Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

[Frosty]

I don't know why people bother trying to understand if the morale is high or low. Our guess is as good as any really. I also don't think it matters so much in modern warfare. The technology is so high the man behind the machine hardly matters unless they are completely demoralized or something.

I think morale is an issue in the Donbass:

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

The soldiers are not yet getting the new weapons, and it is a slow, attritional fight, not marked by technology but by artillery. Flesh and bone against iron and steel. In that sense we haven't moved much in the last 100 years. Given the rate of deaths too (and those won't be caused by nice neat bullet wounds), and crucially the lack of rotation, then morale there would suffer.

Also the Battle for the Donbass has been going on for (I think) 76 days, longer than the Battle of Kursk and heading towards Monte Cassino and Anzio territory.

Morale is likely much higher on other fronts.

 

[Raoul]

The tweet above contradicts what you're saying. Yeah motivation is used as a tool in war and believing the enemy is demoralized is one of the war propaganda tools currently being used by both sides right now but it's pointless to speculate if you want an accurate answer.

If all you subscribe to is one side of stories you are going to hear how the enemy is shattered right now. A few intercepts doesn't prove or disprove anything in army of thousands. There are similar reports about how volunteers that came to Ukraine are shocked to see how much of a mess it is (again by randos on twitter)

We can't know and I don't know on what basis you can conclude they are "light years ahead" in terms of morale.

Ukrainians with sophisticated western weapons are the exception, not the norm. Much of the fighting still appears to be taking place with relatively low tech automatic weapons in short spaces, which is why the war has largely become one of very small gains for either side. The Ukrainians clearly have the upper hand in the morale department, which will begin to pay more dividends once they get fully trained up on the NATO weapons platforms.

 

[Raoul]

I think morale is an issue in the Donbass:

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

The soldiers are not yet getting the new weapons, and it is a slow, attritional fight, not marked by technology but by artillery. Flesh and bone against iron and steel. In that sense we haven't moved much in the last 100 years. Given the rate of deaths too (and those won't be caused by nice neat bullet wounds), and crucially the lack of rotation, then morale there would suffer.

Also the Battle for the Donbass has been going on for (I think) 76 days, longer than the Battle of Kursk and heading towards Monte Cassino and Anzio territory.

Morale is likely much higher on other fronts.

Not surprising given that the guy has apparently been in Donbas since 2014.

 

[shamans]

Ukrainians with sophisticated western weapons are the exception, not the norm. Much of the fighting still appears to be taking place with relatively low tech automatic weapons in short spaces, which is why the war has largely become one of very small gains for either side. The Ukrainians clearly have the upper hand in the morale department, which will begin to pay more dividends once they get fully trained up on the NATO weapons platforms.

Still have no idea how you are so sure of that.

 

[Raoul]

Still have no idea how you are so sure of that.

Perhaps you're applying morale to just the eastern front ? I'm looking at it collectively across the entire country. Ukrainian resolve to defend areas like Kyiv, Khakiv, Odesa, retake Kherson and other pockets in the south, would seem to be much stronger than that of Russian conscripts being involuntarily forced to fight a war they were lied to about (denazification) and would've had little interest in fighting in the first place. While its true, morale in Donbas will be naturally lower than in other parts, collectively, the Ukrainians will always have the upper hand against a disorganized invading force using its own conscripts as canon fodder, then denying to their families that they have died. That has a cumulative effect in how Russian kids look at fighting in Ukraine.

 

[4bars]

No one in this forum knows the morale of any of the army

Noo one knows what is the real losses of both armies.

No one knows how much military resources Russia has

No one knows how much effect the sanctions has on russia ( so far they made more money with gas/oil in 4 months than in 1 year)

If we learnt anything this las 4 months is that everything is pure speculation and the only truth is that ukrania had the upperhand the first 2 months and now is russiawho has the uperhand

 

[Organic Potatoes]

No one in this forum knows the morale of any of the army

Noo one knows what is the real losses of both armies.

No one knows how much military resources Russia has

No one knows how much effect the sanctions has on russia ( so far they made more money with gas/oil in 4 months than in 1 year)

If we learnt anything this las 4 months is that everything is pure speculation and the only truth is that ukrania had the upperhand the first 2 months and now is russiawho has the uperhand

You don’t know that.

 

[4bars]

You don’t know that.

True. Again pure speculation

 

[shamans]

No one in this forum knows the morale of any of the army

Noo one knows what is the real losses of both armies.

