. The UKR  losses. It is too early to have a reliable loss estimations for either party, but previously in similar of actions comprising mostly static defence under RUS arty fire the losses were very high for the Ukraine and well over the acceptable exchange rate. I know the Russians are losing tons of vehicles, but for the UKR personnel is the vulnerable asset, and they do not come off well in this exchange.

 

[Maciej Zwolinski]

1 hour ago, FancyCat said:

Quick google search brought up 20k foreigners, with 200k total on the low side of personnel on the frontlines, that’s still just 10 percent of the soldiers defending Ukraine are foreigners.

That is a huge proportion,  during the Indochina War the French Foreign Legion made up just a bit over 10% of the frontline strength of the French expeditionary corps. And that was a formation specifically created for that kind of occasion.

[The_Capt]

51 minutes ago, Maciej Zwolinski said:

I agree -obviously-  with the part about Russian slow tempo of advance. However, there are some other elements, which make the recent Russians offensive actions more dangerous than the earlier ones, regardless of the low tempo.

1. The mere possibility of breakthrough. I won't quibble whether it would be an operational breakthrough or a smaller one, but people report that there could have been a breakthrough and transition to exploitation by Russians. That is significant. The last time it happened for Russian was after Severodonetsk 2 years ago. In the meantime they could not, and now they can again.

2. The sheer repeatability of the RUS set piece attack method,. They have been redoing the same approach again and again in Avdieyevka, Bachmut/Chasiv Yar, Ocheretovate and elsewhere. Each time it works in the same way, the Russians finally drive the UKR away. Obviously, time and casualties are hugely important variables in this equation. But the outcome is not really in doubt.  If the UKR receive ammunition for artillery, they will be able to fire defensive barrages and counterbatery fires, possibly suppress Russian artillery and hopefully screw up their method that way. But even then they will have nothing against the gliding bombs.  I doubt that the UKR have even a shadow of an idea, how to counter them. If I were Shoigu, I would order conversion of 3/4 of the fighter force to gliding bomb tossers and have them fly multiple delivery missions, as much as the airframes can stand.

3. The UKR  losses. It is too early to have a reliable loss estimations for either party, but previously in similar of actions comprising mostly static defence under RUS arty fire the losses were very high for the Ukraine and well over the acceptable exchange rate. I know the Russians are losing tons of vehicles, but for the UKR personnel is the vulnerable asset, and they do not come off well in this exchange.

 

All solid and fair points.  If Russia could exploit this succession of tactical advances and translate into something else we could be looking at a new ball game.  However, recall that after Severodonetsk we had some more leg jumping and then an exhausted RA folded like a cheap tent at Kharkiv and Kherson - tactical success does not necessarily signal operational success.

The ability of Russia to continually plug away at this, at the loss levels they are sustaining is frankly baffling.  The losses the RA are talking, based on charts and figures that get tossed up here, are mind blowing - even halfing them to account for over-reporting.  The way to counter glide bombs is to wage a campaign against the RUAF.  Long range AD can deny but take all those ATACMs and start hitting airfields.  Then use SOF and UAS to hit them deeper.  The dangerous aspect is that the Russian may have finally found a way to make air power work for them and that has to be blunted.

As to loss ratios…no one really knows.  I have no idea what the UA losses have been in comparison to Russians for terrain taken.  They could be high or they could be moderate. The UA has likely learned to disperse and they definitely have learned to use FPVs.  I am not sure if historical ratios even can be applied here given the shift we are seeing.  I am not sure UA defence has been static in this one.  It was at Adiivka but since then there is a more mobile feel to the thing.  I would not assume massive losses on the UA side.  They definitely have happened but whether they have been enough to create conditions for a UA operational collapse have yet to be seen.  Finally, while the RA have been upping the air game, we also saw evidence of Russian guns slowing down.  We are not seeing the WW1 level of fires we saw at Severodonetsk.  Nor do we have evidence that Russian fires have gotten anymore accurate or precise.

Honestly, I am not at the doom and gloom point.  The UA is definitely straining but we do not see symptoms of breaking (mass casualties, prisoners, encirclements).  We do see high casualties for the RA but they are also still able to attack.  Until something really gives we cannot say one way or the other.  Now that US support is turned back on I suspect Russia will be forced to move off the offensive but let’s see if that unfolds.

