The War in the Ukraine

tankphobia

Senior Member
Registered Member
At this point i don't think so many people are buying this line anymore. I clearly remember all the arm chair generals and MSM wind bags cheerleading so proudly and excitedly for the mother of all insurgencies Ukrainians would unleash the moment the Russians steamrolled through to the Polish border, which many of those same nobodies said would take a week tops. Well, at least we have some epic twitter fails from that time to enjoy today

As time went on it proved, (time always brings the truth with 100% reliability) the Russian MOD had a very different plan than what the shepards were telling what the Russian masterplan was. Turns out it isn't facing any mother of all insurgencies, or much of any insurgency at all for that matter, in the areas it has chosen to occupy thus far. How peculiar, the country who has fought more brutal insurgencies than any country, is conducting war differently than based on the theories we subscribed to, and the end result is different than what we are used to seeing.

Even more surprising to me is how these "occupied" people welcome the evil Russian oppressors as liberators. Anyone should find that at least interesting.

In summary, it's just more evidence that in our amazing democracies that are so free and honest, there is totally not a tiny group of people controlling mass opinion so they and their buddies can make trillions in profits as we kill each other and our planet for them.
I'm not going to sit here and justify the war because it will just go in circles, bring it back to my original point that even with all the alleged corruption and endless footage pasted here of the ineptitude of the Ukrainian armed forces, 5 months on Russia has captured barely 20% of their territory. By all metrics but those from the most ardent nationalists, they have not achieved their objectives against a country that has 3x less people and a bit more than 10% GDP, A country with no navy and little airforce to speak of.

So what would be the reason?
A) Russian forces are much less capable than expected (My main point)
B) Western Weapons are making a difference (that just proves my first point if small arms turned the tide)
C) Ukraine has super Nazi space mutant super soldiers
D) Putin got bamboozled by the FSB and that a minimal of Ukrainian turn coats actually turned (First point, i.e hybrid warfare doesn't work)
 

W20

Junior Member
Registered Member
(a) the Ukrainian army is huge, well armed and well entrenched (b) the Russians do not want to declare war for many reasons (c) the Russians see that the Ukrainian regime is willing to send waves of soldiers under Russian Artillery.

The sum of the three reasons I think explains what we observe.
 

tygyg1111

Captain
Registered Member
Ukraine didn't attack Donbass and Luhansk under the pretext of rescuing minorities, they explicitly say that they are reclaiming territory.
Excuses, excuses. It doesn't matter what the 'justification' is, if you are true to your 'values' you should abhor the truth of what they were doing, which is shelling civilian centres to pacify the 'rebels'.

See what I mean about people using civilians to shield everything when its convenient and dropping them like a wet rag when its not? What makes you think Ukrainians are hostage takers? Be realistic about it and remove all the propaganda. This is a war of territorial expansion. Why else would Russia run a referendum for the liberated areas to join them.
You are again contradicting your earlier claim

What makes you think Ukrainians are hostage takers
Hiding out in civilian buildings, and fortifying them with civilians still inside. Before you say "where else can the civilians go but their homes", if the UAF were 'fair dinkum' about fortifying a building, the least they could do is evict the rest along with those evicted from the fortified floors.
 

tankphobia

Senior Member
Registered Member
Excuses, excuses. It doesn't matter what the 'justification' is, if you are true to your 'values' you should abhor the truth of what they were doing, which is shelling civilian centres to pacify the 'rebels'.
I explicitly said that I had no issues with countries pursuing their goal according to geopolitics whatever method so this is not the gotcha you think it is.
You are again contradicting your earlier claim
What claim? State your point explicitly please, we're not teenagers and I don't need to read your mind.
Hiding out in civilian buildings, and fortifying them with civilians still inside. Before you say "where else can the civilians go but their homes", if the UAF were 'fair dinkum' about fortifying a building, the least they could do is evict the rest along with those evicted from the fortified floors.
Why should they? They're fighting in Donbass where all the Russian minorities are, since the locals love their liberators so much that they don't want to move to the rear that's more on them then either the Russians leveling the cities or the Ukrainians soldier camping out. The Ukrainian check points are near the border, not the front. I don't see why at the slow pace that the Russians had advanced the Civilians can't just leave.
 

tankphobia

Senior Member
Registered Member
(a) the Ukrainian army is huge, well armed and well entrenched (b) the Russians do not want to declare war for many reasons (c) the Russians see that the Ukrainian regime is willing to send waves of soldiers under Russian Artillery.