No one knows how much military resources Russia has

No one knows how much effect the sanctions has on russia ( so far they made more money with gas/oil in 4 months than in 1 year)

If we learnt anything this las 4 months is that everything is pure speculation and the only truth is that ukrania had the upperhand the first 2 months and now is russiawho has the uperhand

Right, but it's not like we know nothing at all. You can look at things with skepticism and make your mind about it.

Single accounts of soldiers to conclude morale is silly as well as a lot of the tweets making the rounds. What we can say is Russia has suffered more losses than they would want. We really can't say who is "winning" since that depends on what our definition of winning is.

 

[Simbo]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[frostbite]

https://www.politico.eu/article/emm...ir-putin-russia-diplomacy-france-documentary/

Inside Emmanuel Macron’s failed one-man diplomacy mission on Ukraine

A behind-the-scenes documentary on Macron’s diplomatic efforts to stop the war in Ukraine exposes diplomatic failures and a hyper-personalized approach to foreign policy.

 

[Frosty]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Zelensky must be loving UK politics. Every time Johnson has a scandal, more support and arms are funnelled to Ukraine.

 

[Raoul]

Right, but it's not like we know nothing at all. You can look at things with skepticism and make your mind about it.

Single accounts of soldiers to conclude morale is silly as well as a lot of the tweets making the rounds. What we can say is Russia has suffered more losses than they would want. We really can't say who is "winning" since that depends on what our definition of winning is.

Given that Putin attempted regime change by attacking Kyiv, then promptly withdrew when he realized he couldn't succeed, its not particularly hard to see which side has had the upper hand given the Russian/Ukrainian capability and resource disparity going into the war.

 

[shamans]

Given that Putin attempted regime change by attacking Kyiv, then promptly withdrew when he realized he couldn't succeed, its not particularly hard to see which side has had the upper hand given the Russian/Ukrainian capability and resource disparity going into the war.

If that was Putin's initial goal, and I agree it probably was, it's definitely a failure. Some people might say the goal was always just to take the Donbas, in which case it isn't. I personally think Russia failed its primary objective and settled for an easier task which they are succeeding it.

 

[Raoul]

If that was Putin's initial goal, and I agree it probably was, it's definitely a failure. Some people might say the goal was always just to take the Donbas, in which case it isn't. I personally think Russia failed its primary objective and settled for an easier task which they are succeeding it.

If it was just to take Donbas, he would've just attacked Donbas and applied all his resources there. He clearly miscalculated wildly, probably because he was mislead by his military commanders who didn't want to be the bearers of bad news that Russia couldn't take all of Ukraine. Putin therefore probably had his eyes on the entire country since decapitating the Zelenskyy government in Kyiv, would've been tantamount to taking all of Ukraine since all Ukrainian military actions throughout the rest of the country couldn't function without centralized command and control and a unified strategy. The Russians obviously miscalulated and wildly underestimated Ukrainian resolve to defend their country (aka morale).

 

[shamans]

If it was just to take Donbas, he would've just attacked Donbas and applied all his resources there. He clearly miscalculated wildly, probably because he was mislead by his military commanders who didn't want to be the bearers of bad news that Russia couldn't take all of Ukraine. Putin therefore probably had his eyes on the entire country since decapitating the Zelenskyy government in Kyiv, would've been tantamount to taking all of Ukraine since all Ukrainian military actions throughout the rest of the country couldn't function without centralized command and control and a unified strategy. The Russians obviously miscalulated and wildly underestimated Ukrainian resolve to defend their country (aka morale).

Sounds good for a movie, but reality is they underestimated the western worlds response and support of Ukraine. Everyone had enough of Putin's pattern of transgression and backed Ukraine with aid, volunteers and intel holding Putin off.

 

[MadMike]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Zelensky must be loving UK politics. Every time Johnson has a scandal, more support and arms are funnelled to Ukraine.

He probably hopes BoJo gets caught receiving a BJ from Laura Kuenssberg on live TV. He might even get direct UK involvement in the war as part of the effort to deflect.

 

[Raoul]

Sounds good for a movie, but reality is they underestimated the western worlds response and support of Ukraine. Everyone had enough of Putin's pattern of transgression and backed Ukraine with aid, volunteers and intel holding Putin off.

