Ukrainian War Developments

Status
Not open for further replies.

meckhardt98

Junior Member
Registered Member
Any "crimes" committed by Russian soldiers will be heard in a Russian military court, the ICC will have nothing to do with it.

Yesterday Russians were tying up civilians and shooting them but that got debunked. Today's war crime is stealing washing machines. I bet tomorrow's war crime will be parking in a disabled space and not returning library books.

I don't know why you Polish people seethe so much about Russia yet are too afraid to fight them. It's the most pathetic thing I've seen.

The mass murder that took place in Bucha was not disproven; additionally it’s a violation of international law to loot and pillage villages and settlements in a time of war. The Russians will not persecute them and neither will the international community, it was a hyperbole to highlight the insanity of the Russian military.

I don’t know why you think I’m Polish; which I’m most certainly not; or why that would have anything to do with what I’ve said above.

It is objective however to say the Russians are most certainly war criminals.
 

Black Shark

Junior Member
The mass murder that took place in Bucha was not disproven; additionally it’s a violation of international law to loot and pillage villages and settlements in a time of war. The Russians will not persecute them and neither will the international community, it was a hyperbole to highlight the insanity of the Russian military.

I don’t know why you think I’m Polish; which I’m most certainly not; or why that would have anything to do with what I’ve said above.

It is objective however to say the Russians are most certainly war criminals.
A - War crimes first have to be proven.
B - If looting abandoned places is what you consider war crimes to be prosecuted while literal nazis are killing people with cluster ammunition, trap them in buildings and use them as human shields, shoot them in front of bread lines and say it was the russians or duct-tape people to poles so anyone can abuse, rape, kill them or do whatever then my polish friend you are truly revealed that you are just a person with burning russophobia.

C - There will be a war tribunal in DNR and LNR and guess who will be tried? ;)
 

GodRektsNoobs

Junior Member
Registered Member
the fact that Russian army is no longer a match for full western military has been apparent since Grazney around 1992. The guarantor of russian security since then has been the credibility of russian nuclear deterrence. which is why there is a contest over ukraine at all.
Remember though, European militaries are in far worse condition than even Russia. All we have seen from they is counter-insurgency warfare with only few elite troops and air strikes against defenseless enemies. Well, Russia did the same in Syria and were seen as just as effective. And Russia has a far larger military. But then again, if Europeans view Russia as legitimate threat, they would not have lowered themselves into this position in the first place.
 

pmc

Major
Registered Member
Western army would never consider a 5 axis attack, and would consider such a move wrongheaded.

Russians did attack in 5 directions at once as they have their own idea of fundamental military principles that had worked many times before. But they clearly did not make sure the circumstance that made such maneuver succeed before is duplicated in Ukraine before they tried.
Atleast 3 out of 5 axis are success. Ukraine coast is blocked. it has lost 25% of area. if you include foreign nationals moving out. Ukraine may have lost 25% of population and majority of its economically productive population. few Turks are left and they will leave soon.
the bottoom line is that so much foreign nationals would not be there if there wasnt for EU money.
It is EU stupidity that instead of competing with Asia in new technologies they funded Ukraine for the benefit of Turkish contractors and producrs. so i am not sure why not quantifying it as success as all these are done in 40 days period.


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Anlsvrthng

Captain
Registered Member
Western army would never consider a 5 axis attack, and would consider such a move wrongheaded.

To understand why the western army would not want to do it while the Russian army would, it has to be understood western and Russian armies generally has a different operational ideology, for the lack of better word.

Soviet operational doctrine since around 1943 has emphasize opening at battle with a style of practical military deception operation called moskirovka. Moskirovka presumes Soviet forces had numerical superiority. It emphasizes setting the stage for the main decisive attack by first simultaneously attacking the enemy along multiple widely separated axis that makes it difficult for the enemy to know where the main attack axis lay, and also makes it difficult for the enemy to be able to position its reserves so as to be able to advantageously meet Russian attacks on several axis at once. This forces the enemy to guess which axis is the main one, and commit their reserves prematurely. Only when it becomes clear where the enemy has committed their reserves, would Russian select the primary axis of attack to avoid enemy reserves. The Russian army would then commit its own reserve to achieve a breakthrough by effectively push against an unlocked door. During the late 1943-1945 period, the Soviets implemented moskirovka with tremendous success against the German army. Despite later soviet portrayals of great soviet heroics in beating the german army, the Soviets didn’t do much out fight the Germans as out deceived and out maneuvered the German army.

Moskirovka remained an integral part of soviet operating doctrine through the Cold War.
There wasn't any bigger troop movement in Ukraine, the units stay where they were at the begining of the conflict.

If they use more units then the current state could be different, but in that case the USA could be fancy to send few thousand polish and german to Belorus and Kaliningrad, just to check how far they can go.
 

meckhardt98

Junior Member
Registered Member
A - War crimes first have to be proven.
B - If looting abandoned places is what you consider war crimes to be prosecuted while literal nazis are killing people with cluster ammunition, trap them in buildings and use them as human shields, shoot them in front of bread lines and say it was the russians or duct-tape people to poles so anyone can abuse, rape, kill them or do whatever then my polish friend you are truly revealed that you are just a person with burning russophobia.

