How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[danfrodo]

20 minutes ago, MikeyD said:

By the time Trump enters office in 2025, if it comes to that, Russia should be down to seven running tanks at the current loss rate

I keep thinking that.  They'll run out of arty tubes, IFVs & tanks, we think, based on the loss rates.  But I also keep questioning whether we are being the german general staff circa 1941/2, where we continually think they are running out of everything but turns out.....

 

[cesmonkey]

An unexpected opinion:
 

 

[MikeyD]

WSJ = Rupert Murdoch organization.

[Maciej Zwolinski]

11 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Why on Earth would NATO member countries throw in the towel on supporting Ukraine because someone who spent 4 years berating and disrespecting them them says so?  No way.  And even if NATO caved that doesn't prevent member nations from continuing to aid Ukraine.

One reason could be if they were unable to provide support which cannot be substituted. Examples: 155 mm artillery ammunition and Patriot SAM missiles. Apparently Europe can manufacture more artillery shells than the USA but somehow it was sending to Ukraine much smaller numbers - which is evident because the absence of US support in the past 6 months soon caused a shell hunger. The Europeans could not close the gap. Assuming that the US withdraws support in January 2025 again, will European countries be able to deliver their own shells in the Americans' place in sufficient numbers?  I have no idea. The Czech deal is 152 mm ammunition scrounged from some secret place, Shangri-La or whatever. But re. delivering shells from actual domestic European production of 155 mm shells, something has been holding them up.Will that problem be overcome in the next 6 months? Again, no idea.

Re. Patriots. There does not seem to be anything comparable, S-300s ammunition is running out or has ran out, German and French systems have shorter range and will not provide equivalent coverage. F-16s or no F-16s, the  Ukrainians will not gain air superiority so they need their S-300 replacement. Can European countries get Patriots for the Ukraine somehow?

In the case of unsolvable shell hunger problem and Russians gaining the ability to bomb the entire Ukraine with reasonable impunity I can well see the European nations deciding the war is lost and good money should not be thrown after the bad.

12 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

The pulling back of US support for Ukraine will be bad for Ukraine, no doubt about it, but it isn't the deciding factor. 

Other than the arty shells and SAMs - which, as I described above, I think could be decisive factors - I am also wondering about the access to the US reconaissance and intelligence assets, in particular to satellites and signals intelligence. If the new president orders the heads of the CIA and the NSA to stop data sharing and all cooperation with the UKR immediately, can e.g. the UK take the same data via their NATO arrangements  and subsequently re-transfer it to the Ukraine? If not and the Ukraine actually loses access to the information it used to receive this could potentially be decisive.

[Maciej Zwolinski]

9 hours ago, danfrodo said:

I keep thinking that.  They'll run out of arty tubes, IFVs & tanks, we think, based on the loss rates.  But I also keep questioning whether we are being the german general staff circa 1941/2, where we continually think they are running out of everything but turns out.....

 

To avoid this mental trap it suffices to remember that the Russians will react, somehow. Their reaction will be better or worse, but they will not allow the line on the graph showing the number of remaining IFVs or artillery or ammunition to merrily continue on its current way and hit zero. They will do something to change the trajectory t e.g. by switching more to meat waves, or reducing tempo of operations, etc. The thing is, they will incur extra costs or lose opportunities by switching from their preferred action to the less preferred action.

So when thinking about what will happen next in a war one should not extrapolate the present into the future ad infinitum but try to anticipate the opponent's reaction and be prepared to explore the inefficiencies forced upon him- the sum of which is eventually going to lose him the war. At least that's the plan.

PS. This is basic stuff for any war or any opposed action, really. The mistakes like the Werhmacht General Staff thinking should not really happen. But they do happen, in particular to armies fighting the Russians. I think that Russian peacetime armies when they transition to war habitually look so incredibly and obstinately stupid, that their opponents start to believe they are permanently unable to adapt. But they do, just very slowly at the beginning. But after 2-3 years of war they hit their stride.

[Fenris]

This popped into my feed today, this is the second prototype apparently.  Have to wonder how much the people involved  are sweating on recent developments.  Clip isn't much more than a nice external walk around.  They do mention an active protection system and a few other details.

