The War in the Ukraine

Kremlin TeeVee mouthpieces are not only preparing the population for a defeat of Kherson but defeat of other occupied areas in the coming months likely the.... Zaporizshishamajig.


I don't think Russia has any troops beyond the first line of defense. I think once they breakthrough it's clear sailing to Kherson and Derp River. Also, what I find hilarious about them is they believe that actual NATO troops are on the ground on the frontlines fighting Russian troops. It's as they don't want to believe Ukraine troops are this capable or better fighters than Russian ones.

I mean sure US is giving Ukraine real time ISR of Russian forces but Ukraine still has to do the work and dislodge dug in Russian forces with a fraction of outdated NATO equipment. Only thing that is "modern" is the 20 HiMARS/M270's with GMLRS.

Sinnavuuty said:

To be fair, we don't know why this range was chosen to carry out the intercept,, but the fact is that if it were to carry out an interception further away, they would have this ability like the case shown by @Chilled_k6 :

Click to expand...

I just havent seen beyond visual range intercept from Ukranians.
see this Tor missile intercept. the camera is under the trees and barely capture the target.

reservior dogs said:

That sounds like the same cope that reasoned the Russians have no way to mobilize. The people who are mobilized have different kinds of of people. Many are ex-military. Many are gung ho. You cannot blanketly say they won't be sent to the frontline. There are many who are willing to go to the frontline. The Wagner group has been expanding, even as they are suffering losses. The Army has been able to replenish their losses. These people came from somewhere. I would say there are probably much higher portion of the draftees who are willing to go to the frontline compared to their Ukrainian counterparts.

Click to expand...

I never said Russia cannot send conscripts to front line. They have decided not to despite obvious benefits if they did. I am sure Putin has his own consideration of pros and cons because he is not stupid. As things stand right now, unless Russia change their policy, Ukraine's tactic is successful. Russian front line troop is limited by professionals only. They cannot withstand losses, their numbers are very limited. As long as Ukraine is willing to pile up the bodies, Russians will be forced to withdrawl to preserve the limited professional troops. This leads to the hilarious result of technical forcing tanks to retreat despite when faced in combat the tanks should win. The superior firepower advantage cannot make up for inability to man the battlefield and is forced to withdraw or risk its supply getting cut off. Now obviously if Russia mobilize like an actual war, the man power situation will be reversed. But that is not happening so far with no sign pointing toward change. As we speak they are evacuating the entire city of Kherson. I am sure if they have the option of keeping the city intact, they would have. So what is stopping them?

TK3600 said:

I never said Russia cannot send conscripts to front line. They have decided not to despite obvious benefits if they did. I am sure Putin has his own consideration of pros and cons because he is not stupid. As things stand right now, unless Russia change their policy, Ukraine's tactic is successful. Russian front line troop is limited by professionals only. They cannot withstand losses, their numbers are very limited. As long as Ukraine is willing to pile up the bodies, Russians will be forced to withdrawl to preserve the limited professional troops. This leads to the hilarious result of technical forcing tanks to retreat despite when faced in combat the tanks should win. The superior firepower advantage cannot make up for inability to man the battlefield and is forced to withdraw or risk its supply getting cut off. Now obviously if Russia mobilize like an actual war, the man power situation will be reversed. But that is not happening so far with no sign pointing toward change. As we speak they are evacuating the entire city of Kherson. I am sure if they have the option of keeping the city intact, they would have. So what is stopping them?

Click to expand...

Kherson has a couple of hundred thousand people. From what I heard, they are evacuating 60K. If that is true, it might be that they are evacuating those that can be impacted if the dam is blown up.

I get the sense, though I can't prove it, that the Russians are baiting the Ukrainians. They may appear weak, they may broadcast to the world that they are vulnerable. You would not mention this on TV interviews if you are actually vulnerable. If the war was hopeless, the Ukrainians might take their last bit of equipment from the West and fortify their current frontlines. NATO may want to do a cease fire. For all practical purposes, this would end the war with the current boundaries. This is not ideal for Russia. If the Ukrainians are baited into pouring their last bit of war equipment into the offensive it would

1. Allow the Russians to mobilize internally,
2. Provide them the pretext to destroy Ukrainian infrastructure.
3. fight the Ukrainians close to the current frontlines, where the Russians have a huge logistic advantage.
4. Cut down on the resistance once the Russians do go on the offensive.

I think the Russians will do their best to defend Kherson. At the end, the Ukrainians will pour large amount of their resources into this counter-offensive and leave themselves open to the Russian offensive to come.

M113 captured by Russians on the Kherson front.
I don't know Russians but I can tell already he's shit talking about the aluminum armour. What do you reckon made those holes in front? 14.5mm?

reservior dogs said:

Kherson has a couple of hundred thousand people. From what I heard, they are evacuating 60K. If that is true, it might be that they are evacuating those that can be impacted if the dam is blown up.

I get the sense, though I can't prove it, that the Russians are baiting the Ukrainians. They may appear weak, they may broadcast to the world that they are vulnerable. You would not mention this on TV interviews if you are actually vulnerable. If the war was hopeless, the Ukrainians might take their last bit of equipment from the West and fortify their current frontlines. NATO may want to do a cease fire. For all practical purposes, this would end the war with the current boundaries. This is not ideal for Russia. If the Ukrainians are baited into pouring their last bit of war equipment into the offensive it would

1. Allow the Russians to mobilize internally,
2. Provide them the pretext to destroy Ukrainian infrastructure.
3. fight the Ukrainians close to the current frontlines, where the Russians have a huge logistic advantage.
4. Cut down on the resistance once the Russians do go on the offensive.

