personaldesas
Active Member
It would certainly be typical for this war if, at some point, a new effective anti-drone measure were introduced and the way combat works got reshuffled once again.
The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #14,042
I suspect that Russia can't solve the technological problems required for this, at least not for a drone-defense station that can be readily mounted on individual vehicles. I think the first such systems will come from technology leaders, possibly Israel, China, or the US. But I might be wrong. I think it's very unlikely Ukraine will solve the problem, but it is possible that a western defense company working with Ukrainian partners comes up with the solution. Although we did see a fairly small drone defense station mounted on top of a Spartacus MRAP as part of the recent Russian tests of anti-drone systems. It seems it wasn't selected for purchase, instead the (in my opinion deeply flawed) Zubr quad-MMG trailer is being procured.
EDIT: On the Seversk front Russian forces are now halfway to Nikolaevka, the next town over. It's essentially the last locale before Slavyansk itself, though not quite a suburb of it. Also important to note here is that the southern shore of the Severskiy Donetsk river tends to be taller than the northern shore which is why we have seen a pattern of Russian forces advancing along the southern shore, and advances north of it following. This means continuing Russian advances here are not only heading straight for Slavyansk, but are also threatening Krasniy Liman by enabling additional Russian gains in the woods south of it. I think it will be a few more months until Russia actually reaches Nikolaevka, but the overall direction of movement is clear and it's another one of those areas where a few advances that individually don't seem to matter much, can add up to an unpleasant development for Ukraine.
All of this is happening as Russia is mopping up the remaining Ukrainian positions north-east of Krasniy Liman and slowly wrapping around the town from the south, west and north-west of Dibrova village. These developments are very much setting the stage for the upcoming battle for Slavyansk likely later this year. I think the big red flag to watch for is the fall of Ray-Aleksandrovka and/or Russian forces reaching Nikolaevka. It's possible they will do the second before they do the first, because advancing along the high ground north of Ray-Aleksandrovka they could reach that far, especially with support from the north shore of the river. But it's also possible they will take Ray-Aleksandrovka first by a combined effort out of Fedorovka-Drugaya and Reznikovka (by way of Kaleniki).
Last little bit of note, the powerplant in Slavyansk is actually in Nikolaevka, and it's still working despite being only a few kms from the front line. If Ukraine intends to evacuate the equipment from the plant, they're running out of time to do so.
Last edited:
Beltrami2005
Member
I believe the most effective protection against small drones at the moment are nets, such "passive systems" at least protect expensive logistic and infrastructure
rsemmes
Active Member
L'issue de la guerre avec la Russie était toujours incertaine, mais que l'Ukraine n'était pas en train de la perdre.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said his country is not losing its war against Russia, has taken hundreds of square kilometres in a new counteroffensive and that European troops should deploy right on the frontline after any ceasefire. The Ukrainian president told Agence France-Presse ahead of the war’s fourth anniversary on 24 February: “You can’t say that we’re losing the war. Honestly, we’re definitely not losing it, definitely. The question is whether we will win.”
“I won’t go into too many details,” Zelenskyy told AFP of the advances, “but today I can congratulate our army first and foremost – all the defence forces – because as of today, 300 [square] kilometres have been liberated.” He did not say over what timeframe and the claim could not be verified.
...
The Hungarian prime minister, Viktor Orbán, has threatened to veto the EU’s €90bn ($106bn) loan to Ukraine unless Kyiv restores Russian oil deliveries through a pipeline on its territory.
www.theguardian.com
My highlighting.
A vetoed (almost certainly not) loan, money that Zelenski does not have. Ukraine has lost Primorske twice already, it is uncertain that it will be able to hold it this time. When you don't have the money to fight the war, you have to be creative about what is "not losing" and about what is the definition of "counteroffensive".
Even if he is demanding NATO troops again, at least, he didn't say that the Earth is flat.
Edit
The infantry has been fighting, under artillery fire, in the Arctic, the desert, the jungle and in the mountains. It will keep fighting under drone attacks, it's just a question of how many resources and replacements you need to keep them fighting. And money.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said his country is not losing its war against Russia, has taken hundreds of square kilometres in a new counteroffensive and that European troops should deploy right on the frontline after any ceasefire. The Ukrainian president told Agence France-Presse ahead of the war’s fourth anniversary on 24 February: “You can’t say that we’re losing the war. Honestly, we’re definitely not losing it, definitely. The question is whether we will win.”
“I won’t go into too many details,” Zelenskyy told AFP of the advances, “but today I can congratulate our army first and foremost – all the defence forces – because as of today, 300 [square] kilometres have been liberated.” He did not say over what timeframe and the claim could not be verified.
...
The Hungarian prime minister, Viktor Orbán, has threatened to veto the EU’s €90bn ($106bn) loan to Ukraine unless Kyiv restores Russian oil deliveries through a pipeline on its territory.
Ukraine war briefing: Hungary threatens to block €90bn EU loan to Kyiv in oil row
Viktor Orbán demands Ukraine reopen Druzhba pipeline for Russian deliveries; Zelenskyy says Ukraine is not losing the war. What we know on day 1,459
www.theguardian.com
A vetoed (almost certainly not) loan, money that Zelenski does not have. Ukraine has lost Primorske twice already, it is uncertain that it will be able to hold it this time. When you don't have the money to fight the war, you have to be creative about what is "not losing" and about what is the definition of "counteroffensive".
Even if he is demanding NATO troops again, at least, he didn't say that the Earth is flat.
Edit
The infantry has been fighting, under artillery fire, in the Arctic, the desert, the jungle and in the mountains. It will keep fighting under drone attacks, it's just a question of how many resources and replacements you need to keep them fighting. And money.
Last edited:
Beltrami2005
Member
L'issue de la guerre avec la Russie était toujours incertaine, mais que l'Ukraine n'était pas en train de la perdre.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said his country is not losing its war against Russia, has taken hundreds of square kilometres in a new counteroffensive and that European troops should deploy right on the frontline after any ceasefire. The Ukrainian president told Agence France-Presse ahead of the war’s fourth anniversary on 24 February: “You can’t say that we’re losing the war. Honestly, we’re definitely not losing it, definitely. The question is whether we will win.”
