Ukrainian War Developments

Some days ago now Zelensky the following:

It is clear that Ukraine is not a member of NATO; we understand this. ... For years we heard about the apparently open door, but have already also heard that we will not enter there, and these are truths and must be acknowledged,

Click to expand...

Now, this is not surprising. It is merely official confirmation of what was already widely suspected: that NATO was not willing to admit Ukraine, but would not say so publicly.

Yet to have official confirmation of this is meaningful indeed, because we know that such a public declaration and legal guarantee of Ukraine's non-membership of NATO is precisely what Russia sought in the lead-up to this war:

Speaking at a Kremlin ceremony where he received credentials from foreign ambassadors, Putin emphasized that Russia will seek “reliable and long-term security guarantees.”

“In a dialogue with the United States and its allies, we will insist on working out specific agreements that would exclude any further NATO moves eastward and the deployment of weapons systems that threaten us in close vicinity to Russian territory,” Putin said.

He charged that “the threats are mounting on our western border,” with NATO placing its military infrastructure closer to Russia and offered the West to engage in substantive talks on the issue, adding that Moscow would need not just verbal assurances, but “legal guarantees.”

Click to expand...

Now, part of the issue here is for Ukraine: the matter of revising the constitution to return to strategic neutrality. But the other aspect is in NATO's hands. Just as NATO was able to acknowledge and support Ukraine's ambition to join in the 2008 declaration, it could have offered a similarly public assurance that Ukraine would not be permitted to join NATO. In fact, any one of NATO's member governments could have offered this guarantee, because the accession of a new member requires .

Let us state that clearly. Any one of the governments of NATO's thirty member countries could have publicly committed to vetoing any attempt by Ukraine to join NATO and could have submitted that declaration to the UN as an instrument of international law, and thereby gone a long way toward avoiding this terrible conflict. Each and every NATO member government chose not to offer this assurance.

That's how much Ukrainian lives matter to those in power in the west. Even though NATO had actually revised its position since 2008, it did not want to be seen to have revised its position. The governments of NATO did not want to lose face, and the present catastrophe is the result. That NATO is "willing to fight Russia to the last Ukrainian" is not just a macabre quip, but de facto NATO policy.

Some Brits have lost originality. They copy from the Nazis and the American cowboys which I think the Brits probably still despise a lot. Or maybe there is racism in their blood all along.





Does anyone know why the Communist Party of UK called these posters as "anit-worker"? I would think "racist" and/or "russophobia" fitting better.

A quick thought to leave you with tonight based on the experience of not dissimilar positions in Syria
Russia are making progress against the main formations of the enemy
Yet Western MSM are claiming the opposite is true and the Ukraine is advancing against Russia
Meanwhile Belgrade Biden has also been warning about a "Desperate Russia" resorting to a Chemical or Biological attack to shore up its faltering position.
So, guess no one will be surprised to learn of a pointless and militarily meaningless attack of this nature somewhere.
Well look on the bright side, they are not still sending Jet Liners overhead this time......

Overbom said:

I also want to grow wings and fly
"⚡️ Poll: 90% of Ukrainians believe Russia must pay for country's reconstruction after war.

According to the recent poll conducted by the Rating Group, a fifth of Ukrainians add that European countries & international organizations also must pay for rebuilding Ukraine’s economy."

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1506613065210605571

Click to expand...

Yeah they will pay and rebuild the east of Ukraine, but it will just a Russian province at that point.

sferrin said:

Not "worried" at all. Just saying that if they used such an expensive missile against a stationary target it's because they had to.

Click to expand...

That is completely like your "opinion". Them testing their toys makes 10x more sense.

Wow. I ducked out to deal with the rest of life and came back to read. This thread has become...disappointing. Meming, ad hominems, mockery of sources, etc. If I wanted that, I'd hang out on reddit. I think I saw 1, maybe 2 attempts to do analysis. That the signal to noise ratio is so bad tells me not much is really happening.

One of the things I have thoroughly enjoyed here has been the divergence of views and the respectfulness of those. I have been told I have a minority view here before. Yet, no mockery. No derision. I hope I have returned that same courtesy. I hope it would be extended to others as well.

I really want to reemphasize NOT to plainly accept anyone's propaganda. The Ukrainians and Russians would both shame Buratino's nose at this point. And let's not even go near the other players in this war. Perhaps they can end the war with nasal jousting? Be critical. Don't just accept things because they fit your worldview or hopes. Sometimes the truth is bitter and we must accept the world is not as we would wish it to be.

Mild chastisement done. Let's do something of a bit of analysis: be the change you wish to see, I think they say?

Everyone knows our friend Oryx.

