Ukrainian War Developments
- Thread starter james smith esq
- Start date
- Status
Georgia took that as a greenlight to attack russian troops and Russia trashed Georgia, that they made it all the way to Gori and outside Tiflis.
So, it's not like a war didn't happen over that and Nato was forced to chill.
And also this happened
"How do you lose so many generals because you are incapable of using encrypted communication?"
It evidently happened to the vaunted Israel Defense Force (IDF).
On 13 October 1973, IDF General Mandler flew in a helicopter to visit a front-line position in the Sinai.
After landing, he radioed (in the clear) his home base to report his arrival and evidently talked for too long.
Egyptian signals intelligence identified him and ascertained his location, which was transmitted to the artillery.
Egyptian artillery then opened fire and killed him near the helicopter.
You're judging this invasion based on US style shock-n-awe campaign. But what if the Russians planned the invasion to use the minimum force possible? In this case, an invasion force that's numerically inferior to the defender and using as little air power as possible. The Russian force engages and/or pins down the numerically superior Ukrainian forces across the battleline, aided by bare minimum amount of air superiority, while achieving force superiority in key locations to overcome the enemies, and slowly destroy enemy positions one by one. In other words, a Napoleon defeat in detail strategy. Why would Russia want to do that? Well, maybe because Russia wants to keep a large portion of its force, especially strategic ones in reserve just in case of a direct NATO military confrontation. In other words, Russia can't afford to do US style shock-n-awe invasion. The fact Russia announcing the end of phase 1 coincides with the near fall of Mariupol seems to confirm that Russia has just that in mind.
Of course, there were a lot hiccups along the way and Russia finds all kinds of ways to embarrass itself. But so far their over strategy seems to be sound. However, if Ukraine finds a way counter by moving a large chunk of its force to reinforce weak key points, even achieving local superiority while maintaining stalemate with the Russians with the rest of the fronts, then the Russian offense will be in big trouble.
Parts of western Ukraine belonged to the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
"The West Ukrainian People's Republic ... was a short-lived polity that controlled most of from November 1918
to July 1919. It included the cities of , , , , , (now Ivano-Frankivsk) and right-bank
, and claimed parts of and ."
--Wikipedia
First footage of missiles launched from the Black Sea impacting Lviv.
Ok thank you for that. Very interesting. At first glance, I'm skeptical of your friend's assessment because a major push through Horlivka wouldn't make sense. The Donetsk line is heavily fortified; we're talking extensive trench networks in many places. There's been a massive fight over Marinka happening for over a week precisely because the Ukrainians have built an underground trench network across the entire town. That's just one place. What makes far more sense to me is to concentrate a major force for a push on Velyka Novosilka, where the Ukrainians have a large presence that needs to be eliminated first, and then break out north along multiple directions to cut off the E50 highway. At that point, the Ukrainians would have to conduct a strategic withdrawal if they have any common sense left, because their entire position in Donetsk would be compromised. I expect that the Russians will probably execute a strategy like this once they wrap up in Mariupol.
Who's winning the war? As Zhou Enlai might have said, it's too early to tell for certain.
Who was winning the Battle of Marengo? The perception would chiefly depend upon when the question was asked.
Should Russian losses in armor be attributed only to alleged Russian incompetence or to basic vulnerabilities of armor in modern war?
I suspect that the best explanation is likely a combination of factors.
In my view, when armored vehicles become exposed to a broad range of modern anti-armor weapons, losses are inevitable.
If Iraq had many of the most advanced anti-armor weapons when it was invaded by the USA, US armor losses would have been higher.
My impression (which is partly based upon the experiences of friends or acquaintances who served in the Russian armed forces)
is that the Russian Army is generally not very efficient, apart from a few elite units. So I am hardly surprised that most Russian
soldiers may have been far from prepared at first to deal with harsh realities of fighting a hostile population in Ukraine.
I had a friend (a member of the intelligentsia) in St. Petersburg (his mother was a curator at the Hermitage Museum), who told me
that he was terrified of being conscripted into the army because he did not expect to survive. He said that one of his friends, a
conscript, had been beaten to death in a brutal ritual of hazing in the army. He said that his family could not afford the bribes
needed for him for avoid conscription. His hope was to marry a young woman with a foreign passport and leave Russia.
He asked me to help him. But I could not give him the relationship that he sought, and so we parted ways.
Wherever he may be today, I feel sure that he would not wish to die--or to kill anyone--in Putin's war.
A Russian woman friend said: "Putin does not stand for all Russia any more than Hitler (an Austrian) stood for all Germany."
Who was winning the Battle of Marengo? The perception would chiefly depend upon when the question was asked.
Should Russian losses in armor be attributed only to alleged Russian incompetence or to basic vulnerabilities of armor in modern war?
I suspect that the best explanation is likely a combination of factors.
In my view, when armored vehicles become exposed to a broad range of modern anti-armor weapons, losses are inevitable.
If Iraq had many of the most advanced anti-armor weapons when it was invaded by the USA, US armor losses would have been higher.
My impression (which is partly based upon the experiences of friends or acquaintances who served in the Russian armed forces)
is that the Russian Army is generally not very efficient, apart from a few elite units. So I am hardly surprised that most Russian
soldiers may have been far from prepared at first to deal with harsh realities of fighting a hostile population in Ukraine.
I had a friend (a member of the intelligentsia) in St. Petersburg (his mother was a curator at the Hermitage Museum), who told me
that he was terrified of being conscripted into the army because he did not expect to survive. He said that one of his friends, a
conscript, had been beaten to death in a brutal ritual of hazing in the army. He said that his family could not afford the bribes
needed for him for avoid conscription. His hope was to marry a young woman with a foreign passport and leave Russia.
He asked me to help him. But I could not give him the relationship that he sought, and so we parted ways.
Wherever he may be today, I feel sure that he would not wish to die--or to kill anyone--in Putin's war.
A Russian woman friend said: "Putin does not stand for all Russia any more than Hitler (an Austrian) stood for all Germany."
- Status