[omae2]

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

“Only 20k”?!  Let’s not be hypoboblic either.  10% of a field force is no small measure.  The point of my original post is that there are young Ukrainian men running away from the fight while (only) 20 thousand foreigners are there doing the dying.  That ain’t right.

I don't think its right to blame a kid for running away. Most of the guys that go to fight for Ukraine was in the military and love to do that. Not all but its a big difference.

Also its easy to demand a kid to risk its limbs and life while had no opportunity to get a family and kid, so leaving behind something. But its ain't right. I understand why you seeing this way, cause you probably joined up with the military at a young age and lived a life there. Those who run know very little about it, most of them would not be an officer only a grunt. I have young Ukrainians just on the opposite door on my level, the kid must be like 20 something. I couldn't blame him from leaving, its a choice that can be made. He can have a life, as he should be, its perfectly fine.

[cesmonkey]

https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3757794/biden-administration-announces-historic-new-security-assistance-package-for-ukr/

Quote

This announcement represents the beginning of a contracting process to acquire  additional priority capabilities for Ukraine.

The capabilities in this announcement, which totals up to $6 billion, include:

    Additional munitions for Patriot air defense systems;
    Additional munitions for National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS);
    Equipment to integrate Western air defense launchers, missiles, and radars with Ukraine's air defense systems;
    Counter-UAS equipment and systems;
    Munitions for laser-guided rocket systems;
    Multi-mission radars;
    Counter-artillery radars;
    Additional ammunition for High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS);
    155mm and 152mm artillery rounds;
    Precision aerial munitions;
    Switchblade and Puma Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS);
    Tactical vehicles to tow weapons and equipment;
    Demolition munitions;
    Components to support Ukrainian production of UAS and other capabilities;
    Small arms and additional small arms ammunition; and
    Ancillary items and support for training, maintenance, and sustainment activities.

 

 

[The_Capt]

14 minutes ago, omae2 said:

I don't think its right to blame a kid for running away. Most of the guys that go to fight for Ukraine was in the military and love to do that. Not all but its a big difference.

Also its easy to demand a kid to risk its limbs and life while had no opportunity to get a family and kid, so leaving behind something. But its ain't right. I understand why you seeing this way, cause you probably joined up with the military at a young age and lived a life there. Those who run know very little about it, most of them would not be an officer only a grunt. I have young Ukrainians just on the opposite door on my level, the kid must be like 20 something. I couldn't blame him from leaving, its a choice that can be made. He can have a life, as he should be, its perfectly fine.

Freedom ain’t free.  Someone has to stop Russia from doing what it is doing which is definitely not “perfectly fine”.  In reality the kid did not run away, his family did when he was 16.  Now that he is 18 and of age; he is “staying away”.  I think every citizen has a duty to protect their nation in times of crisis.  A duty to protect each other when threatened.  If they cannot or will not do that then they really are no longer a nation.  This is one thing I think we have lost, and it will come back and bite us.  There is a solemn duty in being a citizen, and even a greater one in a free nation.  It is one that takes sacrifice for the greater good.  Now this kid could be from a pacifist ideology or religion, ok there are a lot of ways to fulfill this duty to serve.

What I disagree with is that is all fine for a young man like this to selfishly protect himself while his own people are suffering.  Running away to “embrace life” when Ukrainian children are dying back in Ukraine does not wash with me.  Personally I have been in two wars that really had not much to do with Canada.  We were really doing it for some greater global good (really did not turn out well in the end) but we all believed in it and honoured kids maybe a year older than this one who died in crappy places no one will remember in 50 years. The idea that one could “sit out” an atrocity like this invasion of Ukraine and still claim citizenship or ethnicity does not sit well with me at all.  It is shirking duty and letting others pay the price.   As we have discussed this kid does not even have to fight.  He can be in a support trade or work in industry or even humanitarian.  But his people and his country need him right now which is more important than how he gets to spend his twenties.  It is more important than him as an individual.  

Mark my words on this, we have more of this coming.  The future is likely going to demand more sacrifice for the greater good not less.  We will have to stand or kneel in the end.  And right now to my eyes, that young man is kneeling.

