The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

Ananda

The Bunker Group
100999351_1660317523563.png

I always like to watch French Defense Ministry report on Ukraine war. They are straight to the point and not adding BS like US or UK defense ministry on Ukranian war.

Practicaly their twitter put (sorry not speaking French thus only using google translate) on 3 main engagement:

1. Exchange artilery in Sumy,
2. Eastren Front (Donbas), Russia push but only modest gain,
3. Ukranian try to disrupt Russian Logistics in Southern front.

So clearly no BS like UK defense ministry that always talking on Ukranian counter offensive momentum since close to two months ago, as just another mouth piece of Ukranian propaganda.

Basically the French more honest to say, it is still a grinding attrition war.
 

seaspear

Active Member
The maps seem confusing in comparison around the city of Kharkiv the French map suggests that Kharkiv is surrounded? the U.K ministry suggests the opposite
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
What portions of airspace over the Black Sea do you think Russia could close, without triggering Article 5? Whilst the Black Sea is an inland sea, AFAIK there are portions of both the sea and the airspace above that would constitute international waters/airspace. Yes, NATO aircraft would need to cross through the airspace and territory of one or more nations to enter the Black Sea areas, but since there are three NATO members with coastlines on the Black Sea and there are adjoining NATO member-states which can give flight corridors... Provided NATO aircraft keep their flights to outside the 12 n mile limits of coastlines, then such flights even if they are harvester flights, should be able to continue.
Perhaps I'm misinformed, but I have been under the impression that Article 5 required an attack on a NATO member state. Russia certainly doesn't have some sort of special authority to close airspace above international waters. But Russia doesn't have authority to close airspace over Ukraine either. Yet they have an NATO has complied. Nobody has flown aircraft into Ukrainian airspace with the intention of invoking Article 5. What would prevent Russia from making a similar statement regarding international airspace say south of Odessa?

The maps seem confusing in comparison around the city of Kharkiv the French map suggests that Kharkiv is surrounded? the U.K ministry suggests the opposite
It's not surrounded. The shaded areas aren't Russian controlled necessarily.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
maps seem confusing in comparison around the city of Kharkiv the French map suggests that Kharkiv is surrounded? the U.K ministry suggests the opposite
Shaded area means active military operations from both sides. However Russia trying to gain momentum there. Seems that's the index in french means.

Well I trust the French ministry more then the UK ones. Then again it is back to anyone else preference. Like I put in previous posts, as one of big Western power, French seems more honest in their reporting, even in their mainstream media, on this war. Despite they are still off course like most Western possition, more bias to Ukraine sources.
 

vonnoobie

Well-Known Member
View attachment 49590

I always like to watch French Defense Ministry report on Ukraine war. They are straight to the point and not adding BS like US or UK defense ministry on Ukranian war.

Practicaly their twitter put (sorry not speaking French thus only using google translate) on 3 main engagement:

1. Exchange artilery in Sumy,
2. Eastren Front (Donbas), Russia push but only modest gain,
3. Ukranian try to disrupt Russian Logistics in Southern front.

So clearly no BS like UK defense ministry that always talking on Ukranian counter offensive momentum since close to two months ago, as just another mouth piece of Ukranian propaganda.

Basically the French more honest to say, it is still a grinding attrition war.
.... And the French one also shows Ukrainian lines literally right up against the city of Kherson, and Severodonetsk still beingthought over... The French one is the very most basic update glossing over vast amounts of details and not even an accurate representation of the front lines... but sure the US and UK propaganda mouth pieces for Ukraine...
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
The French one is the very most basic update glossing over vast amounts of details and not even an accurate representation of the front line
They are more honest eventough more basic information.

but sure the US and UK propaganda mouth pieces for Ukraine...
Unless they shown more factual in the ground, what they shown mostly taking what Ukraine put in their media positioning. Then again everyone entitled on their opinion.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
you provide proof that the French reports are more accurate?
Can you provide proof that US and UK reports are more accurate ? Besides I never say French ones is more accurate, I say they are more honest. They only shown what the situation in the ground on overall.

The way I see it, French provide assesment on something that are hapenning, and less bias judgmental opinion on this war as US and UK defense communique.

