The War in the Ukraine

TK3600

Major
Registered Member
According to Weeb Union he has sources within the Russian army and they’ve told him. He has sources in the Ukrainian and Russian armies:
Decided to discuss the situation with my Russian source.
Here are the main points.
This is not a Russian trap, the Ukrainians simply did a good offensive. The Russians were clearing mines for their own Sumy offensive and the Ukrainians took advantage of that to launch their own.
The motive of the Ukrainians is also questioned but the general idea is to "strike first", to avoid a collapse on the Ukrainian side they took the fight to the Russian side before they were ready.
Considering Russia was preparing their own offensive they do indeed have soldiers ready. These were stationed far from the front to avoid detection + fpv/artillery strikes.
This means Russia will likely respond very quickly to this Ukrainian offensive and it will not live for much longer.
Russian side is not panicking at all but they are very busy to respond to the current situation.
Good analysis. It would explain how Ukraine managed to go through so quickly, because Russians cleared their own defensive mine field. Ukrainians made a dangerous but correct judgement, which is to strike first. They weighted the defender advantage, and considered it insufficient to hold effectively, likely negated by disadvantage of firepower. Counterattack is deadly, but same applies to Russia if caught off guard. The gamble succeeded and threw Russians in a disarray. Several unguarded logistic hub was overrun by Ukraine.

Russians quickly mobilized their firepower to inflict damage, but did not have enough ground asset to actually stop the push. When they did gather the ground asset, Ukrainians already made a large gain and managed to dig in.

What happens next remain to be seen. Will Ukrainians hold the gain to take the war damage to Russian land? Or will they call it a success and pull back?
 

TK3600

Major
Registered Member
A small tactical victory is hardly something to be proud of over an inevitable strategic failure that cost reserves, equipment, and resources.
What is the alternative? Take the strategic failure and tactical failure at the same time? I would say it is a good move compared to alternatives.
 

TK3600

Major
Registered Member
By depleting your reserves is a good idea? So the goal now is to throw away resources, manpower, and lives to achieve a feels good moment.
Alternative: Sit in your town, eat bombs, get pushed out in 1 month. Russians just sit out and take minimal casualty.

Plan: Push out of town, eat bombs, inflict proportional damage to Russians, gtfo after a month.

Result is the same, but at least they died doing some real damage for once. The damage might not be enough to win a war singlehandedly, but what can you do? Just take the small win and forget it.
 

Sheleah

Junior Member
Registered Member
During the Cold War the Soviets had supremacy in terms of conventional military equipment.

They have always been big mouths, in the incidents over Zhenbao they threatened to use nuclear weapons, when they saw that China was willing to mobilize 7 million Chinese to defend their territories, they had to back down

Since the death of Stalin, they have become accustomed to only threatening with their nuclear weapons, and the times when the will to fight has been proposed to them, they have proven to have feet of clay.

In Ukraine, despite their military supremacy, they have not been able to defeat an inferior army (in all wars the sides have external support), and in addition Ukraine has taken the war to Russian soil, something unthinkable for many who consumed military propaganda. Russian
 

TK3600

Major
Registered Member
They have always been big mouths, in the incidents over Zhenbao they threatened to use nuclear weapons, when they saw that China was willing to mobilize 7 million Chinese to defend their territories, they had to back down

Since the death of Stalin, they have become accustomed to only threatening with their nuclear weapons, and the times when the will to fight has been proposed to them, they have proven to have feet of clay.

In Ukraine, despite their military supremacy, they have not been able to defeat an inferior army (in all wars the sides have external support), and in addition Ukraine has taken the war to Russian soil, something unthinkable for many who consumed military propaganda. Russian
The war really dismiss some stereotypes. Russians military doctrine had been described as rugged, willing to take casualty and fight. In reality they have been very cautious in their doctrine to save lives, even when being hyper aggressive might be the right move. It would be up to the individuals to risk take and inflict damage.

We have seen some examples of war footage where the soldiers are determined to press the advantage, while the commanders tries to avoid risk. Example includes Wagner's assault on Bakhmut. Wagner is launching relentless assault, while the military prefer to sit back and siege slowly. The attack turned out to be right move, because it forced disproportional Ukrainian reinforcement to the town, and most of those got ambushed on the road. Another example is the tank footage where T-90M driver took out an entire Ukrainian armored column alone, while his commander desperately call him to pull back because he is outnumbered. Or the recent SU-34 video where the pilot was confident of its EW ability, but the commander told him to pull back when they detected Patriot launch.

It is a good thing and a bad thing really. It shows the military is compassionate and do what it can to stop soldiers from dying. But it also shows they do not have enough experience to understand when is a suitable time for risk taking.
 

Kich

Junior Member
Registered Member
The Russians are once again demonstrating their operational incompetence. In columns, especially in areas close to the enemy's line of contact, the commander of the logistics unit knows that he has to use dispersed vehicles; it would be practically mandatory to disperse personnel and vehicles as a passive air defense measure.
Start posting comment about how Russia can't prosecute this war correctly and the mods here will threaten you with a ban.

The level of incompetence is amazing yet many here keep eating Russia MOD lies.

This is not how you fight a major war.

You don't leave the regions bordering the enemy you've been fighting for 3 years exposed. Yet the Russians keep doing it. I've lost count how many times Ukraine has started incursions into Russia.

You don't leave the enemy energy and other vital infrastructure intact. You level everything. That's how the West fights. It works.
You seal the borders.
You mobilize the entire nation, not this half-measure mobilization or conscription. Look at Israel against a weak opponent in Hamas.
You allocate a major part of your finance to the military to design and produce vital equipment needed for the war (satellites, aircraft, etc).
You declare NFZ over the entire Ukraine airspace and portions extending to the Black Sea. Even if you can't enforce it, it would give you cover if you down any Ukraine ally that violates it.
You actually declare a war not the "special military operation"

Russia acts like it can have its cake and eat it too. Putin wants to launch a major war, while trying to not bring any suffering or consequences to Russian citizens. All these measures creates hardship for Russian citizens, but the top priority should be victory at the earliest.

At this rate, the war will go on for another 3 years especially if the same administration wins US elections.
 
Last edited:
Top