The sum of the three reasons I think explains what we observe.
So you're telling me in 8 years time Ukraine developed a light infantry army that can blunt a Russian offensive with thousands of tanks and APCs. Those NATO super simulants must be super effective. You're proposing that a mechanized army is getting stopped by endless wave of light infantry which has not being effective since WW1.
 

baykalov

Senior Member
Registered Member
Zelenskyy Says Ukraine Should Free Itself From Russian Occupation Within 3-6 Weeks

Ukraine has only a few weeks left to retake the Russian-occupied territories before it becomes much harder to do so, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said. This was reported by Politico on Tuesday, July 26.

Ukrainian President Zelenskyy had an urgent message for the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
: We only have only a few weeks left to take back territory Russia seized before it gets much harder to do so.

Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), chair of the House Armed Services Committee, led his colleagues into Kyiv to meet with the Ukrainian leader and get an update on the war. He relayed Zelenskyy’s message and discussed other parts of his trip with NatSec Daily in a Monday afternoon interview.

Ukrainian officials said they want to reach a peace agreement with the Russians, but first they must recapture lands the Russians took, particularly in the South, Smith told us in his first print interview since the trip. “Help them now as much as possible. The next three to six weeks are crucial,” he said, conveying the main message he heard from Zelenskyy and others.

Smith also explained that it is beneficial for Russia to delay hostilities and wage a war of attrition, since every month it will be more difficult for Ukraine to return the captured land.

While it’s still summer, the winter months are fast approaching. The colder temperatures and brutal conditions will slow the fighting to a grinding war of attrition that mainly benefits Russia. More support now — before Vladimir Putin’s forces lock in their gains — is far preferable to assistance later.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Suetham

Senior Member
Registered Member
It sucks having to read so much bullshit.

Following up with the updates:

If the Russians don't take down Zelensky, the Ukrainians will, because he was already at the knife point of some Ukrainians, especially the Army, now after this rehearsal, this was seen as a mockery of the thousands of dead, especially those killed in doomed operations. to the failure in which he personally issued the order to take place as at Kherson.

Speaking of Kherson, the Russians have moved dozens of ferries to Kherson, across the channel into the Gulf of Dnipro, while the Kherson Bridge is under repair. This here indicates two statements made by the Russians during the week such as the demining of the entrance to the gulf and the destruction of Harpoon launchers in Odessa, in which the Russian MoD declared that "Harpoons would no longer be a problem in the region". Ferries are already operating, transporting weapons across Kherson. As a matter of fact, it seems that the Russians should advance against Mykolaiv and Odessa, according to the Russians themselves. When will this be done? In my opinion, the Russians will wait for the AFU to make the mistake of creating the biggest offensive against Kherson to destroy as much equipment and troops as possible, thus carrying out a counterattack, catching the AFU troops in a possible retreat, seizing the moment.

This is also a problem for the Ukrainians, because if the Russians manage to pass the channel calmly, nothing prevents them from passing amphibious landing ships against the obvious target that is Ocharkiv. If the Russians land on Ocharkiv and establish good control of the city and a good beachhead, Mykolaiv could fall much sooner than expected. Remembering that, in the Kherson and Crimea region, the Russians have three airmobile brigades, two from the VDV and one from Spetnaz, in addition to the equivalent of an MPR brigade that was transferred to Sevastopol, with reinforcements from three amphibious landing ships. Apparently, the MPR troops who fought in Mykolaiv and the rest of Zaporizizhia were relieved by a motorized or mechanized brigade with T-72B3 and T-72B3M dispatches from Kherson there.

The Russians are putting together brigades in the Belgorod region that would be three mechanized brigades, which could indicate offensive action against Kharkiv or a way to try to divert the AFU's focus.

Something has exploded with force in the Port of Odessa, which has been on fire since yesterday at 19:00. The interesting thing is that there is no aerial alert and no report by the Russians of an attack on the port, the fire seems to be quite serious, and it could be an accident to some flammable deposit - it could be ammunition - or sabotage, as it has long been said that the Russians they have saboteurs inside Odessa, such is the ease of the Russians in finding deposits and concentration of troops in the city.