“I won’t go into too many details,” Zelenskyy told AFP of the advances, “but today I can congratulate our army first and foremost – all the defence forces – because as of today, 300 [square] kilometres have been liberated.” He did not say over what timeframe and the claim could not be verified.
...
The Hungarian prime minister, Viktor Orbán, has threatened to veto the EU’s €90bn ($106bn) loan to Ukraine unless Kyiv restores Russian oil deliveries through a pipeline on its territory.
My highlighting.Ukraine war briefing: Hungary threatens to block €90bn EU loan to Kyiv in oil row
Viktor Orbán demands Ukraine reopen Druzhba pipeline for Russian deliveries; Zelenskyy says Ukraine is not losing the war. What we know on day 1,459
A vetoed (almost certainly not) loan, money that Zelenski does not have. Ukraine has lost Primorske twice already, it is uncertain that it will be able to hold it this time. When you don't have the money to fight the war, you have to be creative about what is "not losing" and about what is the definition of "counteroffensive".
Even if he is demanding NATO troops again, at least, he didn't say that the Earth is flat.
Edit
The infantry has been fighting, under artillery fire, in the Arctic, the desert, the jungle and in the mountains. It will keep fighting under drone attacks, it's just a question of how many resources and replacements you need to keep them fighting. And money.
Im quite certain our financial backing is far greater than russias. So moneywise Ukraine has no issue
KipPotapych
Well-Known Member
As I once mentioned here, it appears that almost the entire “spectrum” of the British media is on the yellow side. At the same time, The Telegraph has a higher reach than the Financial Times and Daily Mail beats both combined. At least there is still BBC around.
What you are saying is very clear (and was the first time you wrote it). You are also making my point for me though.
Source weighing and sampling is exactly why my list of “following” is exactly the way it is. There is no personalized algorithmic feed here (not directly, anyway) because the only posts in my feed are from those I follow, in order from most recent to oldest. There is no “best/recommended for you” or “who to follow” or whatever nonsense. If there is a post that got into my feed, that is because one of the people I follow made it (including reposts of other content, direct or otherwise) or replied to it. There are no other options to get in. This is the reason I use Twitter to begin with (and because there are still serious people there, though many have left in the past 3-4 years). If some post not made or addressed by someone on my defined list (ie repost/reply) gets in more than once, this is usually due to the fact that it is making the rounds and is one of the “high-virality claims regardless of source quality”.
The validity or how representative the take is is largely irrelevant. These “viral” posts, each and every one of them, have the goal of either marginally adding to the confirmation of a biased view or “muddy the waters”. Those readers who reject the claim outright or after “mulling it over” some do not matter because they are not the target audience.
Source quality and methodology matter greatly, no doubt. In the real world. This is where the “I would be offended” part comes in. “Would be offensive” is the implied suggestion that I lack the ability (worse yet, capacity) to distinguish between the quality and methodology and claim frequency, not the disagreement. In fact, disagreements are welcome and debate is what this is all about.
What I am saying here is that -insert post- adds to the narrative not because it is a great take backed by evidence, but because it is consistent with and extends the narrative that had already been set by the mainstream media, such as Bloomberg, to use the most recent example again. The Telegraph dude just adds the flavour of his outlet to the unsubstantiated claim that had been made by Zelensky, repeated by all major outlets in the world, often citing one another. For example, Bloomberg talking about the 30,000 killed as per UA here and 30,000 and 35,000 here, reposted by the Japan Times here, in case of the former (there is certainly the latter out there as well). The (former) article cites the diarrhea of the UK Def Sec Healey, of course, and so did most, if not all, major outlets worldwide. I cited here the same claims made by various politicians, also cited by various media outlets, be it traditional or social. This is where the narrative is set. A clever use of the social media by the Ukrainians is also a part of the problem. Frankly, I personally have never previously seen such a wide, involved, and intense propaganda campaign in my lifetime.
In the real world, people still talk about Russians fighting with shovels and stealing toilets. And those reports were widespread in the media, including BBC, citing assessments of the UK MoD a few years ago now. The shovel report from the UK MoD I had proved here back in the day to be false and based on, literally, google translate of some marginal, supposedly, Russian outlet citing some, supposedly, Russian soldier. The marginal outlet was probably created by the Ukrainians to begin with, but that does not really matter. I can probably find my post discussing it.
So if you are arguing there is no agenda and narrative being set here, I strongly believe you are mistaken.
This is not about everyone or someone in particular being dumb. Smart people can be manipulated into believing ludicrous stuff too by repetition and statements of the highly regarded officials, experts, and “experts”. Furthermore, an average person, just like most people in this world, have no existing base (valid) knowledge about either Russia or Ukraine (most never distinguished between the two prior to 2022 and certainly before 2014). Not many are going to pick up a book (which one to pick up?) and educate themselves, but most will rely on the reports of their elected officials and preferred media. I would also argue that an average person also has no prerequisite skills to verify the reported claims and numbers, aside from getting a second opinion, which, in this case, happens to be the same more often than not (usually citing the same initial source of information). Even less people have any idea about the Russian oil industry, financial system, even political system. You really do not need much to convince anyone around here about anything (but positive content, and I use that word (positive) loosely) regarding Russia. And it is not that Russia is helping.
In other words, individual intelligence has little to do with it. Historical context, accompanied by the current events has much more relevance.
KipPotapych
Well-Known Member
Here is another thought or a variation of one I had already expressed in another thread.