I think the Russians will do their best to defend Kherson. At the end, the Ukrainians will pour large amount of their resources into this counter-offensive and leave themselves open to the Russian offensive to come.

Click to expand...

I cannot predict if Kherson will fall, but what I can say is pretending to get your ass kicked do not help you to reach the 4 goal you mentioned.

1. Losing territory you annexed does not inspire confidence for people joining a losing offensive war, pretend losing or not.

2. They are already destroying it and Ukraine striking Russian proper is a sufficient excuse.

3. Ukraine will attack you in offense to reclaim their land even if they are losing as seen from start of the war.

4. Russian artillery strike on static enemy was doing that job just fine, no need to lose territory because "you are pretending". If it was empty land I can buy that. Iziym was a strategic transportation node. Kherson is a even more important city overseeing Crimea. You know it is not a bait if Russia were to pull back from those kind of places.

Even more rolling blackout are happening across Ukraine.
I'm curious if Surovikin see these attacks against power infrastructure as a purely strategic level thing detached from the front line or does he expect to see it translate to affecting the battlefield over time.

reservior dogs said:

Kherson has a couple of hundred thousand people. From what I heard, they are evacuating 60K. If that is true, it might be that they are evacuating those that can be impacted if the dam is blown up.

Click to expand...

When Russia warned that Ukraine may blow up dam I think folks knew the dam is likely to go however not by Ukraine. It's more than likely US and Ukraine has prepared for this contingency. I think the lull after taking a chunk of Kherson there were a lot of meetings with US spooks and those that move the proverbial chess board of Ukraine forces are telling Ukraine Generals where and how to attack incase of such event. I think in coming days Ukraine will launch Zaporizhia offensive.

reservior dogs said:

I get the sense, though I can't prove it, that the Russians are baiting the Ukrainians. They may appear weak, they may broadcast to the world that they are vulnerable. You would not mention this on TV interviews if you are actually vulnerable.

Click to expand...

You can more than likely bait Ukraine but not US and NATO ISR. They can pretty much see what Russians are moving around on the frontlines of this war.

reservior dogs said:

If the war was hopeless, the Ukrainians might take their last bit of equipment from the West and fortify their current frontlines. NATO may want to do a cease fire. For all practical purposes, this would end the war with the current boundaries. This is not ideal for Russia. If the Ukrainians are baited into pouring their last bit of war equipment into the offensive it would

Click to expand...

The thing is Ukraine aint running out of equipment it's pretty much an open faucet of western weapons pouring in. US alone is being calculative on what to give and how much. Every time Russia escalates the US gives more capable weapon systems. US has over 2000 IFV Bradleys sitting in storage and other IFV's same with tanks. When Ukraine starts to go critical on armored personnel vehicles that is when the US will start giving Ukraine Bradley's and other IFV. Russia's mistake of invading Ukraine became the US catalyst to degrade the Russian conventional force and they are succeeding.

reservior dogs said:

1. Allow the Russians to mobilize internally,
2. Provide them the pretext to destroy Ukrainian infrastructure.
3. fight the Ukrainians close to the current frontlines, where the Russians have a huge logistic advantage.
4. Cut down on the resistance once the Russians do go on the offensive.

Click to expand...

Russians had a huge logistic advantage on Feb 24th in the Kyiv invasion. It wasn't far militarily speaking from the Belarus border to where Russian forces decided to halt its offensive.

reservior dogs said:

I think the Russians will do their best to defend Kherson. At the end, the Ukrainians will pour large amount of their resources into this counter-offensive and leave themselves open to the Russian offensive to come.

Click to expand...

Leave themselves open from where? Ukraine has 50-60k troops around the Kyiv area in defensive positions with much more capable weapons thn they had on Feb 24th.

C'mon. As if Russia could invade a city the size of Kiev with that amount of troops. It was quite clearly a fixing operation.

As for the M113 it is a death crate against those 30mm autocannons the Russians have on the BMP-2 and BTR-82.
NATO did not even bother giving Ukraine guns for the M113s. It is a glorified battle taxi.
They were especially vulnerable to IEDs in Iraq and the US stopped using the M113 there after a lot of fatalities.

TK3600 said:

I cannot predict if Kherson will fall, but what I can say is pretending to get your ass kicked do not help you to reach the 4 goal you mentioned.

1. Losing territory you annexed does not inspire confidence for people joining a losing offensive war, pretend losing or not.

2. They are already destroying it and Ukraine striking Russian proper is a sufficient excuse.

3. Ukraine will attack you in offense to reclaim their land even if they are losing as seen from start of the war.

4. Russian artillery strike on static enemy was doing that job just fine, no need to lose territory because "you are pretending". If it was empty land I can buy that. Iziym was a strategic transportation node. Kherson is a even more important city overseeing Crimea. You know it is not a bait if Russia were to pull back from those kind of places.

Click to expand...

I guess we will have to watch how the movie play out.