The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

[ngatimozart]

I don't think this was intentional. I think Russia genuinely tried to cut off and encircle for destruction Ukrainian forces defending Severodonets-Lisichansk first, and Zolotoe-Gorksoe afterwards. Both failed to do what they were aiming for. Pro-Russian sources were reporting, likely from internal sources, that Ukrainian POWs are imminent. Yet they never materialized. I think this was another failure. Russia can advance but not fast enough to do this. I think Russia can demolish Ukrainian forces, but primarily through superior and overwhelming firepower.

Yes Russia is quite capable of destroying the Ukrainian military through the use of superior and overwhelming firepower, but it hasn't done so and that's the problem. We are four an half months into this war and the Russians haven't decimated their enemy. At the start they had the superior and overwhelming firepower to destroy the Ukrainian military, but they wasted it, using it piecemeal and the lost a lot of it and more importantly, experienced troops, in the process. They have made some gains, but slowly, at great cost and they still haven't be able to knock Ukraine out of the fight. Most of the time the Ukrainians know what they are going to do before they do it themselves because the Ukrainians read the same strategy and operations manuals and used the same doctrine. Big difference now is that the Ukrainians have evolved strategically and tactically, adapted and overcame, but against the Russians they always lack quantity which has a quality of its own.

For those wondering about the "aims of the special operation" - short and simple - "Jihad and the defence of Islam". The Kadyrovites are ignorant people who do not know what Islam means. These people call Jihad their job as mercenaries. Jihad is above all a moral self-improvement. These hired killers are betraying Islam. Chechnya is totally subsidized by Russia.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1544361566082109445

I totally disagree with you trying to frame the war against Ukraine as a "Jihad and the defence of Islam" because it is most definitely not and is the farthest thing from it. Religion does enter into it on the sidelines, but it's a power battle between to Orthodox Christian Churches with the Russian Orthodox Church reacting bitterly to the loss of its hegemony and control over the Ukrainian Orthodox Church that it wasn't supposed to have anyway. The Russian Patriarchs are quite bitter and twisted about it because for them it's a huge loss of power, wealth, and prestige.

If your Chechens decide that they want to visit Berlin without an invite, best that they make sure that their affairs are all in order because once they set foot in NATO territory uninvited they won't be returning home healthy, if at all. The Poles will take a very dim view of them trying to cross their territory and they won't be very nice about it. They have no reason to like Russia or any of its vassals fighting for it, and the Poles have long memories. The Germans are lucky that the Poles have a stronger dislike of the Russians than they do of the Germans. Considering what the Russians and their Chechen vassals are doing in Ukraine at the moment, I wouldn't give your Chechen mates much chance in Poland because from what I understand the Poles are quite angry about it.

 

[Stampede]

Solntsepyek was part of a series of elaborate Wagner recruiting efforts. A new film, Granite, just came out, and an older film, Tourist, also exists. I doubt its directly related to this invasion.



It reminds me of an old Russian joke.
A little kid says "Daddy I caught a bear".
And the dad says "Good, bring it here".
"I can't"
"Well then you come here"
"He won't let me"

EDIT: By the way, what makes you so certain Russia mined the bridges? I would have thought there is no conceivable way the entire BSF doesn't have a crane operator, and yet...

I can't speak for mined brides, but I like the old Russian joke.



Cheers S

 

[tabu]

Ukraine needs a victory before autumn to silence Western doubters

Volodymyr Zelensky is running out of time to shore up support, with some believing his country’s battle against Russia is futile

www.telegraph.co.uk

Daily Telegraph is and always be part of western mainstream media as strong supporters for Ukraine side. However when they usual talk on Russia will lost, Russia will collapse, West will grove Russia to total submission etc.

Thus put this kind of article (and they are not the only one among Western Mainstream media), shown how big the doubt on Western supporters already are. Question is what kind of Ukraine victory that will raise back support.

It is not surprising that any Russian fall back is pictures by Western Analysts/Pundits as big Ukraine win. Like Russian fall back from Snake Island is being pictures of Ukraine big success, Russia fall back from Kiev as Routed, and Ukraine routed in Donbass as smart strategic repossitioning.

However those propaganda seems not satisfying the doubt in the west anymore. Thus I do sense of all fronts, The South against Kherson seems what Ukraine try to sell toward their supporters in the West. However those big counter offensive in the South so far only getting possitioning changes. The Ukranian got some gain in south side of the front while Russia gain something else in central side of the front.