C - There will be a war tribunal in DNR and LNR and guess who will be tried? ;)

By your logic of “war crimes have to be proven” then anything committed by the Ukrainians is null and void; you’re conditionally using evidence if it fits your narrative; I don’t know why you can’t except the fact that the Russian military is equally capable of committing war crimes; which they’ve done extensively.

The whole operation is an illegal war that was grossly underestimated and is costing the Russian economy, people, and image greatly.

I am not a “russophobe” given that I love both the country and its people and culture; me disagreeing with the current situation in Ukraine and pointing out blatant unprofessionalism and violations of international law by its government and military is not me being phobic against the country and it’s people.

Once again I am not Polish and do not understand why you keep bringing that up as an argument when
A. I am not Polish
B. Has no relevancy on the situation
 

Zichan

Junior Member
Registered Member
They won't be.


If the Americans had rushed towards Kiev in the same way the Russians had done, well ahead of supplies, without adequate air support, not protecting their rear and flanks, they would have also suffered high casualties since the Ukrainians were already prepared for their ambushes.
In the Gulf War, the 110,000 strong American Army's VII Corps packing 4 armoured divisions (20,000 men each) was tasked to outflank the Iraqi defences in Kuwait and trap the Republican Guard. The forecast was that they would take 20,000 casualties in the first 5 days of war. They proceeded exceedingly cautiously. Their commander Lt.Gen Frederick Franks even asked for 500,000 hand grenades and 35,000 TOW missiles expecting a melee! The US brought in 220,000 120mm tank rounds to the theatre.

The spearhead of the VII Corps, the 2nd Armoured Cavalry Regiment, 4,200 men strong with 126 M1A1 tanks, 155 Bradley IFVs, 24 155mm self propelled artillery and 50 recon and attack helicopters was expected to easily cover the 120 miles of desert between the Saudi Border and the Republican Guard in 10 hours. Well, that didn't happen. The VII Corps commander was obsessed with synchronising the advance and was terrified of the thought that the US forces might encounter the Iraqis on an empty gas tank so he ordered frequent juice up stops. Each night the entire VII Corps would stop to regain command and control. It took them two days to engage the enemy!

During this gruellingly slow advance, JSTAR ground moving target indicator radar was used to micromanage the 2nd ACR spearhead's advance. However on the day of the engagement, a sand storm degraded the ability of JSTAR to track their movement and GPS was their only means of determining their position. At each successive halt the vehicles would report their front line positions. Because of the storm, no air support to the ground units was possible.

Eventually, the 2nd ACR made contact with the enemy and their training kicked in. They dashed at 25 mph through the Iraqi long range artillery barrage taking out Iraqi scouts, never stopping in their advance. Thanks to the sandstorm, the US forces were ideally situated to take advantage of their thermal sights which could see through the sand and smoke. Firing on the move at high speed, less than half of one squadron, no more than 500 men strong with 19 Abrams tanks and 27 Bradleys, scores of M113s and 12 M109s annihilated an entire Republican Guard 2,500 men strong brigade with 70 T-72 tanks and 70 AFVs, including 32 bunkers of their entrenched positions. 24 hours later, the war was over.

The cost of the slow advance and fear of casualties was that a large portion of the Republican Guard escaped, living to fight another day.
 

Richard Santos

Captain
Registered Member
Atleast 3 out of 5 axis are success. Ukraine coast is blocked. it has lost 25% of area. if you include foreign nationals moving out. Ukraine may have lost 25% of population and majority of its economically productive population. few Turks are left and they will leave soon.
the bottoom line is that so much foreign nationals would not be there if there wasnt for EU money.
It is EU stupidity that instead of competing with Asia in new technologies they funded Ukraine for the benefit of Turkish contractors and producrs. so i am not sure why not quantifying it as success as all these are done in 40 days period.


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


No, they were not successful in an strategic or operational sense in any of them. They had some tactical success in the south, which is not the same thing.

To be successful from a operational perspective, they have to break through into Ukrainian hinterland and cause the collapse of Ukrainian war effort by preventing Ukraine from moving reserve from one front to another.
 

Anlsvrthng

Captain
Registered Member
The whole operation is an illegal war that was grossly underestimated and is costing the Russian economy, people, and image greatly.
Why it is illegal ?

Illegal means it is against the current law.

Law means a commonly accepted set of rules that enforced by juridical system and execution system.

Now, there is nothing that exist above Russia or USA - there is no global law with global police and jurisdiction .


The "illegal" is an USA statement, based on "illegal is the thing that is not good for me".
This is the rule of mobsters, not rule of law.

There are certain internationa normas and agreement, but all of them binding as strong as the other parties adhert to them.
 
Last edited:

Anlsvrthng

Captain
Registered Member
No, they were not successful in an strategic or operational sense in any of them. They had some tactical success in the south, which is not the same thing.

To be successful from a operational perspective, they have to break through into Ukrainian hinterland and cause the collapse of Ukrainian war effort by preventing Ukraine from moving reserve from one front to another.
Could they move reserves ?


I haven't seen any trop movement on the Urkainan side.


As far as we know every unit just stay where they are. Considering Russia monitoroing all areas, and has airforce it is asensible strategy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top