How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[sross112]

46 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

2 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Also, a lot of the world (Asia, MEA) sees Ukraine as a US proxy, a stick the Empire is using to beat Russia. They would firmly back a cease fire, having no interest in a prostrate Russia.

These nations aren't the ones backing Ukraine now, so why would they be relevant later on?  The UN?  They aren't able to stop Russia from mass murder and destruction of someone else's homeland, so why would the UN be able to stop someone from defending their own homeland?

Now, if India and China were actively assisting Ukraine now, but might not later, then you'd have a point to consider.  As it is the only countries Ukraine needs to back them are the Western ones.  Not even all of them... US and Poland would probably do just fine on their own.

I'm sure that the longer it goes on the less attention the war will get in the news and in political circles, but I'm with Steve that I don't think the US will stop support for a long time. The old eastern bloc nations will also continue support for however long they have to along with Sweden and Finland. I'm sure Canada and Australia will do what they can as well, but just the eastern bloc nations and the US can keep the UA equipped and going on their own for a long time. 

Now hear me out. There is the noble goal of sovereign integrity, the humanitarian goal of helping the people and then there is a lot of money to be made by the US MIC. The people will support the first two and the politicians will continue support due to the third part. The US taxpayers will subsidize this war for many years. That is the dark reality of the situation. Personally they can take every cent of my taxes and send them to Ukraine in the form of beans, bullets and band aids. At least then they would be spent on a good cause that I believe in instead of gender studies in Pakistan. Just saying.

As for time being on either side I think that is a mix. The longer it goes on the harder up the RA will become due to sanctions, etc that we've laid out here. The flip side is the longer it goes on the deeper the RA can settle in and thus take more effort and blood to dislodge. So yep, if they have the forces for a counter stroke the UA has the best opportunity to create the most losses while taking the least sooner rather than later. Unless it is a lot later. If over the next year or two the UA was to be totally trained and equipped by western nations with top tier gear that would change the dynamic of a later offensive, but no one is going to wait that long so you do have a diminishing window for good successes at minimal costs and then it begins to rise for a long time.

The western equipment is great but 100 towed howitzers and some Gavins isn't exactly going to manifest a dynamic encircling offensive operation. That takes the faster moving armored stuff and not nearly enough of that is heading their way yet. That means the UA will have to conduct an offensive with parity of equipment in tanks, artillery, etc. Yes they have the C4ISR advantage but they will take a lot of casualties trying to drive on a dug in RA. Not to mention how the Russian air force could play into that. They haven't been very effective on offense but they could change that on defense. 

[danfrodo]

7 minutes ago, sburke said:

There are two items running on that clock - military and economic

On the military side Ukraine is moving to a NATO based army.  That will take at least months, but the road is already charted, and the west will do it for political and financial reasons.  Being pretty cynical I think the US defense industry will lobby like hell for it.

On the economic side the EU is making major moves to be weaned off Russian energy.  Also a long term commitment that has consequences for Russia and I don't see the EU backing off that.

So in my view the long term road, not just months, but years is already charted and Russia is on the losing end of both.

As to a stalemate, I guess I differ with you in that I also don't think we will see a stalemate.  As Western military hardware is increasingly integrated into the UA, IMHO you'll start seeing some (more) major hurt on the RFA.  Sitting still and digging in isn't going to work any better than their previous strategies.

Last item  - Part of what I think will keep the west fixated is that Russia will continue to be its own worst enemy.  The atrocities aren't a fluke, they are part and parcel of the Russian view of this war and they will continue.

Good points, SBurke.  Who would make new long term business deals w Putin's Russia?  No matter how craven or greedy some westerners might be they would still be investing a lot of money into a business partner that is completely unreliable.  They'd be happy to overlook all that if they weren't so very likely to lose their entire investment at any moment in the future (ask the airlines about that one!).  And the optics of striking new deals w serial mass murdering war criminals?  Not good. 

By next winter hopefully the energy situation in Europe will look a lot better and RU won't be getting all that money. 

 

[danfrodo]

6 minutes ago, Machor said:

Russian TV fantasizing about turning Britain into the next Atlantis - they also took the Irish out while they were at it:

Erm, the LOTR analogies related to this war have really gone overboard - Ian McKellen has showed up in Lviv: 

 

OMFG GANDALF IS HERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   MEN OF THE WEST RISE UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[danfrodo]

3 minutes ago, sross112 said:

I'm sure that the longer it goes on the less attention the war will get in the news and in political circles, but I'm with Steve that I don't think the US will stop support for a long time. The old eastern bloc nations will also continue support for however long they have to along with Sweden and Finland. I'm sure Canada and Australia will do what they can as well, but just the eastern bloc nations and the US can keep the UA equipped and going on their own for a long time. 

