Ukrainian War Developments

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

Overbom

Brigadier
Registered Member
Phead128 said:
Doesn't look like a conversation between diplomats on Facebook to me. Looks like a ZOOM diplomatic conference.
View attachment 79825
On April 15, 2021, Vice Foreign Minister Le Yucheng and Ukrainian Deputy Foreign Minister Yevheniy Yenin held video consultations between the two ministries.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Get your facts straight before accusing others of not doing proper research.



Judging by China's abtaination in UNSC resolution condemning Crimea annexation, I wouldn't be surprised if China privately doesn't support Russia blatant annexation attempts since it is too obvious violation of international law. China also doesn't recognize the "Crimean Referendum" to "join Russia vote" too, since it sets an poor precedence for independence movements in Hong Kong, Xinjiang, and Crimea if they can suddenly hold a referendum on independence or joining a foreign power.


Great, now provide these sources please that suggest China recognizes Crimea as part of Russia and not Ukraine. I will be waiting....
Click to expand...
Ukraine stole hundred of millions (many billions?) of dollars from Chinese investors. These Chinese investors have already taken Ukraine to the International Court for this theft

Let's wait for Ukraine to pay back China what it stole, and then we will see if Ukraine is sincere about its diplomatic relations with China
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:
Mohsin77

Mohsin77

Senior Member
Registered Member
According to Ukraine, this is Russia's expected war plan:

Ukraine-Russia_security.png


December/Jan is usually not a good time to launch an invasion. The downtick of units in October makes that clear. Interestingly, the last peak deployment was April, which would be a likely month Russia would choose in 2022.

In any case, Russia has to weigh the cost/benefit of severe economic sanctions, against the strategic imperative of securing this flank and port access. If they go for it, it's gonna cost them economically, for years. But in the long-run, they may have deemed it necessary.

As for the success of the actual war plan if executed... It's a bit tricky, since there's no surprise element here. Ukrainians are dug-in and are expecting an invasion. The Russian army's maneuver coordination will be tested here, they haven't engaged in multi-division maneuvers like this since WWII. But Russia is still expected to win decisively, granted everyone else stays out of the conflict.

With that said, I think there's also a possibility of a massive insurgency after the invasion. If the captured territory turns into another Chechnya, it'll be a disaster.
 
O

Overbom

Brigadier
Registered Member
Mohsin77 said:
According to Ukraine, this is Russia's expected war plan:

View attachment 79826


December/Jan is usually not a good time to launch an invasion. The downtick of units in October makes that clear. Interestingly, the last peak deployment was April, which would be a likely month Russia would choose in 2022.

In any case, Russia has to weigh the cost/benefit of severe economic sanctions, against the strategic imperative of securing this flank and port access. If they go for it, it's gonna cost them economically, for years. But in the long-run, they may have deemed it necessary.

As for the success of the actual war plan if executed... It's a bit tricky, since there's no surprise element here. Ukrainians are dug-in and are expecting an invasion. The Russian army's maneuver coordination will be tested here, they haven't engaged in a war like this since WWII. But Russia is still expected to win decisively, granted everyone else stays out of the conflict.

With that said, I think there's also a possibility of a massive insurgency after the 'victory.' If the captured territory turns into another Chechnya, it'll be a disaster.
Click to expand...
Russia uses its massive artillery firepower when it attacks. These "dug-in" Ukrainian soldiers will suffer hours of artillery barrages before getting dislodged from their positions

I dont think this will be the traditional "infantry-to-infantry" combat. From reports I have read in the Eastern Ukraine operations, Russian forces would pummel the Ukrainian army with overwhelming artillery firepower before closing in and cleaning up any left over mice

I wouldnt underestimate the Russians. Their military reforms have been proven to be a success so far
 
solarz

solarz

Brigadier
Overbom said:
Russia uses its massive artillery firepower when it attacks. These "dug-in" Ukrainian soldiers will suffer hours of artillery barrages before getting dislodged from their positions

I dont think this will be the traditional "infantry-to-infantry" combat. From reports I have read in the Eastern Ukraine operations, Russian forces would pummel the Ukrainian army with overwhelming artillery firepower before closing in and cleaning up any left over mice

I wouldnt underestimate the Russians. Their military reforms have been proven to be a success so far
Click to expand...

The Ukrainians couldn't even win against Russian light infantry in the form of Donbass rebels, what chance do they have against the full might of the Russian military?
 
R

reservior dogs

Junior Member
Registered Member
Strategically, it is better for the Russians if they don't invade. If they invade, they will decisively defeat the Ukrainian forces, but taking back all of Ukraine is an economic drain to Russia. They have to deal with the discontent from a population that is 80% Ukrainian. Even driving up to the river, taking half of Ukraine has costs. On the East side of the river, there will still be a lot of Ukrainians living there which the Russians must deal with. On the West side, what is left of Ukraine would certainly invite the West in to be viable. Not to mention the sanctions.
If they just threaten and leave Ukraine in tact, now the ethnic Russians are the insurgents and the West has to prop up this corrupt and inept government. The insurgent ethnic Russians will be a drain to Ukraine for a long time to come. The condition of the Ukrainian economy will bring disillusion to the population. The prospect of war, like a festering wound, will keep the Ukrainian economy in tatters for years to come. What is the most important thing, the West would not want to step into this mess and make Ukraine a member of NATO. The EU and the U.S. does not have what it takes to fight a war so close to Russia and so far from their home turf. If you think Afghanistan is a disaster, this is on a whole different scale if Ukraine is admitted to NATO.
 