So we have something like Russia Today agency. I don’t have detailed model of their operation and have never really watched/read their stuff with a few exceptions. However, let’s assume they have a political curator and general goals and policies defined regarding the content they produce and broadcast (I do not think this is how it actually works, but let’s assume that this is exactly how it works since it is a general belief anyway). So they broadcast content shaped by the very policy and political curator(s) targeted at the (unsuspecting) audience to shape a narrative and portray the western world in undesirable (to the western world), negative terms, while painting the actions and policies of the Russian Federation as, I don’t know… good? Proper values and justified actions? You can insert anything you want here, really. We call it propaganda and since we do not trust (and rightfully so) in our own people’s mental capacities or general ability to distinguish between reality and imaginary world, or, basically rationally asses the information presented, we ban the outlet (rightfully or not is up for debate). To note here, I have watched a few documentaries made by RT over a decade or so ago for academic purposes (the few exceptions mentioned above) - wrote a couple of papers on the subject - and they were actually all well-made, honest (enough), and so on. The propaganda part was related to the fact that they would concentrate their attention on the worst parts of life in any given place in the west they talked about and later project it as the state of events in that place in general, mainly by omitting anything that is good or even decent. But the content itself was not wrong (they actually received a few prestigious and less so awards for several of the documentaries at the time). I have no idea what they broadcast today, to be fair. I am talking about the time when Larry King just started working for the outlet (haven’t seen a single show of his there, but rather enjoyed his stuff when he was at the CNN - man, were the times different not all that long ago!).
Anyway, you can easily draw a parallel between what I had just written and the (statistically wrong) toilets and septic system in Russia stuff, along with other nasties, cited in the discussion in the past few days. Ain’t no one is getting any awards for that reporting though. Laughing.
So we have an outlet with a goal to basically trash the adversaries (or “partners” what Putin used to call them), the goal defined by the political curators who answer to the political elite or “the man himself”.
Now let’s consider a western outlet, such as Bloomberg, New York Times, BBC, Telegraph, insert any, it doesn’t matter. These are all independent media for the most part. Their independence mainly rests on their freedom of choice for reporting as they do not have any obligations or affiliations (the middle of the pack media); in other words, they do not have a programming they are supposed to adhere to. So what do they report? Well, whatever their journalists bring to the table, provided it passes the legal department and the editor’s desk. These outlets compete with each other and have seats at various government departments’ briefings, sources from various agencies, and so on. They have produced some stellar reports and investigations. At the same time, there are daily reports, such as “according to the UK Ministry of Defence”, “sources at the CIA”, “government officials”, and so on. This stuff is not reported as facts, but the reports from the authorities from the jurisdictions these outlets belong to or their allies, which are naturally interpreted and cited as facts by the (unsuspecting) audience that the very authorities do not trust to be able to distinguish between propaganda and reality, but feel free and justified to make whatever proclamations to set the narrative they think the audience needs to hear in order to have it aligned with the policies these authorities pursue, presumably in the name and interests of the audience. As a result, we have western media reporting, based on the most recent examples, 30,000 dead Russians per month, reliance on North Korean and other foreign troops, upcoming demographic and economic collapse, and so on. None of this is reported because any of the outlets were told to report it by the authorities, but because this is the information the authorities made available to everyone to report. The audience, expecting the reporting agencies to do their due-diligence and factcheck the information they report, but also having an honest faith in the authorities cited, generally believes the reports and takes them as facts for the most part. Especially if the information is reported by a wide range of outlets (call it “everyone”), regardless of the fact that the actual source of the information is one and the same - most of the (unsuspecting) audience is not verse in digging deeper than what is presented in front of it for the aforementioned reasons and general lack of abilities and/or interest.
At the same time, Izvestia and whatever other Russian outlets run numerous articles that cite the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation stating that Ukraine had sustained one and a half million (or whatever the number they report is) irrecoverable losses during the Special Military Operation. Whether they were directed to report it (not really, they just report it because this is the information that was made available) or report it on their own becomes irrelevant. The difference is that most of these outlets cannot say “we looked into the reported numbers and they appear to be ludicrous”, furthermore, “Gerasimov, who made the numbers available to the public, may have gone into a full-retard mode and we are afraid if this is the general belief of the Ministry of Defence and what is being reported to President Putin, appropriate decisions can no longer be made and we are operating in the fairy tale environment that can (and will) have severe consequences on the outcome of the Special Military Operation, as well as long-term consequences for the country and our people”.
Our independent outlets pick up on the latter part (that cannot be reported by Izvestia, et al) citing various officials, military experts, economists, and so on and report that to the (unsuspecting) audience in greatly exaggerated fashion due to the experts and sources from the authorities and intel (while avoiding the numbers cited by the Russians because they are truly ludicrous). The audience had already also believed that Russians are sustaining 30K+ killed personnel monthly. Weeks or months later (usually many months later), one of the outlets publishes a long and rather good article based on their own investigation and informs the audience that the numbers and projections previously cited appear to be unrealistic for several reasons, which are described at great length, citing other official sources named or otherwise. Of course, that takes time to compile and process, time during which the audience got convinced of the former reports being true (they have been bombarded with this stuff daily for weeks or months now), and rejects the current report citing the smell of Russian propaganda, amplified by “expert” opinions of random small-follower, but plenty numerous, accounts on social media that everyone and their grandmas follow as if their lives depended on it. It also takes time for the new information to circulate and it is only one report, while numerous other current (nonsense) reports are in the circulation at the same time.
I am going to stop the storyline here and ask: what is the difference, as far as the end result is concerned, between the two systems of reporting?
End result here is that a great deal of population believes that the Russians are almost neanderthals stealing toilets and advance, at best, 70 metres a day and cannot achieve any goals, even the most minimal ones, while being killed by thousands daily; yet we try to convince our populace that we need to greatly increase our military spending because we are, for whatever reason, surely going to fight these very neanderthals in the near future (as in direct physical confrontation) and risk our washrooms being disassembled for the sake of the septic environment in Russia or risk having to learn to speak Russian altogether. Dissonance aside, imagine the assumed stupidity level that a Russian soldier would pull out a toilet and… -> something happens here that I cannot think of… -> installs it in his home in (glubinka) Russia, while not having a septic system in place to connect it to. All good though in our space because savages do not think but act on instinct that serves no purpose. The leader of the pack is also mad as hell and completely delusional. While the immediate ceasefire is greatly desired because Ukraine needs a breather and get their shit together, they surely are going to win regardless, if not in the next few months, then by the end of the year or definitely in 2027 or the year after. Perhaps, the relatives of the fallen Russian troops will even ship the stolen toilets back in the resulting just (or dignified) settlement and the process of rebuilding of Ukraine.