Now hear me out. There is the noble goal of sovereign integrity, the humanitarian goal of helping the people and then there is a lot of money to be made by the US MIC. The people will support the first two and the politicians will continue support due to the third part. The US taxpayers will subsidize this war for many years. That is the dark reality of the situation. Personally they can take every cent of my taxes and send them to Ukraine in the form of beans, bullets and band aids. At least then they would be spent on a good cause that I believe in instead of gender studies in Pakistan. Just saying.

As for time being on either side I think that is a mix. The longer it goes on the harder up the RA will become due to sanctions, etc that we've laid out here. The flip side is the longer it goes on the deeper the RA can settle in and thus take more effort and blood to dislodge. So yep, if they have the forces for a counter stroke the UA has the best opportunity to create the most losses while taking the least sooner rather than later. Unless it is a lot later. If over the next year or two the UA was to be totally trained and equipped by western nations with top tier gear that would change the dynamic of a later offensive, but no one is going to wait that long so you do have a diminishing window for good successes at minimal costs and then it begins to rise for a long time.

The western equipment is great but 100 towed howitzers and some Gavins isn't exactly going to manifest a dynamic encircling offensive operation. That takes the faster moving armored stuff and not nearly enough of that is heading their way yet. That means the UA will have to conduct an offensive with parity of equipment in tanks, artillery, etc. Yes they have the C4ISR advantage but they will take a lot of casualties trying to drive on a dug in RA. Not to mention how the Russian air force could play into that. They haven't been very effective on offense but they could change that on defense. 

Remember that the 100 guns and the gavins are just part of what's being sent.  A lot more is there and coming. 

I suspect UKR will look for targets of opportunity wherever it arises -- bottom quality troops that will rout easily, yielding more & more ground here & there; RU simply doesn't have enough troops, let alone troops of quality, to handle that huge line.  There's 2022 version of Romanian and Italian units all over the place. 

And I think they will focus their artillery on destroying RU artillery -- it's the only part of RU armed forces that is a difference maker. 

[Machor]

Trent Telenko at his best: discussing truck tires. He has noticed the "MADE IN USSR" mark on the tires of a Russian Grad truck, and as you can guess, that means Russia is in a bad bad place:

And one for the record: Turns out the Russian SA-13 on Snake Island was also taken out by a TB2:

 

[sross112]

2 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

And I think they will focus their artillery on destroying RU artillery -- it's the only part of RU armed forces that is a difference maker. 

True. I'm eagerly awaiting Switchblade results on counter arty missions. If those live up to expectations they could be a real game changer in that arena.

[dan/california]

If true this brings a small  piece of one of the GLOCs Izyum into artillery range. The Russians might have to divert forces to try and take that back. If they have any to divert.

[Battlefront.com]

1 hour ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Oh, I would love to see the Izyum armies crushed (Napoleon's dictum), but the UA isn't going to do that on defence alone. 

Of course not, but crushing the Russians attacks means less Russians to defend.  Russia is strategically depleting its ability to withstand Ukrainian attacks while at the same time Ukraine is not harming its ability to counter attack because it has reserves nearing combat readiness.

So instead of prematurely attacking Russia, and diverting resources to support it, keep plinking away at idiotic Russian attacks. 

1 hour ago, LongLeftFlank said:

I don't buy the 'tipping point' collapse theory for the Russian Army, unless it is pushed, which to me is the destruction of division sized formations, not mere attrition.

Yes, and I said this a few pages back.  This is why I don't see a real possibility for "tipping point" this month (May).  Ukraine needs to let Russia destroy itself a bit more and Ukraine's reserves to become available.

1 hour ago, LongLeftFlank said:

I say again, waging a war of attrition with Russia is a mistake for Ukraine, not because they will lose, but because the clock of massive Western support will run down in months of stalemate, and it will be very hard for Ukraine to resist the pressure to 'deal.'

This is where you are very wrong.  The US and UK, most likely others, will keep funding Ukraine for at least a year if not more with no questions asked.  Others will contribute in various ways for many months yet, especially the Baltics and Poland.  Why?  Because these nations understand that Russia needs to be crushed as much as possible and the best way of doing that is supporting Ukraine.