Mohsin77

Mohsin77

Senior Member
Registered Member
Overbom said:
Russia uses its massive artillery firepower when it attacks. These "dug-in" Ukrainian soldiers will suffer hours of artillery barrages before getting dislodged from their positions

I dont think this will be the traditional "infantry-to-infantry" combat. From reports I have read in the Eastern Ukraine operations, Russian forces would pummel the Ukrainian army with overwhelming artillery firepower before closing in and cleaning up any left over mice

I wouldnt underestimate the Russians. Their military reforms have been proven to be a success so far
Click to expand...

It's not their artillery which will prove decisive, it will be their air power.

And I already said they are expected to win decisively.

The real problems Russia would face will come after i.e. sanctions and possible insurgency.
 
solarz

solarz

Brigadier
reservior dogs said:
Strategically, it is better for the Russians if they don't invade. If they invade, they will decisively defeat the Ukrainian forces, but taking back all of Ukraine is an economic drain to Russia. They have to deal with the discontent from a population that is 80% Ukrainian. Even driving up to the river, taking half of Ukraine has costs. On the East side of the river, there will still be a lot of Ukrainians living there which the Russians must deal with. On the West side, what is left of Ukraine would certainly invite the West in to be viable. Not to mention the sanctions.
If they just threaten and leave Ukraine in tact, now the ethnic Russians are the insurgents and the West has to prop up this corrupt and inept government. The insurgent ethnic Russians will be a drain to Ukraine for a long time to come. The condition of the Ukrainian economy will bring disillusion to the population. The prospect of war, like a festering wound, will keep the Ukrainian economy in tatters for years to come. What is the most important thing, the West would not want to step into this mess and make Ukraine a member of NATO. The EU and the U.S. does not have what it takes to fight a war so close to Russia and so far from their home turf. If you think Afghanistan is a disaster, this is on a whole different scale if Ukraine is admitted to NATO.
Click to expand...
Mohsin77 said:
It's not their artillery which will prove decisive, it will be their air power.

And I already said they are expected to win decisively.

The real problems Russia would face will come after i.e. sanctions and possible insurgency.
Click to expand...

Russia doesn't need to take over Ukraine.

If the goal is to prevent NATO from putting forces in Ukraine, they can do what China did to Vietnam.
 
O

Overbom

Brigadier
Registered Member
Mohsin77 said:
It's not their artillery which will prove decisive, it will be their air power.

And I already said they are expected to win decisively. Anything less would be a failure anyway.

The real problems Russia would face will come afterwards i.e. sanctions and possible insurgency.
Click to expand...
If Russia attacks and wants to hold land, then taking the East part and leaving the West part should be preferable.

Russia can drive Ukrainian nationalist and anti-Russian people to the West part while keeeping the rest on its own land, the East. This would massively help Russia to prevent serious resistance to its rule

Similar to the BNO thing with HK and UK. The brainwashed go to the UK and thus make HK easier to govern

As for sanctions, it is unavoidable. However from my readings it seems that Russia is a lot more resilient now than on the 2014 sanctions which heavily damaged it

A question:
What do you think about Russia taking the entire southern part of Ukraine and closing off the Western part of Ukraine (where the Ukrainian government would be) from the Black Sea? It would also provide direct land order access to Moldova
 
R

reservior dogs

Junior Member
Registered Member
Overbom said:
If Russia attacks and wants to hold land, then taking the East part and leaving the West part should be preferable.

Russia can drive Ukrainian nationalist and anti-Russian people to the West part while keeeping the rest on its own land, the East. This would massively help Russia to prevent serious resistance to its rule

Similar to the BNO thing with HK and UK. The brainwashed go to the UK and thus make HK easier to govern

As for sanctions, it is unavoidable. However from my readings it seems that Russia is a lot more resilient now than on the 2014 sanctions which heavily damaged it

A question:
What do you think about Russia taking the entire southern part of Ukraine and closing off the Western part of Ukraine (where the Ukrainian government would be) from the Black Sea? It would also provide direct land order access to Moldova
Click to expand...
Ukraine is not Hong Kong. Hong Kong has a handful of activist paid for by the West. Ukraine is 80% Ukrainian. It is not possible to ethnically cleanse such a large area unless you commit a lot of atrocities to drive those living on their land away. If you take territory, now you have to fight an endless insurgency war with the drain on your economy.

Blocking off the sea means you need to fight a beast that is cornered. The Russians might as well take the Eastern half of the country if they were to do that.
The goal in the short term is to keep NATO from expanding to Ukraine. If they can hold out for a decade, the West will retreat due to its own decline in power, leaving Ukraine with no choice but to come under Russian influence again. At that time, the Ukrainian economy will be in such shambles that there will not be a lot of good will to either the Ukrainian government or the West. Given this goal, why should Russia take land from Ukraine today?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top