The War in the Ukraine

manqiangrexue said:

You don't see the shape of this blue "offensive?" Reminds me of cellular endocytosis, the red area is exactly what a T-cell looks like right before it eats something and the next phase is to close the gap behind it before the foreign object is trapped in the cell for digestion. The Ukrainian "offensive" is telling, along with Zelensky saying he will retake Crimea, the Russians have beat their brains to pulp. The Ukrainian Nazis aren't even grounded in reality anymore and are making reckless moves when being conservative and defensive was their best chance at holding out for as long as possible.

Click to expand...

Well, the T-cell hasn't eaten anything yet. The Ukrainian bridgehead has proven resilient in the past 10 days.

In fact, Russian troops are in danger of suffering the most major encirclement of the war.


Now Ukrainians are launching offensives on the Kharkov and Donbass fronts as well. Russia is suddenly on the defensive everywhere. Only two months ago it seemed they were winning. As I said in the beginning, HIMARS has proven a game changer.

Ukraine has suddenly reportedly retaken Spirne in Donbass.


Even in my wildest dreams I did not image that not only would a Kherson offensive be successful, but a Ukrainian Donbass offensive would be successful. It seems the tide of the war has suddenly turned.

The fundamental problem for the Russians is that they aren't willing to fight. They have a shortage of manpower. The Ukrainians have literally banned every military age man or woman from leaving the country so they can be drafted, they are fanatical. Meanwhile Putin has yet to declare even a partial mobilization. Even worse, he has painted himself into a corner with definitive statements back in March that there would be no conscripts sent to Ukraine.

tankphobia said:

I mean the history/geopolitical lecture is nice but it does not answer my question. I don't think a few of those replies do fully either. The justification of the war is just that, justification, I want to know how Russia can/will end this war now that it has started it 6 months ago with no end in sight.

Click to expand...

Why do you think Russia wants to finish the war now? One can ask the same question to China's war with Vietnam from 1979 to 1991. That war was similarly made of two phases, 1st a quick punch of a month into north Vietnamese plain, 2nd phase of 12 years of attrition.

tankphobia said:

At this stage in the war, Ukraine does not look like it's anywhere close to collapsing like the mood in this thread seems to imply and Russia does not seem like it can get the decisive victory it needs without either full mobilization or the use of tactical nukes in combat, the aerospace forces is all but absent for a global power and Ukraine is managing to fly it's planes in Kherson this far into the conflict even with the famous Russian air defence network in place. So I ask again, with the cards on the table now, how can Russia end the war in a way that is beneficial to its future?

Relying on China to bail them out incase they lost just sounds like a long winded way to say that Russia isn't winning.

Click to expand...

Again, Vietnam wasn't collapsing in 1979, nor pulling out from Cambodia. China did not expect a decisive victory either.

I think the reason of many people asking the question of "why no quick victory from Russia" is because the western propaganda says "no quicky is a failure". The west saying so because they can not afford cold winter and starving, so they hope that their propaganda can sway the Russian population's support for the war. They also hope to sway the sympathy from Russian allies, or even trick them to abandon Russia because nobody want to follow a loser.

gadgetcool5 said:

Well, the T-cell hasn't eaten anything yet. The Ukrainian bridgehead has proven resilient in the past 10 days.

In fact, Russian troops are in danger of suffering the most major encirclement of the war.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1566864260612882432

Now Ukrainians are launching offensives on the Kharkov and Donbass fronts as well. Russia is suddenly on the defensive everywhere. Only two months ago it seemed they were winning. As I said in the beginning, HIMARS has proven a game changer.

Ukraine has suddenly reportedly retaken Spirne in Donbass.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567241363820789762

Even in my wildest dreams I did not image that not only would a Kherson offensive be successful, but a Ukrainian Donbass offensive would be successful. It seems the tide of the war has suddenly turned.

The fundamental problem for the Russians is that they aren't willing to fight. They have a shortage of manpower. The Ukrainians have literally banned every military age man or woman from leaving the country so they can be drafted, they are fanatical. Meanwhile Putin has yet to declare even a partial mobilization. Even worse, he has painted himself into a corner with definitive statements back in March that there would be no conscripts sent to Ukraine.

Click to expand...

They are pushing hard indeed, it's all or nothing before winter and they don't have a long time left. If the Ukrainian can push the South now, imagine when the rivers near Kherson will be frozen... they will be able to pass everywhere. It's clearly the time to get rid of all the bridges used by Ukrainian forces just before winter. Don't know why they left them anyway. The Dnipro is a formidable barrier and they will need it so the east will be at least under control without reinforcements. Kherson will be harder to keep if their forces are countering offensives in the east.

Maikeru said:

Oh well if it's Russian Telegram channels you can rely on them completely. News doesn't get any more fair, balanced and reliable than that.