After a year, for sure funding will start to slow down.  But by then Ukraine should be in good shape and Russia in horrid shape.  Russia simply can not fight a long war, it can't even fight a medium war.  Ukraine can definitely fight a medium war and is likely able to fight a long war.

I think you're forgetting that the US has a very good track record of long term funding of foreign forces.  Even when there's no indication that the money was doing a damned thing (*cough* Afghanistan *cough*).

Put another way, for the US a single Billion USD per month is pocket change.  Yet to Ukraine every 6 months of such funding is equal to its entire annual prewar military budget.  So at even a paltry $1b a month from the US alone that makes Ukraine's military budget for the year 2x what it was prewar.

Who is funding Russia's war?  Nobody.

1 hour ago, LongLeftFlank said:

But let's take the other side of that: what are your thoughts on what the Ukrainian Liberation Offensive looks like?

Push back wherever it makes sense to, such as around Kharkiv, but generally keep making sure Russia loses lots of men and material every day.  Especially where Russia is intent on attacking.  Let Russia exhaust its offensive capability to the point where even counter attacking is problematic.  It's almost there anyway, so it's not a long wait.

Bring up the new Western weaponry and newly trained units.  Concentrate them on the western side Donetsk somewhere.  Drive south to clip M-14 as close to Russia as possible.  This will result in two exposed flanks, but I think this can be managed as the distance isn't huge and the attack itself is going to cause a lot of disruption.

Beef up the rest of the line all the way over to Kherson to make sure the Russian forces there are at a minimum fixed in place.  Any signs of withdrawal should be followed up with at least cautious local attacks aimed at taking ground.

If all goes well the Russians will find their attempts to stop/hinder the main effort to be too much for them.  Once M-14 is seriously threatened there's going to be a huge problem for Russia.  Panic is not out of the question.  Especially when...

Soon as the main effort starts to make progress, blow the Kerch bridge and cut off all land supplies through Crimea.  Use the new US rocket artillery to keep the neck of Crimea a death zone.  This will also put the Russian forces on the western side of the Dnepr in critical trouble quite quickly and the rest of the forces on the eastern side soon there after.

If M-14 is clipped, Kerch is out of action, and the neck is a kill sack I think you'll see a total collapse of the Russian forces there.  Every man for himself is more likely than an orderly withdrawal.

The only possibility that Russia has to relieve the situation is to attack westward from below Donetsk down M-14 to keep it open.  That is going to be tough to do as that means hitting Ukraine's main force head on.  Even if the two forces lock horns for a while they won't be able to significantly improve the situation for the forces to the west.  Those guys will quickly be on their own.

The end result should be a fairly straight line of Russians going from south of Kharkiv to Donetsk city to the coast of Azov, the rest of Ukraine liberated.

If Russia's forces in the south collapse then some Ukrainian resources can be brought up to the salient that is currently being fought over and figure out where the weakest points are and push hard.  Russia will no doubt have removed most of its best units to fight south of Donetsk, so the crap DLPR guys will be largely on their own, and we know how well those guys fight.

How long will this all take?  I don't know.  The first phase could take a couple of weeks to a month and a half.  The rest of it could take a couple of weeks once it starts if things are as I expect they will be, a couple of months if Russia finds a way to put some spines into the DLPR fight.

Steve

[FancyCat]

Been waiting for someone to mention how most of the world is neutral, or Russian leaning. Big reminder, most Russian trade is with Europe, or Western aligned nations, so end of the day, combined with the fact that NATO is the big dog of military alliances, really, it does not particularly matter that South American nations are neutral or aligned with Russia, same for Africa, the Middle East......the economic trade, any "volunteers", any military support is not going to tilt the balance vs the West (theres a big lesson here in a future China vs the West conflict, im sure there is some loud cursing at Putin in China right now)(i mean yes, mutual economic destruction but its mutual). 

As economics and military spending, there is good money in Ukraine entering NATO, for the military industrial complex that would equip Ukraine that would outweigh Russian imports of NATO country arms. As for accusations of prolonged war being good for business, nah, I don't subscribe to that, Ukraine is a essential exporting country, the loss of that is going to generate way more instability and loss of profits vs money made on a eternal war. Now, mind you, NATO military industrial complex will be arming Ukraine, whether it wins the war or is in stalemate forever, as Russia will most likely never be permanently defeated, so the faster Ukraine wins, the sooner Ukraine can get charged for buying arms. 