Seems many in the Western population still not realise (or being hide), the defining war is in Donbas. If Ukraine lost Donbas, they are not only loosing big part of their equipment but also big part of their most season army. That will open Russia potential offensive on other front including South. Everything will depend on Donbas.

Western pundits rightly put this war is war of attrition. What they are shown more is how good Ukraine create attrition toward Russian sources. However not talking on how the Attrition costs toward Ukraine it self.

The Ukrainians are already fighting on the West's dime. Western countries are using the Ukrainian War of Independence to weaken the offensive potential of the Russian Armed Forces. Every tank destroyed in Ukraine, every ammunition shot up is no longer a threat to the West. So the money and weapons will keep on coming.

 

[seaspear]

It would be very interesting to discover how much ammunition Russia has used for its artillery how old it was or from recently stockpiling for this war the price of oil will likely enable replacement of lost equipment with more modern

 

[tabu]

I totally disagree with you trying to frame the war against Ukraine as a "Jihad and the defence of Islam" because it is most definitely not and is the farthest thing from it. Religion does enter into it on the sidelines, but it's a power battle between to Orthodox Christian Churches with the Russian Orthodox Church reacting bitterly to the loss of its hegemony and control over the Ukrainian Orthodox Church that it wasn't supposed to have anyway. The Russian Patriarchs are quite bitter and twisted about it because for them it's a huge loss of power, wealth, and prestige.

If your Chechens decide that they want to visit Berlin without an invite, best that they make sure that their affairs are all in order because once they set foot in NATO territory uninvited they won't be returning home healthy, if at all. The Poles will take a very dim view of them trying to cross their territory and they won't be very nice about it. They have no reason to like Russia or any of its vassals fighting for it, and the Poles have long memories. The Germans are lucky that the Poles have a stronger dislike of the Russians than they do of the Germans. Considering what the Russians and their Chechen vassals are doing in Ukraine at the moment, I wouldn't give your Chechen mates much chance in Poland because from what I understand the Poles are quite angry about it.

You attribute to me incorrectly that I am on the side of Chechen bandits and mercenaries who hide behind pseudo-Islamic slogans to justify their criminal actions. Read my post again carefully.

 

[tabu]

It would be very interesting to discover how much ammunition Russia has used for its artillery how old it was or from recently stockpiling for this war the price of oil will likely enable replacement of lost equipment with more modern

These questions are so complex that it is almost impossible to answer them briefly. But Kirill Mikhailov, an analyst with the independent Conflict Intelligence Team (CIT), answered the individual aspects of Russia's weaponry question.

"
We see that Russia is gradually running out of not only shells and missiles, but also heavy equipment - some very old tanks are coming to the West from the depths of eastern Russia. All of this may indeed be a problem for Moscow and the quantitative stocks of this old equipment are not inexhaustible.
This is already a problem, if only because these T-62Ms got to the front, because they are paradoxically better prepared, because they were used in mobilisation rehearsals in 2018, for example, in Exercise Vostok. It's a rather obsolete tank: the crew is four men, not three, because there's no charging machine. These T-62s last fought in 2008 in Georgia, many tankers have no experience using them. Yes, this is a problem, but the equipment can still perform on the battlefield not much worse than the oldest T-72 models in service with the Russian army. "Javelin doesn't matter whether it's a T-62 in front of it or a T-72, it hits them with equal effectiveness. On the other hand we do not see any rearmament of the T-72 or BMP-2. We believe the problem is that these vehicles, which formed the backbone of the tank and motorized rifle forces fleet, have been largely dismantled for parts in recent years. There was no sufficient production of spare parts, so those tanks that were in storage were used for current repairs of the vehicles in service. It turns out now that most T-72s are unsuitable for refurbishment, so in addition to T-62s we see many T-80s which are also being refurbished. Compared to T-72, they have been used very little by the Russian army, so a significant proportion have survived. We see the same with BMP-1, which is replacing BMP-2. In local conflicts, in the Middle East for example, they have proved far worse than the later Russian infantry fighting vehicles. There is a problem, and the data that Russia has 10,000 tanks in storage should have been slightly adjusted downwards. We do not know exactly how many, but we understand that much of the modern Russian fleet has already been destroyed or lost, and it will be replaced by older vehicles because the Russian military industry has produced virtually no tanks, minus the same T-90s, a company of which, as we saw recently, about ten tanks, were sent to the front. The rest of the production was based on upgrading older models, and even in this format it was, I think, up to 300 tanks a year. The Russian Army has already lost at least 800 tanks. The Russian industry is not able to increase production rapidly, if only taking into account the fact that a significant part of components, sights and so on, were Western-made. According to Pavel Luzin, a military expert, it already takes four years to restore the Russian tank fleet, and the problem will only get worse."

