The War in the Ukraine
- Thread starter SampanViking
- Start date
You mean villages like Lyman?
The rate of casualties inflicted on the enemy and casualties taken would be the main measure of success. Which is incredibly hard to judge due to lack of reliable info.
Talking about losing or gaining a pile of rubble in the no mans land like successes is a bit far fetched... What is the strategic value of losing mens to capture a levelled settlement of 4 houses and a gas station ?
Grinding and deplete enemy forces, are more the objectives and what's happening in the past 6 months. The more the front is static and the grinding can occur on destroyed lands, less damage is done to the rest of the country. Russian forces just pull-out when they are at risk of finging themselves on the receiving end of the stick.
If the collapse of Ukrainian forces happen, Russian forces probably hope that large swath of land will be taken and not only wastelands. These need to be easy to keep without huge loss, a village in the middle of nothing is just a death trap to protect.
Even big cities are death traps. You can see diffrerences of doctrines between Russia and Ukraine: Kherson was a deathtrap the Russian pulled out vs Bakhmut is a death trap, the Ukrainians bring reinforcements...
Last edited:
The Economist published an interview with Zaluzhny
Few takes away after the initial self-agrandization and humble-brag:
This explains why they are so hellbent on holding Bakhmut, they rather be grinded down because "they have plenty of soldiers" than to cede ground. We'll see how it pays off for them
Few takes away after the initial self-agrandization and humble-brag:
- He thinks trying to take Kiev was the right decision but poorly executed but on the other hand thinks Russia is in a no-win situation strategically in Donbass. Doesn't bother to explain why then does some projection about shelling civilians.
- They are aware the Russians are amassing material for an offensive while keeping the entire front line hot enough to prevent them from being able to carry out offensives of their own and its wearing them down because the Russians are still fighting hard. He still thinks Russia can't win strategically despite this
- He think that evens if Russia throws a million soldiers at them with "human waves like Zhukov"(this is a cope talking point wehraboos like to use to cope about the nazis getting curbstompped by the soviets), they still can't win
- They are getting bled by the Russians and are worried for the for the war that will start in February; meaning they expect the Russians to have a go at Kiev again, in February so they are trying to build a reserve of equipment for it while trying to hold ground at all cost and ask for the forgiveness of those units get hammered in the front lines
- Energy infrastructure is at the edge of complete failure, and if it does fail, it will affect the morale of the troops and their ability to build the reserves they need
- Russians have adapted to the HIMARS and in many areas the HVTs have been moved out of their reach.
- He had planned an offensive to reach Melitopol in order to strike Crimea but NATO doesn't have enough resources to give to pull it off
- He thinks they can go back to Feb 24th borders with 300 tanks, 700 IFV's and 500 SPGs
- Points out that Russian mobilization did work and the talk about dire situations are mostly exagerations. They expect the Kiev offensive to employ 200.000 soldiers with a reserve 1.2 million people available.
This explains why they are so hellbent on holding Bakhmut, they rather be grinded down because "they have plenty of soldiers" than to cede ground. We'll see how it pays off for them
Many short clips compiled here, including an Ukrainian infantry column being shelled within a forest after being tracked in infrared; depots being struck by Lancets.
Ukrainian infantry squad shelled in the forest, Mastiff and another APC getting hit.
Russians using ATGMs to bust fortifications with great effect.
Ukrainian infantry squad shelled in the forest, Mastiff and another APC getting hit.
Russians using ATGMs to bust fortifications with great effect.
There's a lot of buzz in the media about a Russian Northern offensive from Belarus aimed at Kiev.
That's what my guess was for the winter and certainly there's been build up at Belarus, I'm curious as to why Zaluzhny is sounding the alarm now as there doesn't seem to be any new development in Belarus recently besides their snap preparedness inspection?
That's what my guess was for the winter and certainly there's been build up at Belarus, I'm curious as to why Zaluzhny is sounding the alarm now as there doesn't seem to be any new development in Belarus recently besides their snap preparedness inspection?
Taking Kiev is the way to have heavy loss...cannot see that happening. They can try but it will be a fiasco. Strange buzz.
They can come from Belarus on the east bank of the Dnieper and going south...blowing bridge and splitting the country. Troops buildup would be quite visible and documented. What's up there right now ?
Distraction. Get Ukraine to pull troops from Donbas and Zapo region even though Ukraine has at least 60-70k troops in the Kyiv area. It didn't work when Ukraine was "caught" by surprised it definitely not going to work now.
That would be a very costly distraction. Based on Russia’s preformance, I don’t think they could effectively support two major fronts.