Odessa and Mykolaiv have become the new Kharkiv, where missiles fired from Kherson have been hitting Mykolaiv and Odessa twice daily, on average between 5-20 confirmed hits. Despite this, the fire that took place was before the bombings, which are currently hammering both cities.

Some analysts say the Russians have changed the way they attack. They are firing cheaper, disposable missiles, such as the Tochka-U, often false missiles, to identify air defense points and then send a wave of passive warhead missiles to hit the radars of anti-aircraft systems. After that first point comes the second wave, focused on hitting the tactical and strategic targets. I have been following the Ukrainian air strike alerts and it has been a pattern, sounding the alarms, stopping for 3 minutes and then sounding again. This happens a lot with Mykolaiv and Odessa, especially after the arrival of the Tochka, which has versions with passive radars for SEAD, the Tochka-R.
 

memfisa

Junior Member
Registered Member
I'm not going to sit here and justify the war because it will just go in circles, bring it back to my original point that even with all the alleged corruption and endless footage pasted here of the ineptitude of the Ukrainian armed forces, 5 months on Russia has captured barely 20% of their territory. By all metrics but those from the most ardent nationalists, they have not achieved their objectives against a country that has 3x less people and a bit more than 10% GDP, A country with no navy and little airforce to speak of.

So what would be the reason?
A) Russian forces are much less capable than expected (My main point)
B) Western Weapons are making a difference (that just proves my first point if small arms turned the tide)
C) Ukraine has super Nazi space mutant super soldiers
D) Putin got bamboozled by the FSB and that a minimal of Ukrainian turn coats actually turned (First point, i.e hybrid warfare doesn't work)
I think many people forget the Russians did initially blitzkreig the country, and effectively took control of or blockaded the majority of towns and cities of the country. They pulled back and completely changed the operation to this thing we see today, the reasons for which are nothing more than hearsay because i don't think anyone in this forum is employed by the Russian MOD and willing to share with us why. What we do know is that we are watching Russia conduct a very cheap and sustainable war, where they have minimized their own casualties within a comparatively small force compared to the defenders, while inflicting catastrophic losses to the same across a front line of over 1000 kilometers (a figure that also never gets any attention) day in and day out

Comparing the populations of each country is probably not the best metric to gauge the effectiveness of their military doctrines, training, force structure etc. If we're talking about available human manpower, lets compare something like deployed force numbers where UAF has an overwhelming zerg advantage. Or which side is using conscription, and which side is using contract and professional forces, and the reasons for each of those policies

Despite all the western weapons that were already in or have been pouring into the country, the front line continues its slow shift westward. Not a great indicator of those weapons making any difference, aside from the publicized events like usual ammo dumps blowing up, which by the way has been happening since before this war started. On top of that, some of these weapons, javelin as an example, have been there since this war was just a quiet backwater operation to forcibly de-Russify the east with Tochka's and artillery shells, that .00001% of average westerners ever heard anything about.

I don't know about nazi super aliens, they sure haven't faired well against a properly equipped military. Ukro propaganda used to speak with much fanfare about their "cyborgs" back in the day, before Russian Forces arrived. I'd wager those were nothing more than another ghost of Kiev, ghost of snake island, etc. For example, when the VDV came for Gostomel, cyborgs didnt last more than a few hours.
 

memfisa

Junior Member
Registered Member
So you're telling me in 8 years time Ukraine developed a light infantry army that can blunt a Russian offensive with thousands of tanks and APCs. Those NATO super simulants must be super effective. You're proposing that a mechanized army is getting stopped by endless wave of light infantry which has not being effective since WW1.
In 6 years, Hitler managed to turn a military that was completely crippled and reduced to a few thousand men, and turned it into a force that conquered the ENTIRE Europe while then pushing into the Soviet Union and almost bringing it to its knees as well. I can only suspect you are trolling at this point

NATO had 8 years to train and equip the 2nd most heavily armed mechanized military in all of Europe (after Russia), and 8 years to prepare thousands and thousands of defensive positions and planning. Seriously, i can't tell if you're trolling
 
Top