 

[vonnoobie]

Here is a question because not so long ago Ukraine stated that Russia was firing as much as 50,000 shells a day does anyone know how many shells they had before the conflict? And what is the production capability in Russia to replace those shells? (ie: How many shells can their armaments factories build in a day)

On the flip side what is the production capability in the countries supporting Ukraine for 155mm and 152mm shells?

Same question could be asked for numorous other munitions and weapons systems. At the end of the day Russia or Ukraine may very well run out of munitions to continue the conflict before they run out of soldiers.

 

[vikingatespam]

It would be very interesting to discover how much ammunition Russia has used for its artillery how old it was or from recently stockpiling for this war the price of oil will likely enable replacement of lost equipment with more modern

Thats a question that has been brought up several times on the Dupuy institute blog. How much in the way of stockpiles does RU have, and what is thier production rate ? We have seen the RU taking stocks of ammo from Belarus.

 

[Redlands18]

Ukraine Is Turning The Tide Against Russian Navy In Black Sea - Naval News
A review from HI Sutton at Naval News on operations in the Black Sea

 

[Atunga]

Thats a question that has been brought up several times on the Dupuy institute blog. How much in the way of stockpiles does RU have, and what is thier production rate ? We have seen the RU taking stocks of ammo from Belarus.

This article by UK based RUSI (Royal United Services Institute) answers some of these questions. The author is saying that Ukraine has 700k soldiers fighting 200k Russian invaders, don’t know how true this statement is. Can anyone with more knowledge about this situation shed more light on this please?

The Return of Industrial Warfare

Can the West still provide the arsenal of democracy?

rusi.org

 

[Karl Franz]

I don't think this was intentional. I think Russia genuinely tried to cut off and encircle for destruction Ukrainian forces defending Severodonets-Lisichansk first, and Zolotoe-Gorksoe afterwards. Both failed to do what they were aiming for. Pro-Russian sources were reporting, likely from internal sources, that Ukrainian POWs are imminent. Yet they never materialized. I think this was another failure. Russia can advance but not fast enough to do this. I think Russia can demolish Ukrainian forces, but primarily through superior and overwhelming firepower.

They have used similar tactic in Syria few times so it got me thinking that they were using it again here but indeed their efforts have been underwhelming so its possible they simply couldn't complete the encirclements.

I have also noticed that the structure of the forces at the front has begun to change with significantly more of the fighting done by the the Donetsk/Luhansk rebels. I have read they had about 40k man standing army, with the mobilization I suspect they can increase that quite a bit. Although I am not sure if they declared general mobilization or just called up their reserves. It will be interesting if the settlement can not be reached after the fighting for Donbas ends whether rebels militia can be transformed into some kind of pro-Russian Ukrainian military to continue the fighting in the rest of the country since it would give more incentive to recruits from other regions where a pro-Russian population can be found (Kherson region, Zaporizhzhia region, etc.) to join than continue calling it strictly Donbas militia.

An unanswered question, but I do wonder when did Putin actually decide to set the wheels in motion to invade Ukraine beyond the existing conflict in the separatist regions.

I have been wondering this as well and as far as I can tell the changing of the prime minister from Medvedev to Mishustin was probably the result of a decision to go into Ukraine being made. Mishustin was I believe brought to prepare Russian economy for an inevitable tough sanctions that were going to be introduced. While everyone (including myself) believed this was an overture to amending the constitution later that year, I believe now with the help of hindsight that he was brought in because of the troubles the Russian economy would face in the future. Mishustin and perhaps even more so Nabiullina in the end did a good job, unlike the generals planing the invasion.

 

[ngatimozart]

The Ukrainians are already fighting on the West's dime. Western countries are using the Ukrainian War of Independence to weaken the offensive potential of the Russian Armed Forces. Every tank destroyed in Ukraine, every ammunition shot up is no longer a threat to the West. So the money and weapons will keep on coming.

Considering that Russia launch a war or wanton aggression against Ukraine without provocation, your claim is somewhat misleading. The war in Ukraine is not a war of independence, but from the Ukrainian side a war to preserve its independence and sovereignty. That's totally different.

These questions are so complex that it is almost impossible to answer them briefly. But Kirill Mikhailov, an analyst with the independent Conflict Intelligence Team (CIT), answered the individual aspects of Russia's weaponry question.

