The War in the Ukraine

Abominable

Major
Registered Member
Anything coming out of Russia is extremely scrutinized yes. I don't even know why you ask such a thing.


The photo is still suspect because it's a photo, and it's coming from Ukraine. It's even more suspect now that we know it's a photoshop.

Photographs aren't immediate proof. We should've all learned that by now, and we must approach all claims with extreme skepticism.
I think it's a lot more suspect than a photoshop. Within a few hours we've had three different versions of the same picture. The last one, poorly watermarked, being the most suspicious. Why would Ukrainians want to photoshop out the name of a pro Ukrainian telegram channel?

It's like they made up an excuse to cover up evidence of photomanipulation.

Some Ukrainians (or Americans) released a AI image of what they thought was a S-400 radar vehicle destroyed. But since they were probably IT guys and not military, the lack of axle didn't seem off to them. When they released it it got called out immediately, including by some in the NAFO crowd. Instead of letting it die they went back and edited in a second axle. When that raised even more questions, they tried to answer that by poorly inserting a watermark of an obscure pro-Ukrainian channel with 3k subscribers.

They didn't even use the correct watermark the channel normally uses, you can see for yourself in this random picture:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
It's much bigger and semi transparent. Not to mention the post they made is only a few hours, while the pictures have been circulating since at least this morning.
 

SolarWarden

Junior Member
Registered Member
For all the posting of individual units being killed by Russian lancets; artillery smacking tanks and buildings; and whatnot, why has there not been a significant *Russian* offensive?

The Russians went into Ukraine with 190k (at most) in 130 BTG. We know the Russians reinforced with other units as some of the originals were chewed on. Plus the PMCs are there. The Russians called up 300k troops. Furthermore, the called-up 300k should give them another 205 BTG assuming they can be equipped. I'd speculate Russia may have 3x the original number of troops now in Ukraine.

The 205 to 335 BTG is a lot more than the 20 brigades the Ukrainians have pulled together for their offensive, if and when and ever that happens.

So why are the Russians not concentrating at least a the force equivalent of a combined arms army and punching through the Ukrainian lines at a particular point? The Ukrainians can't be strong everywhere all the time.

I can speculate:

1. logistical problems - not a problem with having the material so much as being able to resupply the units on offensive. There has been speculation from the start the Russians had issues going past a truck ride from a rail head since nearly the beginning.

2. The russians have a serious ISR problem and can't figure out if the Ukrainians have a weak point or not. Given the number of drones involved - Ukrainians saying they lose 10k per month - I have doubts about this.

3. Casualties are a lot worse than people think and the battle hardened, professional troops are in bad shape. The others need a lot more seasoning before they can be used on a significant offensive.

4. Risk aversion. No commander in the Russian army wants to get blamed for a major failure. The sacking of generals has been a lot more than I'd have expected already and the ones left are not willing to risk a failure - even if slight - or worse, the Ukrainians taking advantage and pulling off another Kharkov offensive.

5. Possibly they tried and failed in the winter. I've heard this a few times now, but...unless the Russian army is a lot worse than I think it is or the Ukrainians a lot better, then ... I have doubts?

Why are we seeing tactics used that look more like the terminal Korean War attacks by the UN/American troops than an actual offensive? Why haven't we seen a new kessel since Mauripol? Even in Bakmut, the Ukrainians were able to retreat in good enough order to prevent encirclement?

Why haven't we seen a major offensive?
They tried. At Vuhledar alone Russia lost almost a divisions worth of armored vehicles.
 

HighGround

Senior Member
Registered Member
For all the posting of individual units being killed by Russian lancets; artillery smacking tanks and buildings; and whatnot, why has there not been a significant *Russian* offensive?

I see daily posts on Ukrainian telegrams of various strikes on Russian equipment as well. The war of attrition is not one sided at all.

The Russians went into Ukraine with 190k (at most) in 130 BTG. We know the Russians reinforced with other units as some of the originals were chewed on. Plus the PMCs are there. The Russians called up 300k troops. Furthermore, the called-up 300k should give them another 205 BTG assuming they can be equipped. I'd speculate Russia may have 3x the original number of troops now in Ukraine.

There isn't a "pool" of men being assigned into "BTGs". Some units are fighting as tactical company units, other are re-organized into larger regiment sized formations.

The BTG moniker is no longer useful, as the Russian Army is significantly re-organized due to the on-going war, it's a bit of an ad-hoc effort.
The 205 to 335 BTG is a lot more than the 20 brigades the Ukrainians have pulled together for their offensive, if and when and ever that happens.

So why are the Russians not concentrating at least a the force equivalent of a combined arms army and punching through the Ukrainian lines at a particular point? The Ukrainians can't be strong everywhere all the time.

This front is thousands of kilometers wide. The only reason Ukrainians "broke through" in Kharkiv for example, is because of how thinly Russians spread their troops (not to mention that NATO hand-held Ukraine through it the entire time. They gave Intelligence and helped craft the operation). Russia does not have the numbers it wants.