(stop groaning!)

As of the time of writing, the Russians have 'lost' 279 tanks, 265 IFVs and 71 APCs. This adds up to 16 and change BTG and tank battalions. Saying that though is a little deceptive. A BTG has, iirc, 3 mech companies and a tank company. A tank battalion is 31 tanks. Really, it is 10 BTG plus 6 tank battalions. That's actually interesting. Please, allow me to attempt to explain.

When the invasion was imminent, it was said there were 130 BTGs positioned. That would mean 1300 tanks and 4030 IFVs+APCs. I don't think I ever heard how many independent tank battalions there were. Does someone know?

Assuming Oryx's numbers are semi accurate, then the Russians have lost 21% of their tanks from the original BTGs. The Russians have only lost about 8% of their IFVs+APCs. Starting to see what I think is interesting?

The question is why? The IFVs and APCs are not more resistant to ATGM. So why the tanks? Let me take a couple guesses:

1. The way the tanks are being employed lends them to getting whacked more often. They are the tip of the spear most of the time. Therefore, they'll get targeted first. First come, first served, erm, shot at. That makes sense.

2. Also...I think the Ukrainians are intentionally targeting the tanks. Tanks in mobile warfare are the most effective weapon against other tanks. IFVs and other lighter AFVs can take out tanks, but BTR videos aside, it's not as easy and far more prone to getting yourself killed. Preserve your own tank force (debatable if that is happening) and let the jerks in a jeep, cyka in a machina, chew up and get chewed up. When it is favorable to you, concentrate your surviving tanks and counterattack. IFVs are going to get rough treatment by tanks, even the older T-72s and T-64s.

edit add: Right now, the tanks are more vulnerable, too. General Mud, the Raputitsa, makes picking them off easier than it will be when everything dries out come late May.

So! Are the Ukrainians selectively killing tanks and preserving a nontrivial portion of their tanks for a larger counteroffensive.

Test the hypothesis? Do we see less tanks than we would expect being whacked on the Ukrainian side? erm. Probably not, but no good data. We only have suspect sources here. The only other way to check quickly is based on Russian air strikes. Do we see them hitting larger groups of tanks or mostly tanks? Are those groups behind the lines? Longer term, let's see if the Ukrainians attempt to do a true armored assault. If I am right, they will. If I am smoking something good - I'm sure a 19th century Brit would sell it to me! - then, it will never materialize.

My intuition is to doubt my hypothesis and think it is pretty wrong. However, it is an interesting idea. And it is an attempt to some analysis more than on the meme level

A few more observations.

4 weeks in and Russia hasn't won. Not in 72 hours. Not in 15 days. still not 28 days later. World War Z has yet to play itself out.

While constricting Mauripol hard, it hasn't cracked yet. I seem to recall a poster claiming Mauripol had fallen in a few hours the first night of the war. That post definitely aged well. I expect it will fall and probably by Sunday, but I thought it would have fallen already. Not yet. Not yet.

The rumors of attacks, thrusts, parries and counteroffensives are about as clear and accurate as a blind man flinging mud and calling it a clear hit. No sign of the kessel I've heard for the last few weeks. Artillery still falls on Donetsk, so any DNR offensives can't have made that much progress. The claims of the counteroffensive by the Ukrainians to Kherson were being followed by CNN and then...crickets? hmm. Hmmm, I say. The Ukrainians have encircled the Russians outside Kiev! um. (x) doubt. The Russians have encircled Kiev! uh, about those Prime Ministers. I'm totally sure the Russians let them pass freely. Oh, sure, go ahead! Feel free to pass through our lines to conspire against us!

I don't think the Ukrainians can win: even if the Russians lose, as dubious as it may seem, Ukraine is trashed. Cities smashed on levels not seen in Europe in a life time. Even if the Russians are thrown out and never to come again, it would take enormous amounts of money, more than the meth addled squirrel brains of the west would be able to concentrate long enough to give would give.

I am becoming dubious the Russians can win either. Oh, they might on the battlefield, but...after that...a full capitulation requires breaking the will to fight. If anything, the resolve, the rage, of Ukrainians has grown. I don't think people here are taking that rage seriously. Ukrainians are a passionate people in their own way. When they love, it is deep. When they hate, it is far, far worse. And they are just as stubborn and obstinate as any Russian. Probably more so, at least in my sample of one (my own) experience.

back to predictions!

If the Russians cannot free up troops from Mauripol after they have taken it, I think Russia is in trouble. If they do not conduct another serious and successful offensive, they are serious trouble. in If the Russians are still fighting this war in July, they are screwed.

Feel free to mock and poke holes. I'll return when I can.