"
We see that Russia is gradually running out of not only shells and missiles, but also heavy equipment - some very old tanks are coming to the West from the depths of eastern Russia. All of this may indeed be a problem for Moscow and the quantitative stocks of this old equipment are not inexhaustible.
This is already a problem, if only because these T-62Ms got to the front, because they are paradoxically better prepared, because they were used in mobilisation rehearsals in 2018, for example, in Exercise Vostok. It's a rather obsolete tank: the crew is four men, not three, because there's no charging machine. These T-62s last fought in 2008 in Georgia, many tankers have no experience using them. Yes, this is a problem, but the equipment can still perform on the battlefield not much worse than the oldest T-72 models in service with the Russian army. "Javelin doesn't matter whether it's a T-62 in front of it or a T-72, it hits them with equal effectiveness. On the other hand we do not see any rearmament of the T-72 or BMP-2. We believe the problem is that these vehicles, which formed the backbone of the tank and motorized rifle forces fleet, have been largely dismantled for parts in recent years. There was no sufficient production of spare parts, so those tanks that were in storage were used for current repairs of the vehicles in service. It turns out now that most T-72s are unsuitable for refurbishment, so in addition to T-62s we see many T-80s which are also being refurbished. Compared to T-72, they have been used very little by the Russian army, so a significant proportion have survived. We see the same with BMP-1, which is replacing BMP-2. In local conflicts, in the Middle East for example, they have proved far worse than the later Russian infantry fighting vehicles. There is a problem, and the data that Russia has 10,000 tanks in storage should have been slightly adjusted downwards. We do not know exactly how many, but we understand that much of the modern Russian fleet has already been destroyed or lost, and it will be replaced by older vehicles because the Russian military industry has produced virtually no tanks, minus the same T-90s, a company of which, as we saw recently, about ten tanks, were sent to the front. The rest of the production was based on upgrading older models, and even in this format it was, I think, up to 300 tanks a year. The Russian Army has already lost at least 800 tanks. The Russian industry is not able to increase production rapidly, if only taking into account the fact that a significant part of components, sights and so on, were Western-made. According to Pavel Luzin, a military expert, it already takes four years to restore the Russian tank fleet, and the problem will only get worse."

We don't appreciate unfounded Russian disinformation being posted here and have a habit of dealing with it summarily. This is because we are a defence forum run by international defence professionals, including one Russian.

We have requirements that claims be supported by evidence from reputable, reliable, verifiable sources that must be linked to or if a html link isn't available cited. These are in the rules which you should read before you make any more posts.

 

[ngatimozart]

There appears to be systemic corruption in the Russian military with Task and Purpose just having released a video discussing it. Ok Cappy does have a bit of fun with it, but he asks some very serious questions and makes some very serious points. He was an infantryman and has seen combat service so that gives him a particular point of view especially when it involves soldiers lives.

In the video he has cited the Norwegian Defence Research Establishment article from 2005 Russian Military Corruption - scale and causes (ffi.no) quite a bit and it makes for sobering reading. Nothing has changed and it appears to become worse with a recent article published in May of this year by the RUSI Corruption in the Russian Armed Forces | RUSI | Official Press Release (wired-gov.net) and a paper published in the Survival Journal by Robert Dalsjö, Michael Jonsson, and Johan Norberg, A Brutal Examination: Russian Military Capability in Light of the Ukraine War (tandfonline.com). It's apparently costing some lives but it's have deleterious effects upon the ability of the Russian military to perform its mission. Add to this its apparent inability to innovate past the 1980s Soviet doctrine, strategy and tactics, the lack of night vision gear, fuel and food problems at the pointy end, it speaks of a dysfunctional military.

 

[Ananda]

I have no dispute that Russian Military have big problem. However what they are facing is Ukrainian Military that basically have similar corruption problem. Despite 8 years of Western training, it's very debatable that the Ukranian Military basically already more potent force then Russian.

Letter: Western arms transfers risk fuelling Ukraine corruption

From Istvan Dobozi, Former Lead Energy Economist, World Bank, Sarasota, FL, US

www.ft.com

So let's see how the result in the ground talk. I know some in here give questionable look on Russian analysts, but for me similar thing also questionable on Western ones. Especially the ones that put big claim on Ukrainian as more potent and efficient forces then Russian, while so far the fact in the ground say otherwise.

Personally for me too much fog of war coming from both side. Thus I let the fact results in the ground talk.

