Ukrainian War Developments

Status
Not open for further replies.

anzha

Captain
Registered Member
Questions for everyone!

1. How much longer for Mauripol to fall?

2. How many troops will the Russians be able to free up from the Mauripol fight once it does fall and how many will need to be pulled back for replenishment and resupply?

3. How many reinforcements will the Russians bring elsewhere?

4. Will Belarus get into the fight?

5. Will the Ukrainians be able to shift enough forces east to prevent the kessel?

6. Will the weapons being delivered now (BMPs, T-72s, Switchblade 600s, etc) be enough to make a difference?

7. Will there be more raids across the border by the Ukrainians?

8. Will the successful supplying of the Ukrainians by the Czechs and Germans with their AFVs be enough to encourage even more... risky gifting by the West?

9. How much longer will the war last?
 

Jingle Bells

Junior Member
Registered Member
My impression is that the Chinese writers who want Russia to conquer all or most of Ukraine also want China to do more
to support Russia's war effort. These writers apparently want Russia to have access to Chinese arms for the war.
It's okey for you to have this kind of impression. But don't start pointing finger of blame on Chinese Nationalists.
I am a Chinese Nationalist, I don't want China getting involved. I just want this war to end, regardless of the outcome.
 

Botnet

Junior Member
Registered Member
Questions for everyone!

1. How much longer for Mauripol to fall?
We've been hearing the Mariupol is going to fall in a few days line so many times now. At this point I'll withhold judgement until it actually does.
2. How many troops will the Russians be able to free up from the Mauripol fight once it does fall and how many will need to be pulled back for replenishment and resupply?
There are probably at the very least 10,000 Russian fighters in Mariupol, as to how many are combat effective at the end of it remains to be seen, but its very probable a large portion will have to recover.
3. How many reinforcements will the Russians bring elsewhere?
Whatever remains of the 3 CAA's in the Kyiv, Chernihiv, and Sumy fronts will likely be redeployed, as well as the remainder of the 1st guards tank army. This will go to the Donbas, and possibly to shore up defenses at Kherson.
4. Will Belarus get into the fight?
At this point, probably not.
5. Will the Ukrainians be able to shift enough forces east to prevent the kessel?
Depends. I haven't been impressed with Russian air support so far. If the Russians are able to utilize their air power well, they can greatly stymie the flow of Ukrainian forces east and force them to move single infiltration under the cover of night. However, I haven't seen that so far, so if the Russians continue with what they're doing, Ukraine will be able to shift forces. Whether they're enough will soon come into question.
6. Will the weapons being delivered now (BMPs, T-72s, Switchblade 600s, etc) be enough to make a difference?
If more NATO countries join in to pool together their Soviet stocks, perhaps, although I'm not sure if they'll make it in time for the Donbas offensive. Switchblades and javelins will do damage, but in the grand scheme of things they're not game changers.
7. Will there be more raids across the border by the Ukrainians?
Possibly, if only for PR.
8. Will the successful supplying of the Ukrainians by the Czechs and Germans with their AFVs be enough to encourage even more... risky gifting by the West?
As the war drags on, the West will feel more and more emboldened to up the ante and test Russia's limits.
9. How much longer will the war last?
If the Russians fail to envelop the Ukrainians in the Donbas, there'll likely be a peace agreement. If they do, however, it'll probably last another few months or possibly even longer as Russia tries to bring the areas east of the Dnieper under their control.
 
Last edited:

Lapin

Junior Member
Registered Member
Ok, that's offensive and shows how much you know about China. I'm not even going to address that. Off topic.

If you're here to find out why most people here don't care about the Ukraine and support Russia, it's not because of that business deal which they stole money or what Azov battallion did during the Hong Kong riots. I didn't know about that until during this war.

It's because they chose to become a US lapdog. If they had remained neutral like Finland and Russia invaded they would have sympathy. But they have no self respect for themselves and tried to attach themselves to NATO. Worse then that, they were happy to be used to provoke Russia in a political chess game, thinking that America would save them. It was a region that developed great things in Soviet times, but they squandered everything and turned their country into a cheap wh*re for America to make money. I don't like Putin's Russia but at least Russia has respect for itself.