Yep, no reason for them not to, really.

Click to expand...

I'll tell you why. Some of the user here sound like those Twitter bots that spams 90% of internet content about Ukraine war. Post a short image or video that likely isn't even relavant, then claim entire Russian unit destroyed, suffered 90%+ causalty, or entire Russian front collapsing etc. And bonus points if they sprew out something racist, inflammatory, or borderline disgusting. And on top of that they have the audacity to claim that people that post reasonable analysis, discussion, or content are biased or Russian shills.

gadgetcool5 said:

Well, the T-cell hasn't eaten anything yet. The Ukrainian bridgehead has proven resilient in the past 10 days.

In fact, Russian troops are in danger of suffering the most major encirclement of the war.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1566864260612882432

Click to expand...

Really?? You don't see the "offensive" getting smaller and smaller? Compare the map from your original post to this one.

gadgetcool5 said:

Now Ukrainians are launching offensives on the Kharkov and Donbass fronts as well. Russia is suddenly on the defensive everywhere. Only two months ago it seemed they were winning. As I said in the beginning, HIMARS has proven a game changer.

Click to expand...

No, HIMARS is a game complicator. FOAB+Tu-160 on Kiev is a game changer. Besides, according to you, Putin was getting ready to give up and beg the West for forgiveness months ago, right? Then the game changer arrived and that hasn't happened? Doesn't look like a very good change for the West...

gadgetcool5 said:

Ukraine has suddenly reportedly retaken Spirne in Donbass.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567241363820789762

Even in my wildest dreams I did not image that not only would a Kherson offensive be successful, but a Ukrainian Donbass offensive would be successful. It seems the tide of the war has suddenly turned.

Click to expand...

Well, those are dreams because nothing there looks successful for Ukraine and you say the tide has changed so many times, it's a whirlpool by now. Russia can't be defeated and it hasn't used its real strength yet, continuing, to everyone's annoyance, to play with Ukraine when it should end it. That is the tide and from day 1 to today, it never changed.

gadgetcool5 said:

The fundamental problem for the Russians is that they aren't willing to fight. They have a shortage of manpower. The Ukrainians have literally banned every military age man or woman from leaving the country so they can be drafted, they are fanatical. Meanwhile Putin has yet to declare even a partial mobilization. Even worse, he has painted himself into a corner with definitive statements back in March that there would be no conscripts sent to Ukraine.

Click to expand...

Ah, so you know that it's true when Putin says that Russia has not even yet begun to fight. Ukraine is exhausted and NATO is broke. Imagine when Russia makes a real effort.

taxiya said:

Why do you think Russia wants to finish the war now? One can ask the same question to China's war with Vietnam from 1979 to 1991. That war was similarly made of two phases, 1st a quick punch of a month into north Vietnamese plain, 2nd phase of 12 years of attrition.

Click to expand...

A war with Ukraine limits options for Russia. They are only allied with China because they have a mutual enemy in the West, Russia has never been and never will be a staunch ally of China simply because of geography. They are competing within Russia's sphere of influence in central Asia as we speak even as the war goes on. (Kazakhstan/Uzbekistan for example)

Before the war Russia could counter-balance the economic dominance of China with European trade partners but now that door has closed with the war and Russia is stuck with China/India as its sole major trading partner going forward. Would it not be preferable for the War to end as soon as possible such that Russia can at least retain some semblance of control over its relationship with China? At least I believe Russia would hate to be the junior in this relationship.

gadgetcool5 said:

Well, the T-cell hasn't eaten anything yet. The Ukrainian bridgehead has proven resilient in the past 10 days.

In fact, Russian troops are in danger of suffering the most major encirclement of the war.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1566864260612882432

Now Ukrainians are launching offensives on the Kharkov and Donbass fronts as well. Russia is suddenly on the defensive everywhere. Only two months ago it seemed they were winning. As I said in the beginning, HIMARS has proven a game changer.

Ukraine has suddenly reportedly retaken Spirne in Donbass.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567241363820789762

Even in my wildest dreams I did not image that not only would a Kherson offensive be successful, but a Ukrainian Donbass offensive would be successful. It seems the tide of the war has suddenly turned.

The fundamental problem for the Russians is that they aren't willing to fight. They have a shortage of manpower. The Ukrainians have literally banned every military age man or woman from leaving the country so they can be drafted, they are fanatical. Meanwhile Putin has yet to declare even a partial mobilization. Even worse, he has painted himself into a corner with definitive statements back in March that there would be no conscripts sent to Ukraine.

Click to expand...