Then, consider what people in Russia think, where information is tightly controlled. As well as people in Ukraine, where information is also controlled, but not as tightly, yet tight enough. And here we are.
So we have something like Russia Today agency. I don’t have detailed model of their operation and have never really watched/read their stuff with a few exceptions. However, let’s assume they have a political curator and general goals and policies defined regarding the content they produce and broadcast (I do not think this is how it actually works, but let’s assume that this is exactly how it works since it is a general belief anyway). So they broadcast content shaped by the very policy and political curator(s) targeted at the (unsuspecting) audience to shape a narrative and portray the western world in undesirable (to the western world), negative terms, while painting the actions and policies of the Russian Federation as, I don’t know… good? Proper values and justified actions? You can insert anything you want here, really. We call it propaganda and since we do not trust (and rightfully so) in our own people’s mental capacities or general ability to distinguish between reality and imaginary world, or, basically rationally asses the information presented, we ban the outlet (rightfully or not is up for debate). To note here, I have watched a few documentaries made by RT over a decade or so ago for academic purposes (the few exceptions mentioned above) - wrote a couple of papers on the subject - and they were actually all well-made, honest (enough), and so on. The propaganda part was related to the fact that they would concentrate their attention on the worst parts of life in any given place in the west they talked about and later project it as the state of events in that place in general, mainly by omitting anything that is good or even decent. But the content itself was not wrong (they actually received a few prestigious and less so awards for several of the documentaries at the time). I have no idea what they broadcast today, to be fair. I am talking about the time when Larry King just started working for the outlet (haven’t seen a single show of his there, but rather enjoyed his stuff when he was at the CNN - man, were the times different not all that long ago!).
Anyway, you can easily draw a parallel between what I had just written and the (statistically wrong) toilets and septic system in Russia stuff, along with other nasties, cited in the discussion in the past few days. Ain’t no one is getting any awards for that reporting though. Laughing.
So we have an outlet with a goal to basically trash the adversaries (or “partners” what Putin used to call them), the goal defined by the political curators who answer to the political elite or “the man himself”.
Now let’s consider a western outlet, such as Bloomberg, New York Times, BBC, Telegraph, insert any, it doesn’t matter. These are all independent media for the most part. Their independence mainly rests on their freedom of choice for reporting as they do not have any obligations or affiliations (the middle of the pack media); in other words, they do not have a programming they are supposed to adhere to. So what do they report? Well, whatever their journalists bring to the table, provided it passes the legal department and the editor’s desk. These outlets compete with each other and have seats at various government departments’ briefings, sources from various agencies, and so on. They have produced some stellar reports and investigations. At the same time, there are daily reports, such as “according to the UK Ministry of Defence”, “sources at the CIA”, “government officials”, and so on. This stuff is not reported as facts, but the reports from the authorities from the jurisdictions these outlets belong to or their allies, which are naturally interpreted and cited as facts by the (unsuspecting) audience that the very authorities do not trust to be able to distinguish between propaganda and reality, but feel free and justified to make whatever proclamations to set the narrative they think the audience needs to hear in order to have it aligned with the policies these authorities pursue, presumably in the name and interests of the audience. As a result, we have western media reporting, based on the most recent examples, 30,000 dead Russians per month, reliance on North Korean and other foreign troops, upcoming demographic and economic collapse, and so on. None of this is reported because any of the outlets were told to report it by the authorities, but because this is the information the authorities made available to everyone to report. The audience, expecting the reporting agencies to do their due-diligence and factcheck the information they report, but also having an honest faith in the authorities cited, generally believes the reports and takes them as facts for the most part. Especially if the information is reported by a wide range of outlets (call it “everyone”), regardless of the fact that the actual source of the information is one and the same - most of the (unsuspecting) audience is not verse in digging deeper than what is presented in front of it for the aforementioned reasons and general lack of abilities and/or interest.
At the same time, Izvestia and whatever other Russian outlets run numerous articles that cite the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation stating that Ukraine had sustained one and a half million (or whatever the number they report is) irrecoverable losses during the Special Military Operation. Whether they were directed to report it (not really, they just report it because this is the information that was made available) or report it on their own becomes irrelevant. The difference is that most of these outlets cannot say “we looked into the reported numbers and they appear to be ludicrous”, furthermore, “Gerasimov, who made the numbers available to the public, may have gone into a full-retard mode and we are afraid if this is the general belief of the Ministry of Defence and what is being reported to President Putin, appropriate decisions can no longer be made and we are operating in the fairy tale environment that can (and will) have severe consequences on the outcome of the Special Military Operation, as well as long-term consequences for the country and our people”.
Our independent outlets pick up on the latter part (that cannot be reported by Izvestia, et al) citing various officials, military experts, economists, and so on and report that to the (unsuspecting) audience in greatly exaggerated fashion due to the experts and sources from the authorities and intel (while avoiding the numbers cited by the Russians because they are truly ludicrous). The audience had already also believed that Russians are sustaining 30K+ killed personnel monthly. Weeks or months later (usually many months later), one of the outlets publishes a long and rather good article based on their own investigation and informs the audience that the numbers and projections previously cited appear to be unrealistic for several reasons, which are described at great length, citing other official sources named or otherwise. Of course, that takes time to compile and process, time during which the audience got convinced of the former reports being true (they have been bombarded with this stuff daily for weeks or months now), and rejects the current report citing the smell of Russian propaganda, amplified by “expert” opinions of random small-follower, but plenty numerous, accounts on social media that everyone and their grandmas follow as if their lives depended on it. It also takes time for the new information to circulate and it is only one report, while numerous other current (nonsense) reports are in the circulation at the same time.
