The War in the Ukraine

B

Biscuits

Major
Registered Member
GodRektsNoobs said:
I am engaging with the actual point that some people (not naming names) on this thread have been posting inflammatory propaganda since day 1. Or others making unreasonable comparisons such as comparing Russian military capabilities (whose GDP is only equivalent of Guangdong) to hyperpower US invading Iraq just to deflect realistic critiques to biased OSINT analysis.
Click to expand...
It actually isn't that incomparable between Iraq and this war.

US went vs 500 000 troops with 480 000+, but those 500 000 had a very questionable command structure as well. And this was after months of terror bombing meant to force civilians to leave and to weaken Saddam's ability to call on conscripts.

If US had invaded with a mere 100 000 (proportional to how many troops Russia used) then it is quite likely they would be stalemated at best. Especially if they didn't do any terror bombing before hand and Saddam had international support. Iraq war was US beating up on its own crony, like Russia's chechnya adventure. Major powers were not interested in sanctioning America or giving weapons to Iraq. Because America was just killing "their own" dictator who they installed in the first place. Iraq was seen by Beijing as almost an internal affairs conflict for USA.
 
A

Andy1974

Senior Member
Registered Member
Pmichael said:
It's the old the enemy is at the same time too strong and too weak dance. Too bad that Russia has truly overstated their own power.
Click to expand...
If the purpose of this special operation is de-dollarisation then it’s going great. Also, if the idea is to keep NATO forces tied up in Europe, rather than say Taiwan, it’s a roaring success. It has really screwed with the US’s plans for the west to take on China militarily.

If the point is to wear out Europe in a grinding, years long conflict that’s is a constant drain on their power, people, resources and reserves, so that they can’t engage in a war in Asia, then yes I think this operation can achieve all that.

The war is not about Ukraine, but creating a new global order. The most vital part of THAT operation is that China is not defeated. This special operation goes a long way to ensuring that.
 
G

GodRektsNoobs

Junior Member
Registered Member
Pmichael said:
You are just shouting the same things again, why not providing something instead why the Russian loses are overstated?
Click to expand...
Many users already provided lots of evidence in this thread and reasonable deductions. It's up to you to read them and understand them. Also, many users here have questioned the claims (for example) that Russia is running out of missiles or Russia is shelling the same nuclear reactors that they control. Unfortunately, the side responsible for senseless propaganda has not provided adequate answers to them.
 
T

tygyg1111

Captain
Registered Member
4Runner said:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

It’s Time to Prepare for a Ukrainian Victory​

The liberation of Russian-occupied territory might bring down Vladimir Putin.
By
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


[My Comments]
No comments ...
Click to expand...
While time will tell, this reads like those NYT headlines from the early days of Covid which have now been scrubbed from the web, like "Democracies handle pandemics better".
 
tphuang

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Sheleah said:
Visually confirmed casualties for both sides in the Kharkov Offensive as of 9/11

IMG-20220912-091303-369.jpg


The Russians were so "orderly" in their withdrawal, that they gave many equipment in very good condition to their enemies... "great strategists"...
Click to expand...

It is quite clear that the people that post these things online have an agenda of making Ukrainians sound like absolute geniuses and Russians sound like complete morons. The fact that everyone on twitter have jumped onto the success of this Kharkiv offensive and just completely ignored all the losses at Kherson show you the reliability of this crowd.

This is a military forum, not twitter or reddit. Yes, we are biased toward China here and probably against Western military here, but let's try to be intellectually honest here and not resort to all these bad takes and hyperventilation.

if we only look at Russian incompetence and have complete media blackout over Ukrainian losses (outside of that one WAPO article), how can we accurately assess what's going on?

What seems to have happened is that:
1) Ukraine launched an enormous offensive at Kherson and the Russians were ready for it. Ukrainians really suffered
2) Ukraine then turned around and attacked Kharkiv, the Russians were not ready for it. They didn't want to lose combat strength, so they retreated to a place.
3) It didn't sound like there were any major Russian forces that were captured, because they were fleeing so quickly.
4) It is also quite obvious that the online twitter crowd has often overstated the number of Russian casualty and equipment losses. They are in capable of being partial and just analyze things from military point of view.
5) It's not clear to me how much casualties Russians can actually suffer from fleeing quickly and abandoning their equipments.


So, since this is a military forum, can we please just get past the hyperventilation and the over the top reactions and just look at what we can know?
- what has Russians actually lost in terms of combat strength?
- even if they lost 100 trucks, how hard is that to regain?
- are there any natural defensive value to the positions that Russia just lost? Keep in mind that Mariupol was a big deal because Ukrainians had fortified the area for years. Are there any such structure along Kharkiv that Russia lost?
- What is the capability of Russia to back up its forces and re-engage?
- What is the ability of Ukrainians to continue offensive? How much Ukrainian forces are available.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top