The western world's response would be inclusive of the Ukrainian response since the Ukrainian government were well on their way to allying with NATO. This has only amplified and strengthened Ukrainian resolve to fight and win. Even if Putin takes a few towns here and there in Donetsk, the fact that he will run out of resources suggests none of his post 24 Feb gains will be preservable in the long run. His only hope at the moment is to decimate Ukraine as much as possible prior to the inevitable ceasefire that yields little to no new Russian territory in Ukraine.

 

[the hea]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[4bars]

Right, but it's not like we know nothing at all. You can look at things with skepticism and make your mind about it.

Single accounts of soldiers to conclude morale is silly as well as a lot of the tweets making the rounds. What we can say is Russia has suffered more losses than they would want. We really can't say who is "winning" since that depends on what our definition of winning is.

Well, with all the propaganda and the fog of war we basically don't know much

I heard that putting is sick but there he is

The morale. no way to know

There is only reports of the russian losses, not ukranian and specially percentage, not absolute that is what we get

And so on. It had been a propaganda war from the start but now it fade out and we could see in many ways that it had been plenty of speculation and that we don't know much in reality.

As you said, is not that we know nothing at all, but we know very little and in this thread it seems that people talks with the certainty of information like they are in the zelensky and putin briefing rooms 3 minutes before posting

Basically I am pissed that I had been so gullible and believe so many things that had been told at the beginning of the war

 

[shamans]

Well, with all the propaganda and the fog of war we basically don't know much

I heard that putting is sick but there he is

The morale. no way to know

There is only reports of the russian losses, not ukranian and specially percentage, not absolute that is what we get

And so on. It had been a propaganda war from the start but now it fade out and we could see in many ways that it had been plenty of speculation and that we don't know much in reality.

As you said, is not that we know nothing at all, but we know very little and in this thread it seems that people talks with the certainty of information like they are in the zelensky and putin briefing rooms 3 minutes before posting

Basically I am pissed that I had been so gullible and believe so many things that had been told at the beginning of the war

I get where you're coming from. I used to follow wars on Twitter back from the war in Syria days to war in Afghanistan. Usually, most on twitter just don't know what they're on about.

 

[ThierryFabregas]

Well, with all the propaganda and the fog of war we basically don't know much

I heard that putting is sick but there he is

The morale. no way to know

There is only reports of the russian losses, not ukranian and specially percentage, not absolute that is what we get

And so on. It had been a propaganda war from the start but now it fade out and we could see in many ways that it had been plenty of speculation and that we don't know much in reality.

As you said, is not that we know nothing at all, but we know very little and in this thread it seems that people talks with the certainty of information like they are in the zelensky and putin briefing rooms 3 minutes before posting

Basically I am pissed that I had been so gullible and believe so many things that had been told at the beginning of the war

Yes there is propganda on both sides. But you're wrong that there isn't reports of Ukrainian losses. There are and they are very high in total and at a very high daily rate. Russian losses are significantly higher from my understanding because fighting a defensive war is less risky than an offensive war.

The theory has been that Ukraine should be able to push Russian troops back with more advanced artillery that is starting to be deployed in combat. We'll have to see if this has any merit in the next few months.

 

[Krakenzero]

What we do know IMO:

-The invasion of Kyiv (biggest city) failed.
-The invasion of Kharkiv (2nd biggest) failed.
-There's currently a blockade in Odessa (3rd biggest, main port).
-The invasion of Luhansk is succeeding.
-The invasion of Donetsk is in progress, no clear result yet.

Therefore, the success of the operation depends on where the goalposts are. If we consider the initial demands, Russia is failing. If we consider a new, more reduced approach, they could be succeeding. For now.

 

[Frosty]

What we do know IMO:

-The invasion of Kyiv (biggest city) failed.
-The invasion of Kharkiv (2nd biggest) failed.
-There's currently a blockade in Odessa (3rd biggest, main port).
-The invasion of Luhansk is succeeding.
-The invasion of Donetsk is in progress, no clear result yet.

Therefore, the success of the operation depends on where the goalposts are. If we consider the initial demands, Russia is failing. If we consider a new, more reduced approach, they could be succeeding. For now.

We could also consider the expansion of NATO, and NATO speaking with one united voice, both of which were the opposite of what Putin was aiming for in February.

 

[Frosty]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[4bars]

What we do know IMO:

-The invasion of Kyiv (biggest city) failed.
-The invasion of Kharkiv (2nd biggest) failed.
-There's currently a blockade in Odessa (3rd biggest, main port).
-The invasion of Luhansk is succeeding.
-The invasion of Donetsk is in progress, no clear result yet.