Besides what's the motive for French to tell less accurate opinion ? Because they are not tailing US and UK style, it is less accurate ?
 

seaspear

Active Member
Honesty and accuracy are the same thing in this context ,if there are reports on the coverage of this war that you presume are slanted because of the government bias being against the Russian attack on Ukraine ,then perhaps you only accept Russia's reporting of its "action" and can you show why its honest.,this is a U.N report on other statistics on this war
Ukraine | Situation Reports (unocha.org)
 

STURM

Well-Known Member
Anything said by anyone; whether Russia or the Ukraine and its supporters; has to be taken with a grain of salt. Given there's a war on; half truths; outright lies; propaganda and misinformation is to be expected.

The British MOD has been releasing assessments on a daily basis on the Russians; painting a very bleak picture. A lot of it isiaccurate accurate I'm sure and quite a bit of it is embellished.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
then perhaps you only accept Russia's reporting of its "action" and can you show why its honest.,this is a U.N report on other statistics on this war
Russian reporting is highly bias just like US and UK. French is more honest on the context they are not exagerating beyond what really happen inthe ground that already verifiable. Again as French not tailing US and UK style of reporting on this war, does not mean they are less accurate.

More honest does not mean they are more accurate, so it is different on any context. More honest means they are reporting as what have more effidences support. Less judgemental report and bias speculations.

I have talk in this thread for some time, I'm not either Pro Russian, Pro Ukraine and certaintly not pro US and Collective West thinking. I follow French official report as in my opinion they are more honest then US and UK ones, relative toward collective west officials standard on this war.

This war level of fogs of war already so high. Personally I found some media in French, Middle East and India try better to thread the middle reporting then those BS in US, UK, Russia, and Ukraine. Fell free though to trust US and UK officials.
 

seaspear

Active Member
I would be careful of accepting media only as an accurate source of what's happening there are some agencies that claim to have some accuracy
A quick guide to the best reporting on Russia-Ukraine invasion (crikey.com.au)
But the media do not have the access to the monitoring sources provided for defence and intelligence e.g. satellites and special aircraft all of which may collect electronic intelligence , before the start of this war the French believed there would not be an attack certainly the U.S and U.K stated otherwise
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
the media do not have the access to the monitoring sources provided for defence and intelligence e.g. satellites and special aircraft all of which may collect electronic intelligence
Yes, on that I agree media is not the best sources. However also the officials communique from either sides. Officials has more bias due to political need that back it up. Again for me on collective west officials communique, I just found (on this war), French more honest (in sense not being to much clouded by BS bias, relative to US and UK ones). Eventough French officials off course as part of collective west will be bias to pro Ukraine and anti Russian. That's my point all along.

Yes officials in collective west have more information and ISTAR assets reports. However don't ever think they will be honest completely on what they are letting to the publics. No officials on any sides will be completely honest and non bias.

on India and its neutrality ,India does seem afraid to offend
India and most Asia Pacific are try to keep in the middle and sitting on the fences, just like most middle east. Thus why most media from those area are try to cover both sides and stay in the middle. Nothing new.
 

seaspear

Active Member
I don't dispute that the media can portray events
How the Ukraine war exposed Western media bias - CNN
But to claim that the reporting of a war is slanted by governments because they are against the aggressor in this case requires some proof , I am not aware of French surveillance aircraft operating near the Ukraine borders certainly U.S.A.F and R.A.F this and the U.S better satellite coverage compared to France may provide a reason that their views of the situation may be different to the French , certainly on the political side France ,there was this report earlier
Macron claims Putin gave him personal assurances on Ukraine | Ukraine | The Guardian
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
I am not aware of French surveillance aircraft operating near the Ukraine borders certainly U.S.A.F and R.A.F this and the U.S better satellite coverage compared to France may provide a reason that their views of the situation may be different to the French , certainly on the political side France ,there was this report earlier
What's this got to do on anything ? You're comparing what US and UK have compared to French, with what they're going to say in public. Again you want to believe US and UK officials is up to you. For me, I don't see much difference on US and UK defense communique on this war compared to Russian ones. Each clouded on their own fog of war version.