Of course now we know that Finland isn't really neutral and no European country can be trusted, so we are grateful to the Ukraine for showing us that at least. Whatever type of European you are you should learn that lesson from this war. If you want to fight America's war you will just be a pawn.
You are extremely delusional when you fantasize that a disunited China alone could have defeated Japan in 1937-45.
When Japan surrendered, it still occupied most of eastern China. The Japanese had recently been driven out of Manchuria
by the USSR, not by the Chinese.

You may like to argue that Japanese naval supremacy over China was largely irrelevant to the war on land.
But how would you fantasize that China could have defeated Japan in the air?
China's aircraft industry could produce few aircraft, which were clearly inferior to the best Japanese aircraft.

In the late 1930s, China bought a license from the USSR to produce the Polikarpov I-16, which was supposed to
become China's standard fighter. It never was put into mass production, however, because when the Mitsubishi
A6M Reisen appeared, it became clear that the I-16 was obsolete. Just in case the USA and UK made a separate
peace with Japan, Chinese engineers did design an indigenous fighter of sorts, a derivative of an American fighter.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

"Based largely on the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, it was of mixed construction with wooden three-spar wings,
welded steel tube fuselage and plywood skinning."

Do you imagine that Chiang Kai-shek's highest priority was winning the war against Japan?
No, Chiang's highest priority was staying at the top of Kuomintang, which meant sabotaging some of
his generals whom he feared could become too successful in battle and might seek to replace him.
Chiang's next highest priority was winning the civil war against the Communists.
Defeating the Japanese came after that. Chiang could take comfort in the belief that his allies would
primarily win the war against Japan for him, while he conserved his forces for the following civil war.

Reading this forum should quickly disillusion anyone who assumed that nationalistic Chinese tend
to be any less ignorant, deluded, dishonest, or inhumane than nationalistic Americans on average.
 

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
Questions for everyone!

1. How much longer for Mauripol to fall?

2. How many troops will the Russians be able to free up from the Mauripol fight once it does fall and how many will need to be pulled back for replenishment and resupply?

3. How many reinforcements will the Russians bring elsewhere?

4. Will Belarus get into the fight?

5. Will the Ukrainians be able to shift enough forces east to prevent the kessel?

6. Will the weapons being delivered now (BMPs, T-72s, Switchblade 600s, etc) be enough to make a difference?

7. Will there be more raids across the border by the Ukrainians?

8. Will the successful supplying of the Ukrainians by the Czechs and Germans with their AFVs be enough to encourage even more... risky gifting by the West?

9. How much longer will the war last?
1. 1 week maximum.
2. Guess 20-30k.
3. Maybe 20k due to casualties
4. No, Lukashenko is looking like he's not all in with Putin
5. Unlikely, Russian forces are pushing south from Izium and are cutting the highways. In addition air power can hit them in the open.
6. Unlikely, they have to be moved all the way across Ukraine to the south or east to make a difference
7. Maybe.
8. Depends on definition of success.
9. July. If it's not settled within 1-2 months of the maneuvering season then it's over for Russia.
 

Lapin

Junior Member
Registered Member
The point that is being argued is that if that if its an existential war for one of the side, then volunteers will start pouring for the war. Both sides have shown to be using coercive and alternative means to recruit troops for the war, showing that just because its existential doesn't mean volunteers are going to be plenty or start pouring in.

But I do agree though that Ukraine has to do conscription because its an existential war, though I think the number of troops Ukraine has and the amount Russia deployed is lopsided to Ukraine's favor, so this is more of an issue of experienced troops and lack of weapon supply. We may see Russia do the same if the war goes really badly for them.

Also yes Russia's existence doesn't depend on Putin saving face, but their existence and sovereignty depends on their security which you don't agree the war is about. Now that the war happened, the result of this war will likely end with Russia having to defend their borders against Ukraine, so if its not security now, then its security later thanks to Putin.

I've also seen some videos of the military advisor of Ukraine about developing missiles with NATO to target Russia, but I don't know if its real or the intentions is just for deterrence, but judging by the amount of anti-Russia fervor in Ukraine before and now this war happen. They might see it as a security issue, but yeah I guess its sorta self-fulfilling prophecy.

Also can you name some of the writers that think its some sort of "Great Patriotic War for Russia"? so far all I've just seeing are pro-Russian users cheering for Russia's victory in the war.