Therefore, the success of the operation depends on where the goalposts are. If we consider the initial demands, Russia is failing. If we consider a new, more reduced approach, they could be succeeding. For now.

Yes. That is the only thoroughly analysis. basically tangible results in the field (can be more and more specific). Who has more moral, equipment, and others is just pure speculation and propaganda

 

[Raoul]

What we do know IMO:

-The invasion of Kyiv (biggest city) failed.
-The invasion of Kharkiv (2nd biggest) failed.
-There's currently a blockade in Odessa (3rd biggest, main port).
-The invasion of Luhansk is succeeding.
-The invasion of Donetsk is in progress, no clear result yet.

Therefore, the success of the operation depends on where the goalposts are. If we consider the initial demands, Russia is failing. If we consider a new, more reduced approach, they could be succeeding. For now.

There's not much in the way of Russian success in any of these scenarios. They attempted to take the entire country and failed quite miserably. Therefore Putin's original intent in invading Ukraine has already failed.

That of course won't stop him from attempting to move the goalposts by reframing success as gaining territory in Donbas. Except even if he does, he will likely not be able to hold on to it because the Ukrainians won't stop fighting until they reclaim all losses, during which they will continue to get armed with sophisticated NATO weapons. Putin has failed to take any of Ukraine's top 7 populated cities in this conflict and is now struggling to hold onto places like Kherson. At this rate, he will probably take a few more towns in Donbas then attempt to initiate peace talks to preserve his gains. The Ukrainians will reject any talks that cause them to lose any land lost post 24 Feb and the fighting will continue until Putin finally capitulates by backing out in a way that is digestible for his own domestic considerations that allow him to bow out without looking like a weak, feckless loser.

 

[shamans]

What we do know IMO:

-The invasion of Kyiv (biggest city) failed.
-The invasion of Kharkiv (2nd biggest) failed.
-There's currently a blockade in Odessa (3rd biggest, main port).
-The invasion of Luhansk is succeeding.
-The invasion of Donetsk is in progress, no clear result yet.

Therefore, the success of the operation depends on where the goalposts are. If we consider the initial demands, Russia is failing. If we consider a new, more reduced approach, they could be succeeding. For now.

Yeah this seems correct to me and what we truly do know. I would say Luhansk is basically under Russian control and Donetsk looks to be succeeding unless the new arms makes a difference.

 

[Frosty]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[RedDevilQuebecois]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

The Turks have their work cut out for them after intercepting the first ship of that lot a few days ago.

 

[Frosty]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[NotThatSoph]

We could also consider the expansion of NATO, and NATO speaking with one united voice, both of which were the opposite of what Putin was aiming for in February.

Careful now! Calling it an expansion has been on the verge of fighting words in this thread.

 

[tomaldinho1]

Careful now! Calling it an expansion has been on the verge of fighting words in this thread.

Why? NATO has expanded.

 

[NotThatSoph]

Why? NATO has expanded.

I know. Something about it not being NATO expanding but other countries joining, and that calling it an expansion is a Russian propaganda talking point.

 

[tomaldinho1]

I know. Something about it not being NATO expanding but other countries joining, and that calling it an expansion is a Russian propaganda talking point.

I know a lot of posters don’t buy into the idea of NATO expansion as a valid reason for invading a country. Not sure what you mean about Russian propaganda.

 

[Frosty]

Careful now! Calling it an expansion has been on the verge of fighting words in this thread.

On that note:

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[NotThatSoph]

On that note:

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Oh, I'm not saying it is. It's probably a reason, though how big I have no idea.

 

[Frosty]

Oh, I'm not saying it is. It's probably a reason, though how big I have no idea.

Not aimed at you by any means - I have heard plenty of politicians and protestors in the West state the reason Putin invaded was because of NATO expansion, and here he is proving them wrong!

 

[Raoul]

On that note:

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

This is one step closer to the truth. Although the bit Putin will never admit is that a strong and democratic Ukraine that embraces the rule of law and pluralistic values is an existential threat to the corrupt, authoritarian police state he is running out of Moscow, which is why he has to stop the spread of democracy into the Russian sphere at all costs.

 

[Spark]

This is one step closer to the truth. Although the bit Putin will never admit is that a strong and democratic Ukraine that embraces the rule of law and pluralistic values is an existential threat to the corrupt, authoritarian police state he is running out of Moscow, which is why he has to stop the spread of democracy into the Russian sphere at all costs.

Nail on head.