 

[Letter from Prague]

The most important thing US provides to Ukraine is not shells or missiles but ISR. I don't know if rest of NATO nations can provide it instead.

Also, EU citizens might not like the idea of giving up Ukraine and reestablishing friendly relations with Russia but EU oligarchs and corporations definitely want the cheap energy and markets. Few well targeted social media campaigns by media magnates and the electorate will happily change opinion.

[The_MonkeyKing]

 

 

 

[Bulletpoint]

14 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Why on Earth would NATO member countries throw in the towel on supporting Ukraine because someone who spent 4 years berating and disrespecting them them says so?  No way.  And even if NATO caved that doesn't prevent member nations from continuing to aid Ukraine.

In theory we could do that, but I think that if the biggest and most powerful country in NATO pulled out, the minor countries would soon conclude that the war was lost. EU countries would start talking about the horrible humanitarian impacts of war, and how we must have peace now.

Ukraine might keep fighting for some time, but without continued external support, they would eventually be defeated, as they have said so themselves several times. I don't even think it would take that long, since it would be a major hit to morale. So even inside Ukraine, there would be increased political pressure for a negotiated settlement to keep at least part of Ukraine independent.

Zelensky would leave the stage one way or the other, and a new Ukrainian leader would emerge to sign the deal Trump would strike with Putin: Peace in return for Russia keeping Crimea and the eastern "republics". And Ukrainian NATO membership not officially cancelled but indefinitely postponed.

Edited May 10 by Bulletpoint

[poesel]

2 hours ago, Maciej Zwolinski said:

Re. Patriots. There does not seem to be anything comparable, S-300s ammunition is running out or has ran out, German and French systems have shorter range and will not provide equivalent coverage. F-16s or no F-16s, the  Ukrainians will not gain air superiority so they need their S-300 replacement. Can European countries get Patriots for the Ukraine somehow?

Yes, they buy them from the US. Same mechanism as how they got them in the first place. Even Trump would not refuse such a deal, and why would he? Foreigners buying American - that is what he wants.

[pintere]

Russians have begun offensive activity in Kharkiv oblast, specifically near Liptsy and Vovchansk. Apparently they’re trying to create a 10km buffer zone along the border according to one Ukrainian source. Here’s the most detailed preliminary summary I found:

From the Deep State Military map source (automatic translation):

 

Activation by the enemy has begun in the Kharkiv region

 

The activation began with dense shelling by various means of fire damage to the border settlements of Kharkiv Oblast. Currently, shelling continues, in particular, in the area of the city of Vovchansk. EW and UAV systems are also actively used.

 

The enemy is trying to enter and gain a foothold in a number of settlements along the border, in particular, in the villages of Strelecha-Krasne-Pylna-Borysivka. Attempts are also being made to attack the enemy in the settlements of Gatishche-Pletenivka. The main Katsap forces for the event are currently infantry with the support of a small amount of equipment. They do not dare to move beyond the above-mentioned settlements, perhaps the use of major forces is expected.

 

️ The available resources used by the enemy at the moment will not be enough for a deep advance. Currently, the situation is such that the enemy is destabilizing the border areas. But it is not known how many main forces he is ready to use for this maneuver.

 

Separately, I would like to mention the shade of Sagittarius-Red-Pilna-Borysivka. In advance, the enemy made attempts to saturate the personnel in the villages, in particular, in the village of Pylna, about which we will write in more detail separately. You can claim to repel all attacks, distort information, but the responsible persons who were supposed to react to it from the first bells are now thinking about what to do with it.

 

In the information field, similar actions from the enemy were expected. Even more, units of the Defense Forces, which directly hold positions along the border, were waiting for them. Now everything is in their hands, and they are making maximum efforts to repulse the next offensive actions of the Muscovites. The task of the entire society is not to panic, but to help our fighters on the front lines. The civilian population in the border areas should not be fooled, but should listen to calls from local authorities, in particular, regarding evacuation.

 

The map has been updated!