The Ukrainian army's top command itself admitted the Russian army's advance on Artyomovsk (Bakhmut) in the Donetsk region with assault operations in Soledar areas, as well as the attacks on Zaitsevo are currently underway. I don't know what you're trying to say here. The AFU is also suffering defeats between Pesky and Vodyany.



Furthermore, it appears that the top command of the Ukrainian army (Zelensky) has given an order to launch attacks in various regions with them using their NATO-donated equipment on a large scale for the first time. It's all or nothing, if it goes wrong, the AFU will not only lose equipment, but professional soldiers who have been trained by NATO in Europe for months.

tankphobia said:

A war with Ukraine limits options for Russia. They are only allied with China because they have a mutual enemy in the West, Russia has never been and never will be a staunch ally of China simply because of geography. They are competing within Russia's sphere of influence in central Asia as we speak even as the war goes on. (Kazakhstan/Uzbekistan for example)

Before the war Russia could counter-balance the economic dominance of China with European trade partners but now that door has closed with the war and Russia is stuck with China/India as its sole major trading partner going forward. Would it not be preferable for the War to end as soon as possible such that Russia can at least retain some semblance of control over its relationship with China? At least I believe Russia would hate to be the junior in this relationship.

Click to expand...

Exact opposite, this is the same bullshit reasoning that lots of think tanks from certain countries use: their capability and unity with allies is infinite and only limited by resolve while all their opponents are jumping for the chance to backstab each other for shortest of short term gain. Anything they fail at is just because they didn't care, not because they don't have the capability.

What control did Russia have over it's trade with Europe denominated in Euros? Who was junior and senior in that relationship?

The huge difference between China and certain countries is that China never dictates exclusive terms while certain countries do so frequently. China doesn't treat any country, not even Laos or North Korea, like a junior partner while certain countries treat even major nuclear powers like juniors and dictate terms to them.

FairAndUnbiased said:

Exact opposite, this is the same bullshit reasoning that lots of think tanks from certain countries use: their capability and unity with allies is infinite and only limited by resolve while all their opponents are jumping for the chance to backstab each other for shortest of short term gain. Anything they fail at is just because they didn't care, not because they don't have the capability.

What control did Russia have over it's trade with Europe denominated in Euros? Who was junior and senior in that relationship?

The huge difference between China and certain countries is that China never dictates exclusive terms while certain countries do so frequently. China doesn't treat any country, not even Laos or North Korea, like a junior partner while certain countries treat even major nuclear powers like juniors and dictate terms to them.

Click to expand...

You are seeing this relationship from China's lense, the other side would not feel the same way. Russia was able to leverage its trade with Europe such that in 2014 it came out relatively OK. Even now it wields the energy hammer as it's main weapon against the West. It has no such leverages with China.

Look at the relationship of Russia with every single countries within its sphere of influence, would you call any of them a fair partnership?

tankphobia said:

A war with Ukraine limits options for Russia. They are only allied with China because they have a mutual enemy in the West, Russia has never been and never will be a staunch ally of China simply because of geography. They are competing within Russia's sphere of influence in central Asia as we speak even as the war goes on. (Kazakhstan/Uzbekistan for example)

Before the war Russia could counter-balance the economic dominance of China with European trade partners but now that door has closed with the war and Russia is stuck with China/India as its sole major trading partner going forward. Would it not be preferable for the War to end as soon as possible such that Russia can at least retain some semblance of control over its relationship with China? At least I believe Russia would hate to be the junior in this relationship.

Click to expand...

Can't find the exact quotes but I believe in the past Putin and some of his politicians have all but stated that they are in fact satisfied with being a junior partner. Of course, some extremists like Dugin or Navalny would not accept it. But afaik by and by large the Russian "center" accepts being subordinate as long as they're not abused.

You assume Russia is trying to gain some sort of bargaining rights with China and should try to put on an overwhelming force. However, if Russia has already become China's deputy in Europe, then it makes sense to let the common enemy (EU and US) drain themselves as much as possible into the Ukraine and then crush them during the winter. Even if you had the strength to smash an enemy salient with brute force, isn't it smarter to let him pool more soldiers (or in this case, money and weapons) into it, until its at a bursting point, and only then attack?

@gadgetcool5 himars does nothing Smerch doesn't do already.

Ukraine had its greatest success rolling back Russian gains during the first months, using purely inherited USSR weaponry. Western hand me downs can substitute losses, but Ukraine has yet to see any major battlefield success with these weapons.

Right now, Ukraine is trading a lot of losses for basically no territorial gain. If you think sending in waves of light infantry in some cases even infantry walking on their legs behind tanks into fields wouldn't cause mass casualties, then you're deluded. Nothing good can come out of throwing away soldiers.

Until fog of war from the current battles clear it is impossible to accurately measure losses, but logically it can't look very good for the side sending in leg infantry with no air cover.