I am going to stop the storyline here and ask: what is the difference, as far as the end result is concerned, between the two systems of reporting?
End result here is that a great deal of population believes that the Russians are almost neanderthals stealing toilets and advance, at best, 70 metres a day and cannot achieve any goals, even the most minimal ones, while being killed by thousands daily; yet we try to convince our populace that we need to greatly increase our military spending because we are, for whatever reason, surely going to fight these very neanderthals in the near future (as in direct physical confrontation) and risk our washrooms being disassembled for the sake of the septic environment in Russia or risk having to learn to speak Russian altogether. Dissonance aside, imagine the assumed stupidity level that a Russian soldier would pull out a toilet and… -> something happens here that I cannot think of… -> installs it in his home in (glubinka) Russia, while not having a septic system in place to connect it to. All good though in our space because savages do not think but act on instinct that serves no purpose. The leader of the pack is also mad as hell and completely delusional. While the immediate ceasefire is greatly desired because Ukraine needs a breather and get their shit together, they surely are going to win regardless, if not in the next few months, then by the end of the year or definitely in 2027 or the year after. Perhaps, the relatives of the fallen Russian troops will even ship the stolen toilets back in the resulting just (or dignified) settlement and the process of rebuilding of Ukraine.
Then, consider what people in Russia think, where information is tightly controlled. As well as people in Ukraine, where information is also controlled, but not as tightly, yet tight enough. And here we are.
Beltrami2005
Member
Russians doing russian things...
A Russian general promoted by Putin sent his wife a photo of severed ears taken from Ukrainian POWs. She said they reminded her of beer snacks.
I have high trust in the ukrainian secret service to deal with this savage and his associates.
A Russian general promoted by Putin sent his wife a photo of severed ears taken from Ukrainian POWs. She said they reminded her of beer snacks.
I have high trust in the ukrainian secret service to deal with this savage and his associates.
I think you should make your texts even longer and with less space that its even harder to read.
rsemmes
Active Member
"No issue" meaning not having 40% of the money it's planning to spend. Financial backing (the money mum gives you) is not the same as the money you have (your mum's salary).
(I think that we all know that you have a problem with reading, in general, not just KipPotapych.)
About the ears, a Vietnam practice, by US soldiers. (Not the first time in History.) You should try reading about the Pentagon Papers to learn how a government works; there are some (videos) documentaries too.
I am not quite sure how neutral Turkey is, or this website, but this is not the usual analysis we get in western media; it is citing an US (Defense Intelligence Agency) source. (I am quoting the article, not the source.)
Non-western democracies media tend to be less biased; it's not their bacon.
Years of unrelenting, high-intensity conflict have severely exhausted the Ukrainian armed forces. It notes that Kyiv’s military remains inadequately prepared to counter the tactical offensives launched by Russian units.
Russian forces are increasingly proficient in the deployment of “shturm” (assault) groups to sustain offensive momentum.
“Ukraine is experiencing a decline in its ability to maintain military operations due to a shrinking pool of draft-eligible men, difficulties in training processes, and a persistent dependence on Western aid,” the report concludes. Furthermore, the document points to a continuous instability in the supply of missiles required for Ukraine’s air defense systems.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy stated in January that delays in European payments had prevented the timely delivery of US-manufactured air defense missiles. Zelenskyy attributed recent nationwide power outages to these logistical failures by European partners.
Pentagon report warns Russian military maintains strategic edge as Ukraine exhaustion grows
The Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) has concluded that Russian military forces maintained a general advantage over the Ukrainian army across critical combat fronts through the end of 2025. The assessment, detailed in a Special Inspector General report to Congress on Operation...
harici.com.tr
It is those "Europeans partners" fault that he is not losing the war, then.
Edit
From the source
USEUCOM reported that the Russian Intelligence and Security Services and their proxies continued to represent a significant hybrid threat in Europe. Russia and its proxies engage in subversion, disinformation, cyber operations, and sabotage to advance Russian foreign policy objectives and protect vital economic interests.
The same "audacious" operations, killing generals, that Ukraine carries out, right? Russia is targeting the means of Ukraine's defence.
By offering contracts of up to $3,000 per month, Ukraine aims to bolster this total by recruiting several thousand contract soldiers from abroad. That's why theguardian has published so many times that Ukraine depends on foreign fighters.
North Korea continued to transfer ammunition to Russia, in total sending up to 9 million artillery rounds since beginning transfers in 2023.
Even if not of the highest quality... How many shells have we provided?
Ukrainian Foreign Intelligence Service accused China of supplying Russian factories with goods that could be used for military purposes.
China is supplying Ukraine too.
Last edited:
Beltrami2005
Member
Looks like Ukraine in last 2 weeks really freed 300km² from russians. Also appears that russias front troops get cannibalized by the star link shutdown"No issue" meaning not having 40% of the money it's planning to spend. Financial backing (the money mum gives you) is not the same as the money you have (your mum's salary).
(I think that we all know that you have a problem with reading, in general, not just KipPotapych.)
About the ears, a Vietnam practice, by US soldiers. (Not the first time in History.) You should try reading about the Pentagon Papers to learn how a government works; there are some (videos) documentaries too.
I am not quite sure how neutral Turkey is, or this website, but this is not the usual analysis we get in western media; it is citing an US (Defense Intelligence Agency) source. (I am quoting the article, not the source.)
Non-western democracies media tend to be less biased; it's not their bacon.
Years of unrelenting, high-intensity conflict have severely exhausted the Ukrainian armed forces. It notes that Kyiv’s military remains inadequately prepared to counter the tactical offensives launched by Russian units.
Russian forces are increasingly proficient in the deployment of “shturm” (assault) groups to sustain offensive momentum.