Edited May 10 by pintere

[pintere]

A few Russian vehicles were destroyed southwest of the village of Pylna. Which means at least some Russians made it 3 km past the border.

[cesmonkey]

1 hour ago, pintere said:

A few Russian vehicles were destroyed southwest of the village of Pylna. Which means at least some Russians made it 3 km past the border.

 

[Battlefront.com]

4 hours ago, Maciej Zwolinski said:

Other than the arty shells and SAMs - which, as I described above, I think could be decisive factors - I am also wondering about the access to the US reconaissance and intelligence assets, in particular to satellites and signals intelligence. If the new president orders the heads of the CIA and the NSA to stop data sharing and all cooperation with the UKR immediately, can e.g. the UK take the same data via their NATO arrangements  and subsequently re-transfer it to the Ukraine? If not and the Ukraine actually loses access to the information it used to receive this could potentially be decisive.

As I said, the US pulling out of direct support would be bad.  However, it isn't preordained that it would be fatal to Ukraine to the extent it would have to immediately surrender on Day One of a Trump presidency.  And as Poesel pointed out, the Trump admin would likely gladly sell things to wind up in Ukraine.  Even in a degraded supply situation Ukraine could hold out for quite some time.  Since time is a major factor in deciding who comes out more on top than the other, this is significant.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

8 minutes ago, cesmonkey said:

 

Obviously, this is the operation to watch.  This is the first new offensive action we've seen from Russia since 2022.  Even Avdiivka was a continuation of what was already happening.  And every action Russia has engaged in since stalling out in 2022 has had very easily understood terrain objectives.  This one is an unknown, though obviously there are guesses as to their intentions (i.e. 10km buffer zone).

The only way Russia has gained ground in the past 2 years is through the massive expenditure of resources.  We'll have to see what they pump into this operation before we can really understand what Russia is trying to achieve.

I'm hopeful this will turn out to be an advantage for Ukraine for two reasons:

1.  Russia has limited resources and every offensive action they take burns through them faster than if it remained largely defensive.

2.  Time is the biggest battlefield element for both sides.  Harboring resources tends to stretch out the remaining time, expending resources tends to shorten it.  Russia engaging in two simultaneous offensive actions (presuming they continue this one) means they shorten their available time in some way/s.

Russia has limited time on their strategic clock and IMHO this year has proven that they fully understand that whatever opportunities might exist to knock Ukraine down look better this year than next.  We've talked about the political and economic issues facing Russia's ability to continue this war so it should not come as a surprise for me to think Russia is aware of where things are headed.

Steve

[kimbosbread]

I could see Western Europe throwing in the towel pretty easily, honestly, in the same of “oh the humanity” and cheap gas. In fact, I’d bet even if Trump was willing to sell weapons, the Germans would fold and push for “peace”. They’d be happy to get more non-African young population for sure.

That said, I’m not completely convinced Trump would abandon Ukraine, and I’m also not convinced Trump has that easy a path to winning, since probably 25% of his own party will not vote for him under any circumstance.

[cesmonkey]

Russian Telegrammer Rybar:
https://t.me/rybar/59936
 

Quote

Fisherman
️Slobozhansky direction: reconnaissance in force in the north of the Kharkov region,
the situation as of 13.00 on May 10, 2024

Due to the fact that jingoistic sentiments have already begun to disperse in the Russian Telegram (with the input of Ukrainian sources), it is necessary to talk about what is happening in the north of the Kharkov region : and , speak in a balanced manner, without running ahead of the locomotive and without echoing the various information dumps that rushed to write about the scale of the advance.

At night , the Sever group of troops and units stationed along the old Russian border began to launch massive attacks on planned targets using cannon and rocket artillery, mortars, and using the allocated aviation resource of the Russian Aerospace Forces in this area.

The purpose of fire destruction is to reduce the enemy’s defensive capabilities, as well as to destroy long-term firing points.

At the same time, advanced groups began clearing the front line. Due to the fact that previously the so-called Ukraine and Russia were a single space, in most places one settlement flows into another , and the border for a long time was very arbitrary. Therefore, military operations in the frontline zone began to be classified as a large-scale offensive - this is somewhat incorrect. It was about reconnaissance in force, which was carried out and carried out successfully.

