Ukrainian War Developments

Many people seem to be too quick to jump from one extreme to the other, too quick to jump to conclusions before who-said-what is understood.

Just for a reference. China stepped into the Korean war in October 1950. The war entered a stalemate in July 1951. The subsequent negotiation (with simultaneous fighting) lasted till November 1954, about 3 years. That is 10 months vs. 36 months. Some battles during the negotiation were more destructive than before the negotiation.

History does not repeat exactly, but it does repeat in many ways. I don't think anyone should be "一惊一乍" at every event reported.

SampanViking said:

I would take any open comment about intent from either side with a very great pinch of salt. They are at War and they are in a process of negotiation.
All that has been said by the Russians is that they will reduce Offensive operations on the most Northern part of the front.
What does that actually mean and how long will that apply? Ultimately its meaningless. So from one shell fired every 15mins down to to one every 30mins?
Nowhere have did I read that Russia intended to withdraw from territory or withdraw any units.
It may well however reflect the need to redirect supplies and logistical support for concentration in the Donbas to ensure no loss of momentum once the full fury of the offensive is unleashed.

Click to expand...

Well, we gotta let some of the folks here who have been steadfastly stood with the Ukrainian regime some mental comfort. A bit of "news" like that, and they'd be cheering and celebrating and even taunting the other side with nice little poems and such. Let them have a moment of fun.

It's like soccer fans, understand how exciting it'd be for even one goal by you side, even in a game where your team is most likely losing. Even one more goal to get back at the other side, is something that make people's blood boil. That is the excitement, IT MUST BE! Or else, I would have no chance in a million-year to understand HOW ON EARTH could this war make people feel anything but anger, sorrow, pity and depression.

If I ever have any excitement, it will be from the news that the war is over, killing and shooting and bombing and all sort of other horrible things are over, regardless of the outcome. I don't give a damn who wins or loses.

Also taking Korean war as a reference. The settled line of division in the armistice was the line that was gained and controlled in the battle. No sides gave away what they have grabbed without getting somewhere else for exchange.

So whatever region that Russia has occupied and held to the day of signing of the treaty will remain in Russian hand unless there is substantial meaningful exchange. Basically nobody is giving up something for free. I can imagine that in exchange of Russia to return Kherson to Ukraine Russia would be allowed by the treaty to station military base in Ukraine like US base in Japan. That would be a physical guarantee of Ukraine never joins NATO. I can even imagine that the Donbass republics remain in a federalized Ukraine with Russian bases, this is the Bosnian solution in reverse. This way the Russian speakers in Donbass will be able to veto any move to join NATO by the western Ukrainians.

redion said:

Below is the new normality Ukrainian Army style. For the expression Anti-tank weapons for all

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1508786772276387840

Click to expand...

Looks like they've been reading our posts about unguided RPGs being better suited in urban warfare than ATGMs.

Based on Russian actions with setting up civilian government, I guarantee they're going to keep Kherson oblast, southern Zhaphorizhzhia oblast and Mariupol as part of Donetsk no questions asked. They'll likely be annexed as federal subjects after the war.

Distribution of money (rubles not hryvnia) in Kherson with photo evidence in this thread.

Distribution of food in Mariupol with photo evidence in this thread.



Note they never did this around Kiev or Chernihiv.

However, note that they're also having trouble taking Izium and Chuhuiv. Failure to take Izium and Chuhuiv puts the entire Donbass at risk in the future because then Ukraine controls the upstream of the Donets River and can cut water supply to Donbass, and there won't be a major natural barrier between Ukraine and rest of Donbass.

If I was Russian general staff:

1. Hold Kherson at all cost
2. Hold Mariupol at all cost
3. Hold Melitopol at all cost
4. Liquidate the Donbass pocket ASAP
5. Drive north afterwards to cut Izium off
6. Keep hitting Kharkiv
7. Refocus on Chuhuiv after Donbass pocket is done as an intermediate goal before Kharkiv and to completely surround Kharkiv.
8. Reduce focus on Kiev and other northern axis, and instead drive towards natural barriers in the east.

FairAndUnbiased said:

Might be too ambitious. With the offensive stalled around Sumy and Kharkiv, the more reasonable short term objective should be liquidation of the Donbass pocket, then marching north (from Mariupol) and west (from Donbass) towards natural borders like the Samara River and everything east of the Donets.

After that, Kharkiv needs to be taken to get to the Vorskla River, which forms a contiguous natural border between East and Central Ukraine.

Only after that can you even think about everything east of the Dnieper. But even taking everything bounded by the Vorskla and Dnieper is a huge gain.

Click to expand...

How about this:

People shouldn't give too much attention to what politicians and negotiaters are saying in the middle of war, for example just because the Russians are saying they don't want regime change in Ukraine that doesn't necessarily mean they don't want it.
Remember for several months before the invasion, what did the Russians say "we will not invade", they said that time and time again, they kept on saying it down to the very last minute right before Putin declared the "special operation".

In war it is natural to lie so that your opponent let's his guard down, they lied so much even to the point Ukraine itself didn't believe the west's warnings about the imminent invasion.

Personally I believe the Russians don't want to kill Zelensky because that would turn him into a martyr, so they want to catch him alive and prosecute him under corruption charges

taxiya said:

Also taking Korean war as a reference. The settled line of division in the armistice was the line that was gained and controlled in the battle. No sides gave away what they have grabbed without getting somewhere else for exchange.

So whatever region that Russia has occupied and held to the day of signing of the treaty will remain in Russian hand unless there is substantial meaningful exchange. Basically nobody is giving up something for free. I can imagine that in exchange of Russia to return Kherson to Ukraine Russia would be allowed by the treaty to station military base in Ukraine like US base in Japan. That would be a physical guarantee of Ukraine never joins NATO. I can even imagine that the Donbass republics remain in a federalized Ukraine with Russian bases, this is the Bosnian solution in reverse. This way the Russian speakers in Donbass will be able to veto any move to join NATO by the western Ukrainians.

Click to expand...

Military bases in Ukraine isn't enough. Ukraine needs to be economically reduced to prevent their rearmament.

They have not been 100% defeated and their will broken like Germany and Japan. Isolated Russian bases will be easy prey when, not if, an ultranationalist Ukrainian government rises again.

Lapin said:

Note that another man, I presume, insists on having the last word, of course.

Click to expand...

In defense of Lapin, there are several other members doing the same thing, at various degree. So let us all declare a ceasefire before Russia and Ukraine do, and move on. Peace to all.

Sorry about the late reply.

Jingle Bells said:

Well, it depends on what Russia's objective is.

If Russia's object is to stop Ukraine from joining NATO, then why should Russia NOT start another war with Ukraine if Ukraine started moving towards joining NATO in the future?

Click to expand...

Russia annexed Crimea and fought an 8-year long proxy war to prevent Ukraine to joining NATO, but that didn't deter Ukraine or NATO. This current direct Russian involvement is an expansion of the war to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO (again). So therefore, to prevent future NATO aspirations, Russia should just end the Zelenskiy regime right now. There should be no reason why Russia needs another "NEXT WAR" to achieve the objectives it set out today, you are repeating the same mistake again expected a different outcome. Just end the regime to have a permanent long-term solution.