“Ukraine is experiencing a decline in its ability to maintain military operations due to a shrinking pool of draft-eligible men, difficulties in training processes, and a persistent dependence on Western aid,” the report concludes. Furthermore, the document points to a continuous instability in the supply of missiles required for Ukraine’s air defense systems.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy stated in January that delays in European payments had prevented the timely delivery of US-manufactured air defense missiles. Zelenskyy attributed recent nationwide power outages to these logistical failures by European partners.
Pentagon report warns Russian military maintains strategic edge as Ukraine exhaustion grows
The Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) has concluded that Russian military forces maintained a general advantage over the Ukrainian army across critical combat fronts through the end of 2025. The assessment, detailed in a Special Inspector General report to Congress on Operation...
It is those "Europeans partners" fault that he is not losing the war, then.
Edit
From the source
USEUCOM reported that the Russian Intelligence and Security Services and their proxies continued to represent a significant hybrid threat in Europe. Russia and its proxies engage in subversion, disinformation, cyber operations, and sabotage to advance Russian foreign policy objectives and protect vital economic interests.
The same "audacious" operations, killing generals, that Ukraine carries out, right? Russia is targeting the means of Ukraine's defence.
By offering contracts of up to $3,000 per month, Ukraine aims to bolster this total by recruiting several thousand contract soldiers from abroad. That's why theguardian has published so many times that Ukraine depends on foreign fighters.
North Korea continued to transfer ammunition to Russia, in total sending up to 9 million artillery rounds since beginning transfers in 2023.
Even if not of the highest quality... How many shells have we provided?
Ukrainian Foreign Intelligence Service accused China of supplying Russian factories with goods that could be used for military purposes.
China is supplying Ukraine too.
PachkaSigaret
Member
Interesting video touring Russia's 36th Motorized Rifle Brigade's command post. I'd like to highlight the use of Discord on the various screens. Another thing I would like to point out is the use of Windows. Since the beginning of the war, all of the command post tours I have seen have featured Windows rather than Linux, even though Russia has invested heavily in its own Linux distribution for military and government use.
Рогаткин Live
Рогаткин Live
KipPotapych
Well-Known Member
^ I saw bits of that on X and it looks quite impressive. Windows vs Linux, whatever works is going to be used unless mandated otherwise. Ban on the use of Telegram looks like has been overturned due to enough expressed frustration. One of the things that actually seems to work in the RU military so far.
Thinking that Ukraine “liberated” or “captured” over 300 sq km in the last two weeks is, in my opinion, being quite disconnected from what has really happened (and/or being entirely consumed by the UA propaganda (see my posts above)). Examples of what had likely happened are to follow.
- This map is in (mostly) French, but is quite easy to follow and basically shows the events that took place (open it in high resolution and read the author’s comments):
Source: https://x.com/Pouletvolant3/status/2025668501902344283
- This post on X: https://x.com/DelwinStrategy/status/2025144567679324410
- This post: https://x.com/J_JHelin/status/2025273876855267708
I know, Russian propaganda and all. One thing in this case though is that the Russian propaganda here, in a way, supports the official Ukrainian claims (via mostly optimistic Russian advances and control). What had really happened, as I see it, things have been really getting out of control in the area for Ukraine. Capture of and consolidation in Turnavate by the Russian forces would be another nearly catastrophic (strong word that I would like to avoid, but) setback for Ukraine. This map that includes main fortifications (only main at this scale) clearly shows why this is the case:
You can see a part of the smaller picture (trenches and whatnot) on the first map I referenced in this post. The author of the map above is the dude with the handle of Playfra on X.
I think it was an action forced on Ukrainians by the Russian infiltrations and potential occupation (consolidation). The loss of Starlink comms by Russia, in my opinion, was not the reason behind the push, but a lucky, for the lack of a better word, coincidence that worked out in the Ukrainian favour. The lucky coincidence can also be attributed to the timing of the request by Ukraine to shut down the connection in order to assist the counteraction and minimize the losses rather than to induce it. The reaction was absolutely necessary due to the nature of the potential Russian advance and further vector of attack. Very similar to the Dobropilla (Pokrovsk direction, is that what it still called?) counteroffensive in this regard. Basically front stabilization efforts: inaction would be much more costly later. Another similarity between this and Dobropilla situation is Russian overextension. It appears to me the actions of the Russians become more and more… not really sure what the right word is here… risky? flexible? Not sure. What seems to be a certainty, I think, is the availability of space to operate. Infiltration distance seems to span longer and longer from the line if contact, if one can be defined at the present time. Another interesting map on this subject (from Playfra as well):
In red and blue are assumed Russian and Ukrainian positions, respectively, in the area.
Whether this will develop into something bigger is questionable at this point. Highly unlikely, in my opinion. The front will be stabilized for the time being and then the grind will begin and/or continue as it did in Dobropilla sector earlier.
Anyway, “liberation” of some three hundred square kilometres is nonsense and feed for the lemmings. To each their own though. Some (with a will and, more importantly, abilities to read longer posts) have to remember me questioning a couple of weeks ago all this painting in red in the area of Ternuvate.
A comment by Kofman on one of the threads I cited abive:
In the next post, I am going to do some copy pasting (because it probably won’t fit into this one) from a thread by a UA soldier (translated from Ukrainian by Grok), without commentary, but it also explains well why some positions are more important than others, as well as the general problem facing the Ukrainians and the advantage the Russians enjoy. The original post is here: https://x.com/solonko1648/status/2025520433865363651
Thinking that Ukraine “liberated” or “captured” over 300 sq km in the last two weeks is, in my opinion, being quite disconnected from what has really happened (and/or being entirely consumed by the UA propaganda (see my posts above)). Examples of what had likely happened are to follow.
- This map is in (mostly) French, but is quite easy to follow and basically shows the events that took place (open it in high resolution and read the author’s comments):
Source: https://x.com/Pouletvolant3/status/2025668501902344283
- This post on X: https://x.com/DelwinStrategy/status/2025144567679324410
- This post: https://x.com/J_JHelin/status/2025273876855267708
I know, Russian propaganda and all. One thing in this case though is that the Russian propaganda here, in a way, supports the official Ukrainian claims (via mostly optimistic Russian advances and control). What had really happened, as I see it, things have been really getting out of control in the area for Ukraine. Capture of and consolidation in Turnavate by the Russian forces would be another nearly catastrophic (strong word that I would like to avoid, but) setback for Ukraine. This map that includes main fortifications (only main at this scale) clearly shows why this is the case:
You can see a part of the smaller picture (trenches and whatnot) on the first map I referenced in this post. The author of the map above is the dude with the handle of Playfra on X.
I think it was an action forced on Ukrainians by the Russian infiltrations and potential occupation (consolidation). The loss of Starlink comms by Russia, in my opinion, was not the reason behind the push, but a lucky, for the lack of a better word, coincidence that worked out in the Ukrainian favour. The lucky coincidence can also be attributed to the timing of the request by Ukraine to shut down the connection in order to assist the counteraction and minimize the losses rather than to induce it. The reaction was absolutely necessary due to the nature of the potential Russian advance and further vector of attack. Very similar to the Dobropilla (Pokrovsk direction, is that what it still called?) counteroffensive in this regard. Basically front stabilization efforts: inaction would be much more costly later. Another similarity between this and Dobropilla situation is Russian overextension. It appears to me the actions of the Russians become more and more… not really sure what the right word is here… risky? flexible? Not sure. What seems to be a certainty, I think, is the availability of space to operate. Infiltration distance seems to span longer and longer from the line if contact, if one can be defined at the present time. Another interesting map on this subject (from Playfra as well):
In red and blue are assumed Russian and Ukrainian positions, respectively, in the area.
Whether this will develop into something bigger is questionable at this point. Highly unlikely, in my opinion. The front will be stabilized for the time being and then the grind will begin and/or continue as it did in Dobropilla sector earlier.
Anyway, “liberation” of some three hundred square kilometres is nonsense and feed for the lemmings. To each their own though. Some (with a will and, more importantly, abilities to read longer posts) have to remember me questioning a couple of weeks ago all this painting in red in the area of Ternuvate.
A comment by Kofman on one of the threads I cited abive:
In the next post, I am going to do some copy pasting (because it probably won’t fit into this one) from a thread by a UA soldier (translated from Ukrainian by Grok), without commentary, but it also explains well why some positions are more important than others, as well as the general problem facing the Ukrainians and the advantage the Russians enjoy. The original post is here: https://x.com/solonko1648/status/2025520433865363651
KipPotapych
Well-Known Member
A short story about yet another of the million factors (or, more precisely, a combination of several circumstances) that affect the battles near Pokrovsk. Also about how important it is to have a full range of weapons in the required quantities to solve all the problems that are raining down on our heads. 1/
The Russians' possession of a large number of heavy aerial bombs, missiles, and drones allows them to gradually erode our advantage, which we hold while defending within the confines of large industrial facilities and dense urban development, in contrast to the enemy, who is forced to advance, at best, through a network of tree lines and ravines. 2/
As soon as the enemy identifies the location of infantry or drone crews in built-up areas, bombs immediately fly there in such quantities that they either destroy us or make operations in such places impossible, combined with measures to cut off logistics. Therefore, sometimes the decision to try to "get lost" and camouflage in forest strips at least for a season of "greenery" seems like a solution for many. 3/
In contrast, when the Russians take control of some industrial facility (a coke plant, a mine, etc.), it becomes an almost unconditional advantage for them. We lack the quantity of aviation bombs and aircraft that could drop them on the enemy’s heads 24/7, wherever they might be, and not fear to compensate for inaccuracy with volume and density. This, on the contrary, makes it very convenient for the Russians to take cover on industrial facilities and in areas of dense urban development. 4/
That is precisely why the loss of every city or town, every mine or factory, multiplies our problems many times over. One vivid example was Ocheretyne. When we were holding the defense there, particularly in the central part of the town where there was a cluster of apartment buildings and railway structures, it turned out to be extremely difficult for us due to the sheer volume of fire raining down on that area. 5/
In contrast, when the Russians occupied the village, they immediately dragged a huge amount of various equipment there. From electronic warfare systems and radar stations to artillery and drone operators. It also became a logistics base. It was difficult to do anything significant about this buildup without the ability to massively level the enemy to the ground with heavy weaponry. 6/
Back then, we managed to pinpoint and take out hidden armor, guns, and motorcyclists on the central streets there, but globally, we couldn't break anything in that situation. On the territory that the Russians seized from that moment on, there’s a whole string of towns and villages, as well as industrial sites with concrete structures, the number of which is frankly hard to count. 7/
Here's an example of Myrnohrad. The map below shows the mines in the city and near it. This is still without taking into account the closed mines in the north of the city (lbz is roughly sketched based on deep state for understandable reasons). Here you see the following object:
Mine 5/6 - Myrnohrad
Krasnolimanska - Rodinske
Kapitalna - Myrnohrad
Tsentralna - Myrnohrad
Dimitrova - Myrnohrad 8/
If a mine or factory has a developed network of capital buildings with underground shelters, the Russians really love dragging their UAV crews there. Working against them with the same drones or even regular artillery is a difficult task. You need those same hundreds of KABs that the Russians drop on us. 9/
The map does not yet show potential concentration areas in dense multi-apartment residential development, which is also used for both drone operators and other needs, including logistical ones. In such a situation, it is logical that enemy pilots are largely being pulled from tree lines into cities or to mines, where there are a million ways to hide. 10/