If you look at the map, the battle zone has been expanded to a depth of 2-3 kilometers in some areas. It is too early to talk about the full transition of border villages under the control of the Russian army .

As a result of hostilities in the border area over the past year, the same settlement. Strelechya is a bare field . Until the fighting north of Kharkov approaches at least Liptsy , it is extremely premature to talk about the capture of villages and towns.

Therefore, combat operations in the border areas are primarily dashes through the ruins and strongholds of the enemy.

The accent on Volchansk is noticeable to the naked eye . Volchansk is one of the enemy’s main transshipment bases; logistics are being built through it east of the Seversky Donets . The city plays an important role in the defense of the northeast of the Kharkov region. Local authorities have already announced the start of evacuation from the locality.

They are working in Volchansk and the surrounding area, and they are working systematically: footage of the destruction of the bridge over the Volchya River has been published . The interfluve area is important for facilitating combat operations near Kupyansk and possible breaching of enemy defenses in the east of the Kharkov region .

Due to the fact that the North group of troops began the task of creating a buffer zone, an unprecedented revival began on the Internet, fueled not only by the enemy along the TsIPsO line, but also by Russian hype-eaters and jingoists. The enemy takes advantage of this : you can always declare another village “virtually” taken by the Russians as liberated by imprinting the Ukrainian flag there.

All that remains is to wish the Russian soldiers good luck in battle, and to urge their colleagues in the Telegram workshop to show restraint.

 

Edited May 10 by cesmonkey

[danfrodo]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

Obviously, this is the operation to watch.  This is the first new offensive action we've seen from Russia since 2022.  Even Avdiivka was a continuation of what was already happening.  And every action Russia has engaged in since stalling out in 2022 has had very easily understood terrain objectives.  This one is an unknown, though obviously there are guesses as to their intentions (i.e. 10km buffer zone).

The only way Russia has gained ground in the past 2 years is through the massive expenditure of resources.  We'll have to see what they pump into this operation before we can really understand what Russia is trying to achieve.

I'm hopeful this will turn out to be an advantage for Ukraine for two reasons:

1.  Russia has limited resources and every offensive action they take burns through them faster than if it remained largely defensive.

2.  Time is the biggest battlefield element for both sides.  Harboring resources tends to stretch out the remaining time, expending resources tends to shorten it.  Russia engaging in two simultaneous offensive actions (presuming they continue this one) means they shorten their available time in some way/s.

Russia has limited time on their strategic clock and IMHO this year has proven that they fully understand that whatever opportunities might exist to knock Ukraine down look better this year than next.  We've talked about the political and economic issues facing Russia's ability to continue this war so it should not come as a surprise for me to think Russia is aware of where things are headed.

Steve

I'm just hoping UKR has the resources to smash this RU incursion.  Hopefully we'll be getting video of lots of wrecked columns.  If UKR has the resources.  What I am foolishly hoping for is that UKR actually has some offensive reserves and uses this to test them against an enemy not sitting behind minefields.  An enemy that is exhausted and overextended.  

[cesmonkey]

https://www.economist.com/europe/2024/05/10/ukraine-will-hold-if-it-gets-the-arms-it-needs-says-a-top-general

[poesel]

52 minutes ago, kimbosbread said:

I could see Western Europe throwing in the towel pretty easily, honestly, in the same of “oh the humanity” and cheap gas. In fact, I’d bet even if Trump was willing to sell weapons, the Germans would fold and push for “peace”. They’d be happy to get more non-African young population for sure.

Ok, 'Western Europe'. Let's say that is: Portugal, Spain, Italy, France, Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, UK, Norway, Sweden, Austria & Germany.

AFAIK, Austria is the only one of those who is still dependent on Russian gas. The rest has its own gas or other sources. Personally, I can say that my gas prices are back to 2022 levels.

The 'push for peace' fraction in the current government is holding support for Ukraine so much back that we are only in the #2 spot of supporters... (depends on course how you count, but you get my point).