France just doesn't seem to make up their minds.

Abominable said:

Not answering your questions directly, but this is what I think.
1. Russia is ok with letting in supplies from the west. They've received assurances from the west that no heavy weaponry will be sent to Ukraine. Most of it seems to be coming in through civilian vehicles like 4x4s which is very inefficient. More than weapons and ammo, at this point they are bringing in food and supplies to keep 30 million people alive.
2. RuAF could absolutely smash Ukrainian ground units at this point. It would be a turkey shoot. They seem to be targeting the threats to them e.g. artillery positions which they are disabling slowly with UAV guided artillery of their own. Not as efficient as using drones but they seem to be lacking in that department.
3. As for why they aren't, probably because they don't want this to be a mass casualty war. Despite claims of tens of thousands of dead on both sides, casualty numbers are likely to be quite low for both sides. In the thousands rather than tens of thousands. Civilian deaths are also likely to be low. There will be exceptions - e.g. Mariupol where I think the deaths will exceed all previous ones combined.

The death blow to the Ukrainians are the PGM strikes which are focused on logistics hubs, railway depots, warehouses, depots, and any remaining anti air equipment. Once in a while they target a barracks or reddit battalion for propaganda value.

Countries normally rely on sea shipments for food and other essentials as it's the cheapest way. Transporting it by road in small vehicles is very expensive in costs of fuel, vehicles and drivers and is not sustainable in the long run.

Rather than getting stronger with time, the Ukrainian army is getting weaker. Rations, ammo will soon start to run low and morale will drop. Every tank, APC artillery unit they lose can't be replaced, and at some point, soldiers will have enough, ditch their uniforms and flee.

Time is on the side of Russians, assuming Putin manages the domestic situation. That is Putin's forte, there's no sign of any major civilian discontent at present. Protests have small and easily quashed, and seem to be the hippy anti-war type rather than regime change. It's also a geopolitical battle, which again is Putin's preferred battlefield and he's making Biden et al look divided and incompetent.

I don't think any Russian general will be happy right now as its not how Russians typically fight, but it's ultimately Putin's call.

Click to expand...

Caspian Report said it more clearly
"The Russians are conducting a "Handbreak Invasion" in which they never tried it in their military history"

Fascinating article from The Washington Post about the situation in Makariv, just outside of Kiev. Link and the first few paragraphs of the article reproduced below:



At first glance, the Ukrainian government’s report that its forces had pushed Russians out of this town seemed true: Armed Ukrainian soldiers stood guard at a checkpoint at the entrance to this rural enclave west of Kyiv, seemingly in full control.

Since Tuesday, top Ukrainian government officials had been touting what they called a key victory in their month-long war against invading Russians. They said Makariv, a key gateway for Russian forces to potentially surround and seize Kyiv, had been liberated from Russian forces — and that Ukraine’s flag was now flying victoriously over the town’s center.

Media around the world reported the news as the latest indication that Ukrainian forces were waging skillful counterattacks and defeating the Russians in vital locations.

But as a team of Washington Post journalists passed through the checkpoint on Wednesday, Ukrainian soldiers ordered them to quickly leave the town, warning of incoming Russian rockets or artillery. Minutes later, reporters heard the sound of shells falling. Black plumes of smoke rose over the houses. Soon more blasts followed.

Makariv remains a contested front line.

“The military doesn’t control all of Makariv, only partially,” said Mayor Vadim Tokar, standing on the town’s outskirts shortly after the shells landed. “It’s 100 percent no-go for civilians to return.”

What happened here is emblematic of the two different yet intertwined wars unfolding in Ukraine, one taking place on the battlefield, the other in the realm of propaganda to shape public perceptions and bolster morale and support. Russia has been by far the more aggressive source of wildly inaccurate information — starting with Vladimir Putin’s false and historically inaccurate justifications for the invasion. But, as the Makariv situation illustrates, Ukrainian officials have also sometimes spread overly rosy information about the war.

A visit to Makariv also opens a window into how much the fog of war is making solid information hard to come by. Journalists are increasingly finding it difficult to reach areas outside the capital to independently verify facts, because of bombardments, rapidly shifting front lines and Russian military positions — even as Russia’s advance remains largely stalled.

On Monday, Andriy Nebytov, the chief of police for the Kyiv region, visited Makariv and in a Facebook post accurately described the situation there. “The city is under constant shelling of enemy artillery. Shattered roofs and windows burned by the flames … There are no people on the streets. Every second house is damaged or destroyed.”

Russia has already lost, even if it "wins":


French nukes on high alert:


Up to no good at Chernobyl:


And there's this: