Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

Raoul

Admin
Staff
Joined
Aug 14, 1999
Messages
129,962
Location
Hollywood CA
Not likely given that Ukraine actually does want Crimea back. Therefore the only negotiated settlement could happen once Putin is gone, since losing Crimea would almost certainly end his dictatorship and probably his life.
 

VorZakone

What would Kenny G do?
Joined
May 9, 2013
Messages
32,618
Not likely given that Ukraine actually does want Crimea back. Therefore the only negotiated settlement could happen once Putin is gone, since losing Crimea would almost certainly end his dictatorship and probably his life.
I'm sure Ukraine wants Crimea back but I'd be surprised if they actually went for it with military force.
 

Raoul

Admin
Staff
Joined
Aug 14, 1999
Messages
129,962
Location
Hollywood CA
I'm sure Ukraine wants Crimea back but I'd be surprised if they actually went for it with military force.
Many can't imagine it because they think Putin would resort to nukes to keep it. But imagine a scenario where the Ukrainians beat the Russians back to pre-2022 lines, where the Russians lack the hardware to continue defending existing territory, all the while they are crumbling economically and socially from within. At that point, would Zelenskyy stop his momentum to negotiate a ceasefire (thereby permanently giving away Crimea) or would he continue into Crimea (which is still Internationally recognized as Ukrainian). There wouldn't be a chance he would give up Crimea if he knew he had the Russians on the backfoot.
 

Krakenzero

Full Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2018
Messages
700
Supports
Santiago Wanderers
I'm sure Ukraine wants Crimea back but I'd be surprised if they actually went for it with military force.
I don't think legalizing the loss of Crimea is even a viable option for Ukraine right now, since it would mean both a very diminished capability for commerce (with Odessa as their only port of relevance) AND a serial agreement breaker like Putin still in power.
 
Last edited:

Raoul

Admin
Staff
Joined
Aug 14, 1999
Messages
129,962
Location
Hollywood CA
I don't think legalizing the loss of Crimea is even a viable option for Ukraine right now, since it would mean both a very diminished capability for commerce (with Odessa as their only port of relevante) AND a serial agreement breaker as Putin still in power.
This is why many of these experts on Twitter need to be taken with a massive pinch of salt. The only way this ends is with an out and out Russian victory, an out and out Ukrainian victory, or through the use of a tactical nuke by the Russians. There won't be any negotiated settlements because the only outcome the Ukrainians will accept is all their land back and the only outcome Putin will accept is the acquisition of further Ukrainian territory.
 

stefan92

Full Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Messages
5,932
Supports
Hannover 96
I'm sure Ukraine wants Crimea back but I'd be surprised if they actually went for it with military force.
A direct attack seems unlikely, I agree. But laying siege to Crimea would be possible if Ukraine can retake Mariupol (or another corridor to the sea) and also finally take out the bridge. At that point Crimea could only be supplied by aircrafts and ships, and both can be attacked.
 

Raoul

Admin
Staff
Joined
Aug 14, 1999
Messages
129,962
Location
Hollywood CA
A direct attack seems unlikely, I agree. But laying siege to Crimea would be possible if Ukraine can retake Mariupol (or another corridor to the sea) and also finally take out the bridge. At that point Crimea could only be supplied by aircrafts and ships, and both can be attacked.
They would simply resupply by air and ship (as you said). A siege would also risk turning off the Crimean population against the Ukrainian side if they felt Kyiv was a source of their hardship. The only way to get Crimea back is to cut off Russian supply by ground then literally attack Crimea by road, air, and sea. Each will be critical since the land attack route will be insanely fortified by the Russians.
 

Krakenzero

Full Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2018
Messages
700
Supports
Santiago Wanderers
A direct attack seems unlikely, I agree. But laying siege to Crimea would be possible if Ukraine can retake Mariupol (or another corridor to the sea) and also finally take out the bridge. At that point Crimea could only be supplied by aircrafts and ships, and both can be attacked.
I understand that the water supply for Crimea goes through a canal starting from Khakovka in Kherson oblast. Getting there, cutting the supply, laying siege and doing some strategic bombing (for example in Kerch bridge) is not that unthinkable, altough a major offensive in the oblast would be needed.
 

stefan92

Full Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Messages
5,932
Supports
Hannover 96
They would simply resupply by air and ship (as you said). A siege would also risk turning off the Crimean population against the Ukrainian side if they felt Kyiv was a source of their hardship. The only way to get Crimea back is to cut off Russian supply by ground then literally attack Crimea by road, air, and sea. Each will be critical since the land attack route will be insanely fortified by the Russians.
Yes they would need to attack at some point. But what I meant is that they don't need to frontally attack Crimea, they could and should prepare that first (if they can at all).
 

4bars

Full Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2016
Messages
4,649
Supports
Barcelona
As many times I said here, No one knows the equipment that Russia has left and will have, no one knows what equipment Ukraine has left and will have. No one knows how much casualties Russia have and no one knows how many casualties have

But what we all should know that anything that you believe about Russia is not as bad as you think. And anything that you believe about Ukraine is not as good as you think

Because this is a propaganda battle also and any information that you have about them, is taken from social media based on 3rd and 4th hand information and wishful thinking and anyone minimally involved that might say anything, will not say the real information (even what they might have is not always correct) and even lie for strategically and/or political reasons

So many assumptions had been made about Russia running out of equipment in the second month of war. That Ukraine was finished at the beginning of summer. That winter would be favorable for Ukraine and they would go on the offensive as soon as the terrain would be hardened, that russia would send untrained units right away

Spring will paint the real picture. Hopefully Ukraine received as much equipment and training to hold and recover terrain
 

Simbo

Full Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
5,203
Some pretty intense footage, to say the least. The poor guy and his fecking foot, I couldn't help but chuckle.

 

Organic Potatoes

Full Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2013
Messages
17,139
Location
85R723R2+R6
Supports
Colorado Rapids
As many times I said here, No one knows the equipment that Russia has left and will have, no one knows what equipment Ukraine has left and will have. No one knows how much casualties Russia have and no one knows how many casualties have

But what we all should know that anything that you believe about Russia is not as bad as you think. And anything that you believe about Ukraine is not as good as you think

Because this is a propaganda battle also and any information that you have about them, is taken from social media based on 3rd and 4th hand information and wishful thinking and anyone minimally involved that might say anything, will not say the real information (even what they might have is not always correct) and even lie for strategically and/or political reasons

So many assumptions had been made about Russia running out of equipment in the second month of war. That Ukraine was finished at the beginning of summer. That winter would be favorable for Ukraine and they would go on the offensive as soon as the terrain would be hardened, that russia would send untrained units right away

Spring will paint the real picture. Hopefully Ukraine received as much equipment and training to hold and recover terrain
You don't need to regularly remind us that no one knows anything. It is kind of baked in to the general consciousness at this point.

And besides: you don't know that. ;)
 

The United

Full Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2015
Messages
5,770
You have also been saying that Bahkmut is falling for months now, and it's still there. There is no source for UA troops being ill equipped and poorly trained, but you opt to sell it as a fact anyway.

The manpower of the RA has never been doubted here. However, its capabilities for performing a full on offensive with the new recruits and a prepared enemy with NATO weaponry, we'll see. They haven't so far, and so far I don't see Zelensky or its allies particularly worried.

Winter will pass and we'll see the reopening of several battlefronts (Kherson, Zaporzhizhia/Melitopol, Svatove/Kreminna/Severodonetsk) to see what's what.
Show me where I said Bahkmut was falling for months. In fact, I said UA should be defending as much as they could, as people thought it was not that important, which I disagreed with. But now, it got to the point that the UA might be wasting their own combat capacity due to RA's overwhelming frontal assaults, and the UA are hardly equipped to withstand that for any longer there where the operational encirclement is very possible soon.

The RA forces are performing as well as they can and are likely to gain territory more than the UA at this point. The NATO weaponry has been there but not enough, and it takes time to train UA soldiers to be effective at using them. So it is a fact that UA troops are hardly more trained and equipped than RA troops at this moment. All you can hope for is that the UA will hold the line while losing minimal territory, allowing the RA to lose steam and counter. Also, a country like Russia can and did increase its military industry right away despite all the limitations, whereas the "West" has to convince some of its population even to aid the UA, let alone start producing some of the critical ammunition to keep the supply going for a mid- to long-term war.

Or you hope the UA has some secret plan that will surprise all of us again.
 
Last edited:

The United

Full Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2015
Messages
5,770
Well, most of us know full well that more deaths means nothing to Kremlin, while Ukraine are trying to save as many of their own as they can. I do expect Russia to make some slight progress this month, however, I fully expect some major counter offensive by the yellow blues in April. Longer range missiles will help enormously.
I have no doubt about that. I just hope the UA don't lose steam themselves soon.

My number point was simple. The RA is losing a lot of men, but not as many as people are making out, assuming the UA is not losing much. Both assumptions may not be true. All we do is watch clips of how RA got blown up while losing territory little by little and think something is going to turn around.
 

NotThatSoph

Full Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2019
Messages
3,757
You have also been saying that Bahkmut is falling for months now, and it's still there. There is no source for UA troops being ill equipped and poorly trained, but you opt to sell it as a fact anyway.

The manpower of the RA has never been doubted here. However, its capabilities for performing a full on offensive with the new recruits and a prepared enemy with NATO weaponry, we'll see. They haven't so far, and so far I don't see Zelensky or its allies particularly worried.

Winter will pass and we'll see the reopening of several battlefronts (Kherson, Zaporzhizhia/Melitopol, Svatove/Kreminna/Severodonetsk) to see what's what.
Two mentions of Bahkmut. The first is one and a half week ago, saying that the situation is difficult, while the second is a reply to your comment here:

None of the (respectable) report says exactly that. I am sure the reports you were looking at showed that the Russians KIA are now over 100k. The respected ( I hope) Western intelligent agencies reports didn't say anything close to it. Even if you take the figure of 180,000 and 1: 3 ratio is right, their KIA would be far below what we read online.

And we do NOT actually know how much UKR lost so far. If we don't then, how can we say confidently that the Russians are losing much more than the UKR? I can believe the equipment loss because the Russians simply had more. But it would be really difficult to estimate about the troop losses.

RA offensives did not have a significant breakthrough since the beginning? I mean they occupied about 15% of the UKR land right now. Nevermind about theirs. Let's worry about the UKR's. Right now, we see nothing of it while having in extremely difficult situation of defending the Bahkmut area.
Show me where I said Bahkmut was falling for months. In fact, I said UA should be defending as much as they could, as people thought it was not that important, which I disagreed with. But now, it got to the point that the UA might be wasting their own combat capacity due to RA's overwhelming frontal assaults, and the UA are hardly equipped to withstand that for any longer there where the operational encirclement is very possible soon.

The RA forces are performing as well as they can and are likely to gain territory more than the UA at this point. The NATO weaponry has been there but not enough, and it takes time to train UA soldiers to be effective at using them. So it is a fact that UA troops are hardly more trained and equipped than RA troops at this moment. All you can hope for is that the UA will hold the line while losing minimal territory, allowing the RA to lose steam and counter. Also, a country like Russia can and did increase its military industry right away despite all the limitations, whereas the "West" has to convince some of its population even to aid the UA, let alone start producing some of the critical ammunition to keep the supply going for a mid- to long-term war.

Or you hope the UA has some secret plan that will surprise all of us again.
Edit: Nevermind, wrong spelling.
 
Last edited:

stefan92

Full Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Messages
5,932
Supports
Hannover 96
We have a similar situation here. Far right parties are pro Russian. They havent said that outright but its obvious from their comments.
Interestingly the German far right is split in this regard. The most important AfD as seen above is pro Russia, while the small "The 3rd Way" has ties to Azov and actively tried to recruit fighters for them.
 

Real Name

Full Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2020
Messages
14,136
Location
Croatia
Interestingly the German far right is split in this regard. The most important AfD as seen above is pro Russia, while the small "The 3rd Way" has ties to Azov and actively tried to recruit fighters for them.
Thing is, 2, 3 far right parties are really small with small support among people (and based on election). Another right party, Most (Bridge), didnt vote on training of UA soldiers in Croatia, they're all about giving support to Ukraine but not in that way, I think they're just afraid to say they're on Russia side in all this outright. Governing party, HDZ, is center right, similar to CDU in Germany, they're together in EPP, and they're completely in support for Ukraine.
 

nimic

something nice
Scout
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
31,038
Location
And I'm all out of bubblegum.
Two mentions of Bahkmut. The first is one and a half week ago, saying that the situation is difficult, while the second is a reply to your comment here:
Easy mistake to make (they both made it), but the town is called Bakhmut.

Their first mention of it is in October, for what it's worth.

Bakhmut may fall to the Russians though and it is their current offensive but who knows what they will do next.

I think they may still have some capacity to do another major offensive somewhere.
 
Last edited:

stefan92

Full Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Messages
5,932
Supports
Hannover 96
https://m.faz.net/aktuell/politik/a...leopard-1-panzern-freigeben-18650618.amp.html

The delivery of Leopard 1 tanks now is in preparation, could be several dozens. However timeline and number is not yet clear as they are in long term storage at two companies and need to be refurbished first to become operational again. And there seems to be a big question mark regarding the ammunition - simply almost no one us still using the 105mm NATO caliber any more. Exception are the M-55 tanks Ukraine already got, but as I understood there is neither big stock nor anyone producing that type currently (this is not the same 105mm the French AMX-10 use, the French have shorter and weaker shells to fit into the smaller and lighter vehicle).
 

Simbo

Full Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
5,203
Not sure where he's getting this from, but he tends to be reliable. Russia regrouping for their "Major offensive" no doubt.

 

Simbo

Full Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
5,203
Or maybe they are preparing to retreat from all Ukraine?

 

stefan92

Full Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Messages
5,932
Supports
Hannover 96
Or maybe they are preparing to retreat from all Ukraine?

Usually Russia means surrendering and accepting Russia's conditions when they talk about peace talks. I don't expect anything else this time.
 

RoyH1

Full Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
5,886
Location
DKNY
Usually Russia means surrendering and accepting Russia's conditions when they talk about peace talks. I don't expect anything else this time.
Exactly right. They lie so much and all the time that I don't understand how there's people in the West that believe what comes out of Lavrov's mouth
 

Simbo

Full Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
5,203
Usually Russia means surrendering and accepting Russia's conditions when they talk about peace talks. I don't expect anything else this time.
Have some faith, they are going to retreat from Ukraine, disarm, pledge a $trillion in reparations, return all captured/kidnapped Ukrainians and surrender senior personnel for war crimes tribunals.

Maybe.
 

stevoc

Full Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2011
Messages
19,836
Exactly right. They lie so much and all the time that I don't understand how there's people in the West that believe what comes out of Lavrov's mouth
Because the West like anywhere has it's fair share of idiots.
 

stefan92

Full Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Messages
5,932
Supports
Hannover 96
https://m.faz.net/aktuell/politik/a...leopard-1-panzern-freigeben-18650618.amp.html

The delivery of Leopard 1 tanks now is in preparation, could be several dozens. However timeline and number is not yet clear as they are in long term storage at two companies and need to be refurbished first to become operational again. And there seems to be a big question mark regarding the ammunition - simply almost no one us still using the 105mm NATO caliber any more. Exception are the M-55 tanks Ukraine already got, but as I understood there is neither big stock nor anyone producing that type currently (this is not the same 105mm the French AMX-10 use, the French have shorter and weaker shells to fit into the smaller and lighter vehicle).
Looks like we are at first talking about 29 units which FFG has already refurbished and could deliver soon - ammunition still being the big problem here.
 

stefan92

Full Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Messages
5,932
Supports
Hannover 96
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...e?srnd=premium-europe&leadSource=uverify wall

Interesting talk. Just about launchers and missiles, but not about radars or control units.

If that really is the full scope I can only assume that this means adding the Swedish IRIS-T SL launchers as short range option to the medium range IRIS-T SLM systems, but not creating new air defense units. Which would make a lot of sense because that way the unmodified IRIS-T can be used, of which a lot of stock exists due to it being the default AA missile of the Eurofighter and the more expensive and rare bigger variant would only be used if really necessary.
 

Counterfactual

Full Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
3,289
Location
Mobil Avenue station
OK, I may be utterly wrong here, but does anyone else think that the Russians have what they want currently? They have Crimea, plus the "land bridge" from Russia through Ukraine. Is it possible they just dig in, hold what they have and hope the West get bored?
 

Krakenzero

Full Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2018
Messages
700
Supports
Santiago Wanderers
Show me where I said Bahkmut was falling for months.
It's been showed below, with posts from October and November. We're well into February and the discussion has moved to neighbour Vuhledar, which also isn't falling.

The RA forces are performing as well as they can and are likely to gain territory more than the UA at this point.
No, they aren't. If they were performing well the war would probably be over by now. They are also not only failing to gain territory right now, but have been failing to do so for months. In fact, after the first three weeks of the war they only had one net territory gain in already controlled Lugansk (the Popasna/Lyschansk/Severodonetsk area). On the meantime the UA regained the surroundings of Kharkiv, Yzium, Lyman, Kherson and the west bank of the Dnieper river.

So it is a fact that UA troops are hardly more trained and equipped than RA troops at this moment.
No, it isn't, and you would have to bring reliable sources for that to make sense. Ukraine forces are regularly receiving NATO standard training and returning to the battlefront with that expertise (plus weaponry). Russian forces aren't. The key points of your argument of Russian gaining momentum are A) Bahkmut, where the forces are mercenaries that operate on their own or untrained/unequipped prisoners; and B) Numbers, which come from forces recruitment of untrained/unmotivated/undisciplined people who are then trained in the tradition of the Russian army (so very quickly, very poorly, and with corruption disrupting the process) and equipped with whatever is available (WW2 outfits in some reported cases). So no, they aren't about the same.

Now that we're on it, we should talk about your modus operandi of argument building. You're (albeit probably accidently) using one of the trademarks of the deceiver which is to hide the deceiving remark or "alternative fact" in between a group of reasonable, verifiable ones. So then we get statements like "Russian outnumbers Ukraine (truth), Ukraine needs more support (truth), the UA is as poorly equipped and trained as the RA (misleading), the UA is having as many casualties as the RA (deceiving), the war is going to be long (truth), Ukraine's allies must step up if they want to win (truth)". That, plus the constant repetition on those misleading remarks, makes for a very difficult and annoying reading (at least in my case).

On the war, I hope that past behaviour would be a good predictor of future behaviour, that the UA keeps getting the help it needs and keeps conducting secret and succesful operations, that the RA keeps making the mistakes that it had been making not only from the beginning of this invasion but from centuries of wars before, and that the spring will give us more information of what's what as (like most experts predicted) the winter has been mostly a stalemate.