[Battlefront.com]

8 hours ago, The_Capt said:

I assume we are talking about this:

Gotta be honest, I see a lot of potential dangerous salients forming up, which was how the Germans made life miserable for the Soviets.  The RA lacks the logistics to really support a major drive unless conditions have changed there.  I get the concerns but until the RA can take a major operational objective - which based on this map looks like Povrovsk - we have death by a thousand nibbles.

However, I do share the concern that the UA is fully capable of collapse as well.  If that happens things could shift quickly, albeit likely slower than in Fall ‘22 re: Russian logistics.  We need a Deep Battle here to get corrosive warfare happening again.  My sense is that this war has recently shifted to front edge attrition which is not what we want.  This plays to Russian strengths.  The key Russian weakness is systems-fragility and for that we need deep deliberate corrosive warfare approaches.

Here's a thought I hope we'll never have to see play out...

Let's say that Ukraine's front collapses and Russians pour through in large numbers.  Then what?  I see a repeat of Feb/March 2022 where a fluid Russian advance is trashed by relatively small, well armed, and highly motivated Ukrainian units that act with only loose concepts of coordination. 

If Russia advances slow and steady it could probably defeat these sort of attacks, or at least come out largely ahead, but is Russia likely to play it cautious?  I don't think so.  I think they would revert to "blitzkrieg" mentality and rush to grab as much as possible as quickly as possible.  How well would that work for them?  How vulnerable would it leave them?  How much would Ukraine be able to harm them?

I don't know, but the possibility exists that if Russia breaks through it could wind up being worse for them than things are now.  Or it could be the end of Ukraine as we know it.

My point is we should not conclude with any certainty that a Russian breakthrough will ultimately see Russia come out ahead.  It's very possible, but they could also do a German Case Blue and go too far, too fast and wind up in some real trouble.

Steve

[Ts4EVER]

But the Soviets had tons of reserves in 42...

[kimbosbread]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

If Russia advances slow and steady it could probably defeat these sort of attacks, or at least come out largely ahead, but is Russia likely to play it cautious?  I don't think so.  I think they would revert to "blitzkrieg" mentality and rush to grab as much as possible as quickly as possible.  How well would that work for them?  How vulnerable would it leave them?  How much would Ukraine be able to harm them?

I’m thinking along the same lines. I think they’d get torn apart by small unit actions all over the place, be unable to refuel their vehicles, and generally things would turn into a giant mess. I assume even Russian military leadership knows this, but they’ve done lots of dumb stuff before, so who knows.

[Battlefront.com]

3 hours ago, Ts4EVER said:

But the Soviets had tons of reserves in 42...

Yes, but this wasn't the reason for the Soviet success.  The success was due to the Germans being horrifically, criminally, over extended with ever thinning flanks guarded by ever decreasing capabilities.  I actually have a great amount of respect for the Romanians and Hungarian soldiers, but let's face it... they were highly immobile and lacked adequate heavy arms, especially anti-tank.  When the Soviets smashed into their lines, it was the thinness and material weakness that was the decisive factor.

Let's not forget, the Soviets had just been soundly thrashed ahead of the German's summer offensive (Case Blue).  The Second Battle for Kharkiv, which ironically focused on Izyum, was an unmitigated disaster for the Soviets even though they did breach the German lines.  This could have been the story with all those Soviet reserves somewhere else if the Germans hadn't been so kind as to put their own outstretched neck on the chopping block.

The point here is as old as warfare itself.  It's not enough to breach the enemy's defenses.  It's not enough to send an exploitation force through the gap.  You also have to be able to do something with that exploitation force that doesn't wind up getting it into trouble.  The Soviets screwed this up time and time again throughout WW2 and Russia showed in 2022 that it wasn't much better.

Steve

[sross112]

6 hours ago, omae2 said:

I don't think its right to blame a kid for running away. Most of the guys that go to fight for Ukraine was in the military and love to do that. Not all but its a big difference.

Also its easy to demand a kid to risk its limbs and life while had no opportunity to get a family and kid, so leaving behind something. But its ain't right. I understand why you seeing this way, cause you probably joined up with the military at a young age and lived a life there. Those who run know very little about it, most of them would not be an officer only a grunt. I have young Ukrainians just on the opposite door on my level, the kid must be like 20 something. I couldn't blame him from leaving, its a choice that can be made. He can have a life, as he should be, its perfectly fine.