Hell, Ukraine has oil and gas reserves aplenty, if I were Germany, I would knock some sense into their crying business Elite and refocus them on a emerging EU candidate that might well be willing to do the needed measures to join the EU. 

Part of the focus on interaction with Russia is based on its hard power, well, that issue is being resolved right now, and yeah yeah, corruption, but any look at the civil society of Ukraine, a mob that isn't afraid of tossing their leaders, having done so twice since independence, my money is on Ukraine. 

 

[Battlefront.com]

Following up to my suggestion Ukraine drives south to clip M-14...

It's about 75km straight down to Mariupol from where the front currently is.  That's not too far, but it is also not something Ukraine has had to do since 2014.

Fortunately, Ukraine doesn't have to advance this whole distance to put M-14 into significant jeopardy.  They can already hit it with the new US MRLS systems coming into play.  So if they advance, say, 50km they are will within traditional artillery range.  The first half of that ground to cover is already within artillery range.

I'm not saying this would be an easy thing for Ukraine to pull off... but I do think it won't be too long before the conditions are good enough to give it a go. 

Worst case is the attack doesn't work, Ukraine calls it off, learns something from the experience, and makes plans for another offensive as soon as possible.

Steve

[Aragorn2002]

This is all extremely interesting, gentlemen. Thank you!  I hope (and SLOWLY starting to believe) you're right. Having said that I think a defeated Putin will be as dangerous as a victorious Putin, but I prefer the first. 

[Suleyman]

The Russians are completely wrong for invading Ukraine, and are the aggressors which makes it blatant. Not up for argument. But as far as strategy goes.

It seems they’re doing, a slow grind to keep casualty rates low, after the L around Kiev. From the sources I’ve checked, their main focus in the Izyum area is probably Slaviansk. I believe they will succeed there, the terrain is right for them. Artillery and firepower is on the Russian side. The Ukrainians could fall back to better defenses, if they want to play the long game. I believe if they hold out, in this medium intensity offensive (so far) the artillery threat is too much. I don’t think our shipments of MLRS, and M777 is gonna do much yet, the precision those weaponry bring is amazing but they will be exposed to counter battery fire, and airstrikes. I still think they’re going to hurt the Russians with it. In the Izyum area, the Ukrainians are probably better off with infantry in trenches, dug outs, with ATGMs, using artillery to push back infantry. Those Javelins should help, Stugnas, NLAWs. I’ve been seeing footage, from Russian forces during night engagements, since some of their forces have thermal sensors, they seem to be doing successful probes at night too. Either way, these are small gains. Ukraine can definitely bleed them out in a long war. Plus I just read they pushed the Russians back in the Kharkiv area, a good sign.

[LongLeftFlank]

Yampil, southern point of the RA *ahem* drive on Sloviansk.

I am a little wary of a new Twitter feed that names itself 'Facts', and the 'Special Group [spetsnaz?] of General Staff from Siberia' thing smacks of either mistranslation or extreme military ignorance, but can you make anything of this, @Haiduk?

Conjecture: one of the RA armies (69th, is it, from 'Siberia'?) sent its organic Spetsnaz recce unit through the woods south of Lyman to seize/ID a river crossing and the long suffering UA paras (79th Bde.) whacked them....

 

 

Edited May 3, 2022 by LongLeftFlank

[kraze]

7 hours ago, sross112 said:

Oryx has posted the 600th tank loss for the RA today. That makes it 50% of the general assumption of tanks for the 120 BTG's thought to have taken part in the invasion. Only losing half their tanks in a little over 2 months is apparently acceptable losses as everything is going as planned.  

Tanks (600, of which destroyed: 312, damaged: 17, abandoned: 49, captured: 222)

that's just 600 visually confirmed losses. More than 1000 claimed by our army is way more likely.

[Taranis]

"The remains of a Russian tank near the village of Skybyn, near kyiv, May 2, 2022. SERGEI SUPINSKY / AFP"

* Tank = T-72A

[chuckdyke]

They say don't fight this war like you fought the last war. There is one exception logistics. There is an opportunity not to rely on made in China. Here is how they won WW2 and WW3 will be won the same way. 

 

[womble]

1 minute ago, chuckdyke said:

They say don't fight this war like you fought the last war. There is one exception logistics. There is an opportunity not to rely on made in China. Here is how they won WW2 and WW3 will be won the same way. 

 

Can't see the vid, Chuck... Might it have anything to do with "...Major Ford and General F*****g Motors!!"?