Since the enemy is conducting offensive, rather than defensive, operations, the number of movements and the chances of demasking are higher for them if they operate in unurbanized terrain. Therefore, the imbalance in access to certain types of weaponry allows the Russians to use control over built-up areas as a significant advantage. And we are already forced to adapt to the circumstances. 11/
Thank you for your attention You can subscribe here:
http://t.me/silukr/793
http://send.monobank.ua/jar/4mxJwUTytv PayPal - [email protected]
The Russians' possession of a large number of heavy aerial bombs, missiles, and drones allows them to gradually erode our advantage, which we hold while defending within the confines of large industrial facilities and dense urban development, in contrast to the enemy, who is forced to advance, at best, through a network of tree lines and ravines. 2/
As soon as the enemy identifies the location of infantry or drone crews in built-up areas, bombs immediately fly there in such quantities that they either destroy us or make operations in such places impossible, combined with measures to cut off logistics. Therefore, sometimes the decision to try to "get lost" and camouflage in forest strips at least for a season of "greenery" seems like a solution for many. 3/
In contrast, when the Russians take control of some industrial facility (a coke plant, a mine, etc.), it becomes an almost unconditional advantage for them. We lack the quantity of aviation bombs and aircraft that could drop them on the enemy’s heads 24/7, wherever they might be, and not fear to compensate for inaccuracy with volume and density. This, on the contrary, makes it very convenient for the Russians to take cover on industrial facilities and in areas of dense urban development. 4/
That is precisely why the loss of every city or town, every mine or factory, multiplies our problems many times over. One vivid example was Ocheretyne. When we were holding the defense there, particularly in the central part of the town where there was a cluster of apartment buildings and railway structures, it turned out to be extremely difficult for us due to the sheer volume of fire raining down on that area. 5/
In contrast, when the Russians occupied the village, they immediately dragged a huge amount of various equipment there. From electronic warfare systems and radar stations to artillery and drone operators. It also became a logistics base. It was difficult to do anything significant about this buildup without the ability to massively level the enemy to the ground with heavy weaponry. 6/
Back then, we managed to pinpoint and take out hidden armor, guns, and motorcyclists on the central streets there, but globally, we couldn't break anything in that situation. On the territory that the Russians seized from that moment on, there’s a whole string of towns and villages, as well as industrial sites with concrete structures, the number of which is frankly hard to count. 7/
Here's an example of Myrnohrad. The map below shows the mines in the city and near it. This is still without taking into account the closed mines in the north of the city (lbz is roughly sketched based on deep state for understandable reasons). Here you see the following object:
Mine 5/6 - Myrnohrad
Krasnolimanska - Rodinske
Kapitalna - Myrnohrad
Tsentralna - Myrnohrad
Dimitrova - Myrnohrad 8/
If a mine or factory has a developed network of capital buildings with underground shelters, the Russians really love dragging their UAV crews there. Working against them with the same drones or even regular artillery is a difficult task. You need those same hundreds of KABs that the Russians drop on us. 9/
The map does not yet show potential concentration areas in dense multi-apartment residential development, which is also used for both drone operators and other needs, including logistical ones. In such a situation, it is logical that enemy pilots are largely being pulled from tree lines into cities or to mines, where there are a million ways to hide. 10/
Since the enemy is conducting offensive, rather than defensive, operations, the number of movements and the chances of demasking are higher for them if they operate in unurbanized terrain. Therefore, the imbalance in access to certain types of weaponry allows the Russians to use control over built-up areas as a significant advantage. And we are already forced to adapt to the circumstances. 11/
Thank you for your attention You can subscribe here:
http://t.me/silukr/793
http://send.monobank.ua/jar/4mxJwUTytv PayPal - [email protected]
Beltrami2005
Member
Analysts here say what happened is, that russias propaganda blows up. They send 2 or 3 guys behind front to wave a flag and that is "conquered". Now that starlink doesnt work anymore their entire com collapses
rsemmes
Active Member
What "analyst"? More of those "scientists"?
What propaganda?
Starlink "does not work", where?
Entire front? In what tiny mind?
Where are the maps for those 300sqkm that theguardian couldn't confirm?
What Russian troops, where?
Everything you say, the opposite seems to be closer to the truth.
Beltrami2005
Member
Star Link was deactivated for russians which appears to have quite a positive aspect for Ukraine.
rsemmes
Active Member
Russians who are using Starlink terminals activated in Ukraine.
Could you quantify that effect?
Where has that effect taken place?
Again, whatever you say, the opposite is true.
What has been the "positive effect" in: Bovchansk, Kupiansk, Petropavlivka, Malta, Liman, Illinivka, Kostiantinivka, Novopavlivka/Toretske, Grishine, Guliaipole?
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #14,059
Yes, not news at all. Discord, telegram, and other commercial services are commonly used. 4 years into the war, and Russian government services have not been able to provide a comparable alternative. The new Max isn't anywhere near that good.
While this sort of thing goes on, both sides do it. And it doesn't change the fact that there are real Russian advances happening too. Russian forces have taken Gulyaypole and pushed past it taking a series of villages west of it. This isn't a couple of guys with a flag. Currently Russian forces are pushing forward towards Slavyansk, and again these are real gains, not a couple of guys with flags. Unfortunately the flag nonsense doesn't remove real changes to the front lines, and simultaneously creates additional confusion.
Last but not least, you repeated a specific claim made by Ukrainian government sources about recapturing 300 sq kms of ground. Kip Potapych provided a substantive response explaining why this claim appears to be untrue. You've simply dismissed it by relabeling it as blah blah. Do you care about the topic? If so, please make an effort to provide thoughtful replies. If not, why are you here?
Hoover
Member
Most of the ukraines gaines in liberated territory are soil in the "grey zone". There are huge areas who are contest by both sides, and nobody has full control of it.
So even I wish that the Ukraines would be able to liberate as much as possible of their territory, I think that these gains are only occasionally.
The Russianterrorist forces will try to recapture the territory as soon as possible.
Another theme: Putin has limited the access to Telegram which enlarges the problems of communication in the Russian front units. Russian MilBlogger said that even attacks were planned via Telegram.
So even I wish that the Ukraines would be able to liberate as much as possible of their territory, I think that these gains are only occasionally.
The Russian
Another theme: Putin has limited the access to Telegram which enlarges the problems of communication in the Russian front units. Russian MilBlogger said that even attacks were planned via Telegram.