 

6 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Freedom ain’t free.  Someone has to stop Russia from doing what it is doing which is definitely not “perfectly fine”.  In reality the kid did not run away, his family did when he was 16.  Now that he is 18 and of age; he is “staying away”.  I think every citizen has a duty to protect their nation in times of crisis.  A duty to protect each other when threatened.  If they cannot or will not do that then they really are no longer a nation.  This is one thing I think we have lost, and it will come back and bite us.  There is a solemn duty in being a citizen, and even a greater one in a free nation.  It is one that takes sacrifice for the greater good.  Now this kid could be from a pacifist ideology or religion, ok there are a lot of ways to fulfill this duty to serve.

What I disagree with is that is all fine for a young man like this to selfishly protect himself while his own people are suffering.  Running away to “embrace life” when Ukrainian children are dying back in Ukraine does not wash with me.  Personally I have been in two wars that really had not much to do with Canada.  We were really doing it for some greater global good (really did not turn out well in the end) but we all believed in it and honoured kids maybe a year older than this one who died in crappy places no one will remember in 50 years. The idea that one could “sit out” an atrocity like this invasion of Ukraine and still claim citizenship or ethnicity does not sit well with me at all.  It is shirking duty and letting others pay the price.   As we have discussed this kid does not even have to fight.  He can be in a support trade or work in industry or even humanitarian.  But his people and his country need him right now which is more important than how he gets to spend his twenties.  It is more important than him as an individual.  

Mark my words on this, we have more of this coming.  The future is likely going to demand more sacrifice for the greater good not less.  We will have to stand or kneel in the end.  And right now to my eyes, that young man is kneeling.

I think service should be voluntary until that alone doesn't fill the need. When volunteers can't cover it, then the draft is perfectly fine. I agree that those that are pacifist or conscientious objectors should be allowed to fulfil non combat roles. I personally don't want to be in a foxhole next to someone who isn't there to fight, and believe that anyone else on the line would have the same opinion. With that being said, anyone who fails to answer the call and flees their country should have their citizenship revoked for life and not be allowed back in for any reason. I know it sounds harsh, but especially in an existential conflict like this one I think it is fitting. It is your choice to flee, but in doing so you should no longer get to identify with that country or nationality. It is an insult to all of those that stay and suffer, whether in the military or not, for that person to continue to have the rights of the others without shouldering the responsibility.

As the CPT said, there seems to be a disconnect between rights and responsibilities in a lot of nations nowadays. Freedom isn't free and those rights come with a price tag from time to time. 

[ASL Veteran]

 

[ASL Veteran]

 

[niall78]

23 hours ago, The_Capt said:

On more than a few levels to be honest.  The fact that this young (assuming healthy) man “wants to return to Ukraine” once the war is over is particularly irksome.  Essentially the young man is saying that as soon as “others fight and die for his own nation”, he is eager to return home.  Now this is one individual that Canadian overly-liberal media have glommed onto because “if it cries it leads” these days.  However, this sentiment cannot be entirely isolated given the significant number of fighting aged people who have simply run away from Ukraine while the nation fights for its life.

Meanwhile foreigners, many without any Ukrainian connections, fight and die for that nation.  Nope, does not sit well at all.

I don't see anything in this at all.

Even in WW2 plenty of people sat on the sidelines. Despite popular belief many people made serious money - both legal and illegal- during that war as others died.

Plenty of people who were drafted or volunteered made sure they weren't anywhere near the fighting end. Over 50k US active servicemen AWOL in the European theatre during the war.

Self-preservation is hardwired into humans. I don't judge because I've never been there.

Edited April 27 by niall78

[Holien]

Russia is now protecting there Oil...

https://boards.4chan.org/k/thread/61504997

I wonder if they will protect their Steel plants making these well enough...

[Holien]

Court politics...

The fact that they are airing it in public makes it very interesting.

Putler getting revenge or some one else?

One to watch...

 

 

[pintere]

21 hours ago, The_Capt said:

“Only 20k”?!  Let’s not be hypoboblic either.  10% of a field force is no small measure.  The point of my original post is that there are young Ukrainian men running away from the fight while (only) 20 thousand foreigners are there doing the dying.  That ain’t right.

It should be noted that the 20k number is very early, and doesn’t at all reflect the situation now. From what I’ve gathered, many of those volunteers either quit soon after arriving or have made their way back home by now in any case. 