And last but not least, we already have many Ukrainians here, and it is not like all of them are working.

I refute your theory that 'Western Europe' will throw the towel. The support for Ukraine has been pretty steady overall. Look at Norway & the Netherlands for some prime examples. We all know what is at stake if Russia wins.

[ZellZeka]

36 minutes ago, poesel said:

And last but not least, we already have many Ukrainians here, and it is not like all of them are working.

Why not return them back to Ukraine? As far as I know, the Ukrainian government is asking to return their migrants to their homeland.

[Eddy]

39 minutes ago, poesel said:

Ok, 'Western Europe'. Let's say that is: Portugal, Spain, Italy, France, Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, UK, Norway, Sweden, Austria & Germany.

AFAIK, Austria is the only one of those who is still dependent on Russian gas. The rest has its own gas or other sources. Personally, I can say that my gas prices are back to 2022 levels.

The 'push for peace' fraction in the current government is holding support for Ukraine so much back that we are only in the #2 spot of supporters... (depends on course how you count, but you get my point).

And last but not least, we already have many Ukrainians here, and it is not like all of them are working.

I refute your theory that 'Western Europe' will throw the towel. The support for Ukraine has been pretty steady overall. Look at Norway & the Netherlands for some prime examples. We all know what is at stake if Russia wins.

Agee with this, not least because so many Western European leaders have expended too much political capital (as well as actual financial capital) to easily turn around and say "Actually, I've changed me mind".

In the UK there is an election this year but the dividing line between the Conservatives and Labour over Ukraine is practically non-existent. If, as the polls indicate, the next government will probably be a Labour one, it is unlikely there will be a softening of support. The Leader of the Opposition, Shadow Defence Secretary and Shadow Foreign Secretary all have spoken in support of continuing aid to Ukraine on at least the level the UK presently does (admittedly I don't think it's enough but, luckily for everyone in the UK, I'm not in charge!)

Although it's not for me to speak for France, I think it highly unlikely that President Macron would cut off aid after his recent speeches and announcements. And the next Presidential election there is not until 2027.

As for Germany, I wouldn't presume to preach to a German what may happen in Germany   

And @poesel, you forgot the Danes  Pretty bang up support they're giving.

[cesmonkey]

 

Quote

MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF STATE

SUBJECT:       Delegation of Authority Under Section 506(a)(1)of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 621 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (FAA), I hereby delegate to the Secretary of State the authority under section 506(a)(1) of the FAA to direct the drawdown of up to $400 million in defense articles and services of the Department of Defense, and military education and training, to provide assistance to Ukraine and to make the determinations required under such section to direct such a drawdown.

You are authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.                             

JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR

 

 

[poesel]

1 hour ago, ZellZeka said:

Why not return them back to Ukraine? As far as I know, the Ukrainian government is asking to return their migrants to their homeland.

Because they are legal refugees who have a right to be here. And the vast majority are women and children, so not soldiers anyway.
My comment was more pointed towards the failure of the German system to bring them into the workforce. Other countries have rates >50% of Ukrainian refugees working while here it is around 25%.

 

1 hour ago, Eddy said:

And @poesel, you forgot the Danes  Pretty bang up support they're giving.

My apologies to Demark! Jeg er meget ked af det! And I was so proud to have remembered Luxembourg...

[Maciej Zwolinski]

24 minutes ago, poesel said:

Because they are legal refugees who have a right to be here.

Are they really? I thought that in order to be a legally recognised refugee one has to apply for the refugee status in the first safe country on the way, and there is no way to travel directly from the Ukraine to Germany 

I do not work in international law, but this rule has been discussed ad nauseam in Poland, as it made it slightly easier for us to deal with the waives of illegals deposited on the border by Lukashenko (I am switching to different immigrants now just to illustrate the legal point; not Ukrainians, but mostly Albanians, Kurds etc. masquerading as Syrians). Vast majority did not even try to claim asylum in Poland in order not to be recorded as "Polish" refugees, but preferred to be dumped at the border to try their luck again at sneaking through to Germany and starting asylum proceedings there.