I can speculate:

1. logistical problems - not a problem with having the material so much as being able to resupply the units on offensive. There has been speculation from the start the Russians had issues going past a truck ride from a rail head since nearly the beginning.

This just isn't true. Russians have shown the ability to lay down enormous firepower down when they needed to. You can't do that with shit logistics.

2. The russians have a serious ISR problem and can't figure out if the Ukrainians have a weak point or not. Given the number of drones involved - Ukrainians saying they lose 10k per month - I have doubts about this.

Ukrainians are getting intelligence from NATO.
3. Casualties are a lot worse than people think and the battle hardened, professional troops are in bad shape. The others need a lot more seasoning before they can be used on a significant offensive.

4. Risk aversion. No commander in the Russian army wants to get blamed for a major failure. The sacking of generals has been a lot more than I'd have expected already and the ones left are not willing to risk a failure - even if slight - or worse, the Ukrainians taking advantage and pulling off another Kharkov offensive.

5. Possibly they tried and failed in the winter. I've heard this a few times now, but...unless the Russian army is a lot worse than I think it is or the Ukrainians a lot better, then ... I have doubts?

Why are we seeing tactics used that look more like the terminal Korean War attacks by the UN/American troops than an actual offensive? Why haven't we seen a new kessel since Mauripol? Even in Bakmut, the Ukrainians were able to retreat in good enough order to prevent encirclement?

Why haven't we seen a major offensive?

The Russian Army has chronic manpower shortages. They've compensated using superior firepower, but boots on the ground are what take and hold ground.

Russians don't have the ISR complex or the air superiority to make do with limited forces. I also have suspicions that they lack specialists like Air Combat Controllers in sufficient numbers to co-ordinate an air campaign of a large size. This is just my hypothesis, unsubstantiated by any real information.

However, I believe everything comes back to lack of manpower. We have very limited information about how many men RuAF actually has, but casualties have been on-going throughout the entire war. While Ukraine is essentially in a state of mass mobilization, Russia is not. They don't even have partial mobilization, they only made one large call-up.
 

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
They tried. At Vuhledar alone Russia lost almost a divisions worth of armored vehicles.

The Russians didn't. There was only one brigade doing that offensive with supporting elements from another. Furthermore said "destroyed" brigade are still active in Ugledar which has been leveled by the same Russian brigade. If this unit was destroyed then what unit do those TOS-1A turning Ugledar to rubble belong to? Why wasn't Ukraine able to take the surrounding daschas and villages and were pushed back with heavy losses? Let me add that a single T-72 and three BMPs that were initially destroyed appeared in multiple videos giving the impression that much more than four vehicles were destroyed as the area became the focus of continuous fighting. The Ukrainians drone grenaded the same tank that's already been abandoned after it was hit.
 
Last edited:

Atomicfrog

Major
Registered Member
The Russians went into Ukraine with 190k (at most) in 130 BTG. We know the Russians reinforced with other units as some of the originals were chewed on. Plus the PMCs are there. The Russians called up 300k troops. Furthermore, the called-up 300k should give them another 205 BTG assuming they can be equipped. I'd speculate Russia may have 3x the original number of troops now in Ukraine.
Yeah they went into Ukraine with 190k (counting logistics) They where thinking it will collapse like a fart in the wind. Most of these 190k where at the end of their contract and didn't renew it after the Shi*show of the first 3 months. In the summer they had lost the majority of these and the front was more or less unmanned and Ukrainian have been able to seize that opportunity. They have changed contracts little characters after that.

Russia reacted and called up 300k and taken 6 months to train them. I think they have still less than 200k manning the front, some are waiting for rotation behind the border. With that amount of troops they just do defensive works.

Wagner and the Chechens where used for offensive in Bakhmut sector and in the forest near Kreminna. Nothing moves and without a massive amount of troops making Russia forces more numerous than Ukrainians we cannot see any breakthrough beside grinding incoming Ukrainians with artillery and gliding bombs. DPR militias are doing some hard works too.
 

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
If we go by that logic the same applies to info coming out of Russia, right?


Can be faked and easy to debunk with a some research. Seems like the narrative is changing from being a fake pic of s400 command truck because an axel was deleted to now it's a Ukraine s300 command truck because how can Ukraine get their hands on a pic far behind enemy lines.

Until proven otherwise this is an s400 command truck with an obvious airburst blastfrag damage


Let me remind you of the phantom sinkings of the Ivan Kurs, the Vasily Blykov and Admiral Makarov.

On the other hand, the Russians are claiming the destruction of Ukraine's only landing ship in port, which may have been used to fire MLRS, deploy special forces and USVs. However I take it only as an MoD claim that's entirely possible within their means but would prefer to see more substantive evidence.



Non related material posted to save post count.

0.29 of this video might be the Ukrainian military intelligence headquarters being hit. This appears to be an optical or TV guided munition, a KAB or a Kh-29. Cruise missiles and suicide drones attacking other targets may serve as a distraction from the main true strike.

 
Last edited:
Top