The Ukraine foreign legion has three battalions currently active, with one extra used for training. A handful of other foreign volunteers are scattered throughout the regular Ukrainian units, but these are few and far between. 

Based on this I estimate that there’s probably in the ballpark of 5k foreigners in the Ukrainian military right now. Certainly no more than 10k. But perhaps our Ukrainian regulars can give a more informed estimate than this.

[The_Capt]

27 minutes ago, pintere said:

It should be noted that the 20k number is very early, and doesn’t at all reflect the situation now. From what I’ve gathered, many of those volunteers either quit soon after arriving or have made their way back home by now in any case. 

The Ukraine foreign legion has three battalions currently active, with one extra used for training. A handful of other foreign volunteers are scattered throughout the regular Ukrainian units, but these are few and far between. 

Based on this I estimate that there’s probably in the ballpark of 5k foreigners in the Ukrainian military right now. Certainly no more than 10k. But perhaps our Ukrainian regulars can give a more informed estimate than this.

Of course the numbers are going to fluctuate over time.  Right now this war is viewed as bogged down and in slow motion - except for the Russians of course who are poised to break out and re-take Kharkiv.  The fact that a divisions worth signed up and fought in that first year is an enormous contribution considering that all foreign fighters really had no duty or obligation to join this fight beyond a greater ideal to right a wrong.

The shoulder shrugging on this issue is not impressive in the least.  How do people on this forum think wars are actually won or lost?  Who do you actually think is really doing the fighting and dying?  I hear comments like "well most of the UA were already in the military" and what I think I am really hearing is "well some people just want to fight anyway, so let them."

Wars are collisions of human certainty.  Violent, lethal collisions.  Once a side loses that certainty they are on the road to defeat - history backs me up on this going back thousands of years.  Certainty demands sacrifice.  For a nation state that sacrifice has been done in many ways.  In the past nations would hire mercenaries to do the fighting, so at worst it was financial sacrifice.  We do not live in that era anymore.  Wars like the one in Ukraine are as near to total as we can get under the nuclear umbrella.  

If too many Ukrainian 18 year old's run away, while enough Russian 18 year old's keep signing up for the $$, how do you think this war will end?  

[danfrodo]

This youtuber continues to post really good frontline analysis.  His youtube channels have been under attack, which I think says something good about him.  The headlines are over the top, but the video content is much more serious.

 

 

[omae2]

48 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Of course the numbers are going to fluctuate over time.  Right now this war is viewed as bogged down and in slow motion - except for the Russians of course who are poised to break out and re-take Kharkiv.  The fact that a divisions worth signed up and fought in that first year is an enormous contribution considering that all foreign fighters really had no duty or obligation to join this fight beyond a greater ideal to right a wrong.

The shoulder shrugging on this issue is not impressive in the least.  How do people on this forum think wars are actually won or lost?  Who do you actually think is really doing the fighting and dying?  I hear comments like "well most of the UA were already in the military" and what I think I am really hearing is "well some people just want to fight anyway, so let them."

Wars are collisions of human certainty.  Violent, lethal collisions.  Once a side loses that certainty they are on the road to defeat - history backs me up on this going back thousands of years.  Certainty demands sacrifice.  For a nation state that sacrifice has been done in many ways.  In the past nations would hire mercenaries to do the fighting, so at worst it was financial sacrifice.  We do not live in that era anymore.  Wars like the one in Ukraine are as near to total as we can get under the nuclear umbrella.  

If too many Ukrainian 18 year old's run away, while enough Russian 18 year old's keep signing up for the $$, how do you think this war will end?  

While you're right i would add, that there is no full mobilization and there is no need yet to throw kids into the meatgrinder who made nothing that last after they died horribly. The Ukrainians see this well this is why those whom under 27 (i think now its 25) are not mobilized. On one hand they need that generation to build whats been destroyed and to make children. On the other hand someone who has kids and a house will most likely have motivation to defend that. Someone who has nothing will have not much motivation unless ideology or hate. So in the end they will not fight for freedom, cause they have no attachments. They are free to flee and live in another country building a life up. I mean you cant really argue with human nature or at least its pointless.

But than again, yet there is no need for 18 years old in the trenches, what they need is weapons and ammunition. Thousands could have been saved by those two. But that kid, i doubt he would have made any difference.