 

[tabu]

Satellite images from Melitopol.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1544644818214739968

The Russians surprise the world. The British for a piece of land on the other side of the globe, not too lazy to send a squadron of marines there.The Americans for Alaska are sure to start a nuclear war.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1544701816641839104

 

[tabu]

The deputy head of the Russian Security Council, Dmitriy Medvedev, has said that Moscow may respond with nuclear weapons to attempts to try Russians for war crimes in Ukraine. He wrote this on Telegram on 6 July.

Because of investigations into war: Medvedev reminds of Russian nuclear weapons – Honey Bunny Ladies

honeybunnyladies.com

In other words, Medvedev is threatening the West with nuclear war just because the West will take economic and legal action against Russia.

It is also interesting that this Medvedev was described by Frau Kanzler Angela Merkel as a "liberal". Even then, this was a premature assessment and a colossal miscalculation!

 

[tabu]

Yes Russia is quite capable of destroying the Ukrainian military through the use of superior and overwhelming firepower, but it hasn't done so and that's the problem. We are four an half months into this war and the Russians haven't decimated their enemy. At the start they had the superior and overwhelming firepower to destroy the Ukrainian military, but they wasted it, using it piecemeal and the lost a lot of it and more importantly, experienced troops, in the process. They have made some gains, but slowly, at great cost and they still haven't be able to knock Ukraine out of the fight. Most of the time the Ukrainians know what they are going to do before they do it themselves because the Ukrainians read the same strategy and operations manuals and used the same doctrine. Big difference now is that the Ukrainians have evolved strategically and tactically, adapted and overcame, but against the Russians they always lack quantity which has a quality of its own.

Once again we come to the conclusion: give Ukraine weapons (currents of support) and it will turn the Russian world upside down!

 

[vikingatespam]

There appears to be systemic corruption in the Russian military with Task and Purpose just having released a video discussing it. Ok Cappy does have a bit of fun with it, but he asks some very serious questions and makes some very serious points. He was an infantryman and has seen combat service so that gives him a particular point of view especially when it involves soldiers lives.

In the video he has cited the Norwegian Defence Research Establishment article from 2005 Russian Military Corruption - scale and causes (ffi.no) quite a bit and it makes for sobering reading. Nothing has changed and it appears to become worse with a recent article published in May of this year by the RUSI Corruption in the Russian Armed Forces | RUSI | Official Press Release (wired-gov.net) and a paper published in the Survival Journal by Robert Dalsjö, Michael Jonsson, and Johan Norberg, A Brutal Examination: Russian Military Capability in Light of the Ukraine War (tandfonline.com). It's apparently costing some lives but it's have deleterious effects upon the ability of the Russian military to perform its mission. Add to this its apparent inability to innovate past the 1980s Soviet doctrine, strategy and tactics, the lack of night vision gear, fuel and food problems at the pointy end, it speaks of a dysfunctional military.

Another video I found useful on this subject:

 

[swerve]

It is also interesting that this Medvedev was described by Frau Kanzler Angela Merkel as a "liberal". Even then, this was a premature assessment and a colossal miscalculation!

I suspect that he's an opportunist, & success (or even survival) in Russian politics requires being a Putin loyalist. He understood that many years ago, & sold his soul to Vlad.

I can't help wondering if being noticeably shorter than Putin has helped his career.

 

[vikingatespam]

I have no dispute that Russian Military have big problem. However what they are facing is Ukrainian Military that basically have similar corruption problem. Despite 8 years of Western training, it's very debatable that the Ukrainian Military basically already more potent force than Russian.

So let's see how the result in the ground talk. I know some in here give questionable look on Russian analysts, but for me similar thing also questionable on Western ones. Especially the ones that put big claim on Ukrainian as more potent and efficient forces then Russian, while so far the fact in the ground say otherwise.

Personally for me too much fog of war coming from both side. Thus I let the fact results in the ground talk.

I would argue the RU retreat from Kiev and Kharkov point out the superiority of the UKR soldier as a whole. The RU had more tanks, more planes, more artillery, and the advantage of picking the battlefield, but they failed miserably. Only during the later set-piece battles of Severodonetsk, are the RU playing more to their hand.

Time will tell how things will play out. If the RU logistics are as bad as perceived, further penetrations into UKR will slow. If the UKR material situation is as bad as some people claim, then things will speed up for the RU.

I have concerns the situation could still spin out of control if Belarus gets involved, or we have a really bad civilian kill incident.