You seem to act as if it's incompatible for a nation at war to have both conscription and many volunteers.
Reportedly, many Ukrainian men have left their safer lives abroad to return to Ukraine and fight against the Russians.
But not every man dreams of becoming a hero, of course, and conscription 'encourages' those who seem fainter of heart.
The Ukrainians don't have quite the warrior culture that, say, the Chechens evidently have.

Most modern people don't blindly rush into battle. Instead, they attempt to assess risks and ascertain whether their
fighting would have a realistic chance of victory or at least of survival. If I were a Ukrainian and given a NLAW and enough
training, then I would consider taking on Russian armored vehicles, though preferably as part of an organized unit.
If I were ordered to make a Molotov cocktail at home and hurl it against the nearest Russian MBT, then I would disobey.
Being too eager to die would not help my country live.
 

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
"It would have been better if America stayed out of the way to let China defeat Japan."

There's no way that a disunited China alone could have won its war against Japan in 1937-45.
At best, China could have stopped Japan from completing its conquest.
China really needed the USA to do the main work of destroying Japan's naval and air power.
but wait by this logic Russia is going to win 100% because Ukraine can't do anything about the Russian Navy and unlike Japan in WW2, the Russian Navy can actually hit all parts of Ukraine.
 

obj 705A

Junior Member
Registered Member
9. July. If it's not settled within 1-2 months of the maneuvering season then it's over for Russia.
it's highly unlikely it will be over any where near 2 months from now, IMO the real war has yet to begin.
Russia is not looking to take just the east, they want the whole of Ukraine however they need more soldiers for that. Apparently Russia will draft an extra 130k soldiers, these conscripts will need few months of training, however they will not be deployed to Ukraine but instead they will help free up an equal number of professional soldiers, this will help double the forces in Ukraine, IMO the war will last at least another 7 months and probably more.
 

Coalescence

Senior Member
Registered Member
You seem to act as if it's incompatible for a nation at war to have both conscription and many volunteers.
Reportedly, many Ukrainian men have left their safer lives abroad to return to Ukraine and fight against the Russians.
But not every man dreams of becoming a hero, of course, and conscription 'encourages' those who seem fainter of heart.
The Ukrainians don't have quite the warrior culture that, say, the Chechens evidently have.

Most modern people don't blindly rush into battle. Instead, they attempt to assess risks and ascertain whether their
fighting would have a realistic chance of victory or at least of survival. If I were a Ukrainian and given a NLAW and enough
training, then I would consider taking on Russian armored vehicles, though preferably as part of an organized unit.
If I were ordered to make a Molotov cocktail at home and hurl it against the nearest Russian MBT, then I would disobey.
Being too eager to die would not help my country live.
Good point! On another note, I've seen videos of Ukrainian military guarding the land borders like near Poland, preventing males from 18-60 from escaping the place and forcing them to take up arms to fight the Russians. There some videos as well although albeit from questionable sources, that the Ukrainian military is threatening to shoot and killed some for retreating or not taking up arms to fight. This is not a retort against your argument, I just want to point out that Ukraine is using coercive means to conscript individuals that don't want to go and fight, and preventing those that wants to escape the area of conflict. These actions to me shows that there isn't much conviction or fighting spirit from the majority of the population that are willing to volunteer, and the use of violence shows desperation in trying to get more manpower.

Also on the point if you were a Ukrainian you would take arms only if you had experience, proper equipment and in an organized group. There are videos and reports of foreign volunteers wanting out of the contract, because of complaints about being trained too short of a time and being ill-equipped, but was barred from escaping through the land borders by guards. So if they treated the foreign legion like so, how well are they treating their own conscripts?

Another is they actually handed out weapons to the local civilian population, which some ended up in wrong hands, there were also reports that they stopped doing that after finding out that majority of the casualties and friendly fire came from these civilian units armed with guns.

To sum it all up, I agree with your point that a nation can have volunteers and conscription in the same time. What bothers me is the coercive methods Ukraine employed in trying to get conscripts and questioning whether a good amount of their population are actually willing to take up arms to defend their nation. Even then, I don't think sending out conscript with only like 2 weeks of training or arming the civilians is a good idea for any country, they may just ended up hurting themselves and become a liability in war.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top