[c3k]

In another area, discussing Ukraine's strategic options, I posted this:

 

In fact, push towards Melitopol is my preferred. 

1. Avoids Mariopul...for now.

2. Threatens Kherson concentration of forces.

3. Cuts land bridge

4. Threatens Crimea.

As part of that push, cut the LOCs to Crimea at Kerch.

Russia's response would be to either evacuate Kherson, if they react quickly enough (if Ukraine can cut to the coast), or rush forces from the east to break the Ukrainian coastal penetration.

THAT would then allow another Ukrainian push near Mariopul...bagging the rescue/reinforcements between the two Ukrainian envelopments.

Yeah, the enemy gets a vote, too.  

 

Ukraine is countering the Russian attack from Izyum. As long as the Russian forces are concentrated there, they are weak elsewhere.

The land bridge is a long front with a lot of opportunities. 

Moving south to the Sea of Azov, through or near Melitopol, will cut the LOCs of any Russian forces west of that point (especially Kherson). Cutting the Kerch bridge will isolate that zone completely. (Physically dropping the Kerch bridge and then interdicting any supplies being shipped or flown into Crimea.)

The reaction from Russia will have to be to remove any Ukrainian corridor cutting down to the Sea of Azov. Force to the west of the corridor (Kherson) will be needed to attack the corridor from their side, while other forces will attack from the east.

Meantime, if Ukraine can maintain that corridor and attacking the Kerch strait via long-range fires, Crimea and all the forces near Kherson will whither on the vine.

[chuckdyke]

37 minutes ago, womble said:

Can't see the vid, Chuck... Might it have anything to do with "...Major Ford and General F*****g Motors!!"?

Yes, they didn't contract anything out. I also liked the posters the enemy listens. Impossible now with the internet. 

[Haiduk]

7 hours ago, Machor said:

Russian Signals using Buryat as 'poor man's Navajo' - are the SIGINT pros on the Forum @Bearstronaut able to divulge how a modern military would counter this?

 

During the war 2014-2015, especially during Debaltsevo battle radio operators of 128th mountain brigade from Transcarpatia spoke on own local dialect - crazy mix of Ukrainain, Russian, Hungarian and local dialectisms. The same did units from Western Ukraine - they also spoke on Halicia dialect, so Russians thought "the Polish merceneries fought against them"

Edited May 3, 2022 by Haiduk

[Haiduk]

4 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Yampil, southern point of the RA *ahem* drive on Sloviansk.

I am a little wary of a new Twitter feed that names itself 'Facts', and the 'Special Group [spetsnaz?] of General Staff from Siberia' thing smacks of either mistranslation or extreme military ignorance, but can you make anything of this, @Haiduk?

Conjecture: one of the RA armies (69th, is it, from 'Siberia'?) sent its organic Spetsnaz recce unit through the woods south of Lyman to seize/ID a river crossing and the long suffering UA paras (79th Bde.) whacked them....

 

 

Our Air-assault Comamnd claimed this was troopers of 24th Special force brigade (Novosibirsk) of Central Military District (spetsnaz subordinates to Districts, not Armies). About "General Staff", all Russian Spetsnaz units are subordinated to Main Directorat of General Staff (ГУ ГШ, GU GSh), reсently this structure named Main Intelligence Directorate (ГРУ, GRU)

I've seen a video of this episode, but it too graphic to post it here, On the photo you can see seven dead troopers, but actually there were burned corpses and destroyed BTR-82A

But probably this videop was filmed several days ago. Reportedly since 1st of May, UKR trrops abandobed Yampil' and it vicinity

Edited May 3, 2022 by Haiduk

[kraze]

Guess if you already started digging - you gotta keep digging deeper

russians now directly accuse Israel of supporting neonazis

[Der Zeitgeist]

13 minutes ago, kraze said:

Guess if you already started digging - you gotta keep digging deeper

russians now directly accuse Israel of supporting neonazis

You may want to start checking out Rafael's product brochures just in case. 

https://www.rafael.co.il/worlds/land/

Edited May 3, 2022 by Der Zeitgeist

[Haiduk]

@sburke @Kinophile @akd

Mayor Azamat Alimov, company commander of 3rd Special forces brigade, Central military district. Got killed 3rd of March

 

[Haiduk]

Mariupol

All the night Russians bombed Azovstal with aviation, now they try to assault the plant again. 

Edited May 3, 2022 by Haiduk