Thus for me, I see French ones more honest compared to UK and US ones in this war. Thus your comparing French assets with US and UK ones on covering this war, has got nothing to do whatsoever with what they want to publish toward public. Russia also has extensive satellite coverage over Ukraine, doesn't mean what they are going to say in public reflect entirely on what they know.

Everyone try to pursue their own interests, including what they want to say to publics. Yes the officials knows better, but doesn't mean they are going to tell honestly on everything. That's why for me personally I check as much as I can on officials, media or Internet chatters. Whoever being circulate enough on each sides, usually have more grounds.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
What portions of airspace over the Black Sea do you think Russia could close, without triggering Article 5? Whilst the Black Sea is an inland sea, AFAIK there are portions of both the sea and the airspace above that would constitute international waters/airspace. Yes, NATO aircraft would need to cross through the airspace and territory of one or more nations to enter the Black Sea areas, but since there are three NATO members with coastlines on the Black Sea and there are adjoining NATO member-states which can give flight corridors... Provided NATO aircraft keep their flights to outside the 12 n mile limits of coastlines, then such flights even if they are harvester flights, should be able to continue.
Russia could declare they're closing international airspace south of Odessa over the Black Sea. Would this be legal? Most certainly not. And given Russia's recent behavior they're obviously very concerned with legality... It would put the ball in the court of NATO countries to determine whether they want to challenge that. In principle one could brazenly fly in and challenge Russian threats. If one was then shot down Article 5 could trigger. I'm not saying this is a good idea, or even that it wouldn't backfire if tried. But it's something Russia could do, and it would drastically increase the risks of direct confrontation, as well as putting NATO in the uncomfortable position of setting course on a direct military confrontation with Russia or submitting to these demands.

On the flip side it's pretty clear that technology has changed the nature of war drastically. A theoretically neutral country could have it's assets as part of the kill chain, while operating out of international airspace. What would be the reaction to Russian A-50s providing AEW to the Iraqis during GW1? Especially if they're present in sufficient quantities and with sufficient capabilities to allow the Iraqis to inflict significant additional casualties on coalition aircraft? Because right now that's the boat Russia is in.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Update.

Kherson-Nikolaev-Odessa.

Allegedly a destroyed HIMARS near Nikolaev, though I can't make out what's getting hit, it goes up pretty hard.


Novaya Kahovka is getting hit again. It appears that despite recent efforts to destroy Ukrainian artillery, including through the use of loitering munitions, Russia hasn't managed to suppress it effectively. On the flip side we recently had Ukrainian sources out of Peski claiming they desperately lack artillery support. Is it wise to have artillery shelling Russia in Kherson region while Russian forces continue to advance in the Donbas?


Russian strikes on Nikolaev.


A Russian 22160 "controlling airspace" with a Tor module on the helo deck.


There are reports that Ukraine's 36th MarBde will be leaving Nikolaev and heading to Kiev. Note this isn't the only Ukrainian unit that recently headed in that direction. It's not clear if there is intel that Russia plans another offensive there, or if on the contrary Ukraine is planning some sort of move in the north.


Zaporozhye-Dnepropetrovsk.


Russian artillery strikes near Zaporozhye.


We have reports of Ukrainian strikes against Zaporozhye NPP and Berislav.


Battle damage from allegedly a Ukrainian strike on Tokmak.


There are reports of an explosion near a police station in Berdyansk.


The North.

There are reports of Ukrainian forces, especially some newly formed units, moving towards Kiev.


Kharkov-Sumy.

Allegedly Russian military (I suspect rebels or irregulars) using a Nona-M1 towed mortar.


The Izyum Salient.

There are reports from Ukrainian sources that the 55th Motor-Rifles, from Tyva, used Tyva-language radio comms as a measure of security. Being a rarely used language, it's likely hard to find translators especially on the fly.


LDNR Front.

Shelling of Donetsk continues, and now apparently with cluster-munitions (second link).


Rebel D-20s firing on Soledar.


Rebel D-20s firing on Avdeevka.


Destroyed technical, allegedly Ukrainian, in Peski.


Ukrainian BTR-80 burning near Peski. Note the checkpoint under the bridge, it looks a lot like a position that we saw getting hit from the Russian side before.


Apparently the destruction of a group of tanks, allegedly Ukrainian, carried out by the LNR 10th Bde.


Battle damage in Alchevsk, presumably a Ukrainian strike.


Russian Kamaz-chassis Grads firing near Donetsk.


Footage of the rebel-held areas of Peski.


Russian and rebel forces near Artemovsk/Bakhmut.


Rebel positions on the heights near Artemovsk/Bakhmut.

.

55th Motor-Rifles near Seversk.


Ukrainian troops have apparently been seen withdrawing from positions in Peski and Avdeevka. This isn't in principle surprising, but what's surprising is that the footage shows armored columns moving around with apparently impunity. This suggests critical gaps in Russian UAV coverage.


Mineclearing efforts continue in Donetsk.


Mineclearing efforts continue in Mariupol' too.


Russian government officials met with local residents in Mariupol' and promised restored water and power to the city by September 15th. On the one hand this seems optimistic. On the other hand I believe most of the population left, so presumably you would only need to restore it to a few areas where most of the population is, and move all the remaining people into those areas.


Russia.


It appears at least one Serna landing boat that was hit in operations around Zmeiniy, survived and is being repaired.


Misc.

Russian Orlan-10 operations, location and context unclear.


Russian forces attempted to send a Kamaz full of explosives and artillery shells with a lit fuse towards Ukrainian positions, but it allegedly hit a landmine.


Ukraine apparently acquired 118 new UAVs as part of the Army of Drones program. This includes 20 Warmates, 20 Fly Eyes, and 78 DJI Matrice.


Ukrainian L-119s, location and context unclear.


Russian forces show off a RPO variant, location and context unclear. Note, while in principle thermobaric rockets have been put to good use by Russian troops in the past, this actually highlights one of the problems of the Russian armed forces. There's no reason they couldn't have one rocketlauncher that fires RPGs, thermobarics, and even HE-FRAG. Instead there's RPG-7s in most units, but RPOs in others, with unique munitions for each. At least with rocketlaunchers this isn't that bad. For ATGMs however the Land Forces currently use the Konkurs, Metis, Kornet, Khrizantema, and even Ataka (BMPTs).


Amnesty International released a report where they have criticized Ukrainian forces for positioning military assets near civilians.


NATO/EU.


We have reports that Macedonia will be handing over 4 Su-25s to Ukraine.


Recently delivered Mi-24Vs and Mi-17V5s in Ukraine.

 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
ISW Updates.
These are deliberately posted without comment in order for members to reach their own conclusions.

Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment
August 13, 8pm ET

Main Points.
  • Ukrainian forces are continuing efforts to disrupt Russian ground lines of communication (GLOCs) that support Russian forces on the right bank of the Dnipro River.
  • Russian forces may be reprioritizing efforts in northeastern Donetsk Oblast in order to draw Ukrainian attention away from the Southern Axis.
  • Russian forces conducted limited ground attacks northwest of Slovyansk, east of Siversk, and south and east of Bakhmut.
  • Russian forces conducted a limited ground assault north of Kharkiv City.
  • Russian and Ukrainian authorities accused each other of shelling the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant.
  • Russian authorities are failing to pay Russian reservists and members of volunteer units for service in Ukraine.
  • Russian-backed occupation authorities are likely dealing with internal challenges that are complicating efforts to administer occupation regimes and institute restoration projects in decimated areas of Donbas.



Click here to see ISW's interactive map of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. This map is updated daily alongside the static maps present in this report.

Ukrainian forces are continuing efforts to disrupt Russian ground lines of communication (GLOCs) that support Russian forces on the right bank of the Dnipro River.
Ukrainian forces struck the bridge on the Kakhovka Hydroelectric Power Plant (HPP) dam again on August 13, reportedly rendering the bridge unusable by heavy vehicles.[1] Ukraine’s Southern Operational Command had previously reported on August 10 that the Kakhovka HPP dam bridge was unfit for use.[2] The Kakhovka bridge was the only road bridge Russian forces could use following Ukrainian forces’ successful efforts to put the Antonivsky road bridge out of commission. The UK Defense Ministry has claimed that Russian forces now have no bridges usable to bring heavy equipment or supplies over the Dnipro River in Kherson Oblast and must rely mainly on the pontoon ferry they have established near the Antonivsky road bridge.[3] ISW cannot confirm at this time whether Russian forces can use the Antonivsky rail bridge to resupply forces on the right bank of the Dnipro River.

Russian forces cannot support mechanized operations at scale without a reliable GLOC. Bringing ammunition, fuel, and heavy equipment sufficient for offensive or even large-scale defensive operations across pontoon ferries or by air is impractical if not impossible. If Ukrainian forces have disrupted all three bridges and can prevent the Russians from restoring any of them to usability for a protracted period then Russian forces on the west bank of the Dnipro will likely lose the ability to defend themselves against even limited Ukrainian counterattacks.

Indicators of degraded Russian supplies resulting from the disruption of Russian GLOCs over the Dnipro River would include: observed fuel and ammunition shortages among Russian forces in western Kherson Oblast; abandoned Russian vehicles; decreased intensity and, finally, cessation of Russian ground assaults and artillery attacks; possibly increased instances of Russian looting; increased reports from Russian soldiers about supply shortfalls; increased numbers of Russian prisoners of war taken by Ukrainian forces; and an observed absence of new heavy machinery transported to western Kherson. Such indicators could take days or weeks to observe depending on how much Russian forces have been able to stockpile supplies on the west bank of the Dnipro and how successful Ukrainian forces are at finding and destroying those stockpiles while keeping the bridges inoperable.

Ukrainian Mykolaiv Oblast Head Vitaly Kim reported that unspecified Russian military command elements left upper Kherson Oblast and relocated to the left bank of the Dnipro River, suggesting that the Russian military leadership is concerned about being trapped on the wrong side of the river.[4] Ukrainian Advisor to the Minister of Internal Affairs Rostislav Smirnov also stated that Russia has deployed 90% of its air assault forces (presumably 90% of those deployed in Ukraine) to unspecified locations in southern Ukraine to augment Russian defenses or possibly prepare for Russian counteroffensives.[5] It is unclear whether the Russian airborne units Smirnov mentioned are concentrated exclusively in Kherson Oblast or also deployed near Zaporizhia. Elements of the Russian 7th Airborne Division are known to be operating in Kherson Oblast as of at least August 10.[6] The concentration of Russian Airborne Forces in western Kherson Oblast could indicate Russian efforts to use forces to defend against a Ukrainian counteroffensive that they are more likely to be able to exfiltrate by air if they are unable to hold the Ukrainians back or re-establish their GLOCs. Airborne forces are easier to move by aircraft than regular mechanized forces, of course, although the Russians could find it challenging and very risky to try to move forces by air given Ukrainian attacks on airfields in Kherson Oblast and Russian failure to secure air superiority.

Russian forces may be reprioritizing advances in northeastern Donetsk Oblast in order to draw attention from Ukrainian counteroffensive actions in Southern Ukraine. Russian forces had seemingly scaled back offensive actions east of Siversk and conducted sporadic and limited ground attacks while relying heavily on artillery barrages of surrounding settlements since August 6.[7] However, since August 11, Russian forces have increased the number of limited ground attacks in the Siversk area.[8] These attacks, along with continued assaults in the direction of Bakhmut, may constitute an effort to draw Ukrainian materiel and personnel to the Bakhmut-Siversk line in northeastern Donetsk Oblast in order to detract Ukraine’s attention from critical areas in the South, where Ukrainian troops have been conducting effective counterattacks and may be setting conditions to launch a counteroffensive.[9] Russian forces may hope to shift both tactical and rhetorical focus away from the south in order to alleviate pressure on their own operations along the Southern Axis. ISW will continue to monitor the situation around Siversk.

Full article: Institute for the Study of War
The pdf can be downloaded here.
 

STURM

Well-Known Member
Amnesty International released a report where they have criticized Ukrainian forces for positioning military assets near civilians.
Amnesty International came under flak for its report. Zelensky accused it of parroting Russia.
 
Top