The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

Feanor said:

And extended range fuel tanks never before seen on the type. It looks exactly like what he said - an attempt to probe Polish air defenses. And I agree with the conclusions from above too, NATO performance was piss-poor.

Click to expand...

The NATO response was awful. I cant believe no one expected this ?

vikingatespam said:

The NATO response was awful. I cant believe no one expected this ?

Click to expand...

It's obvious. The long range UAV threat in this war is completely new. Never before has long range strike on this scale and over this length of time been a thing. Nobody is prepared for it. Obviously NATO isn't. If I was Russia I would like NATO to remain unprepared for this as long as possible. Probing Polish airspace like this has the opposite effect, while I suspect providing information that isn't very useful.

So if N.A.T.O decided to shoot down any missiles or drones that could be assessed as a potential threat before entering Polish territory because Russian uav,s have not shown the ability to land only in Ukraine it could be interesting

seaspear said:

So if N.A.T.O decided to shoot down any missiles or drones that could be assessed as a potential threat before entering Polish territory because Russian uav,s have not shown the ability to land only in Ukraine it could be interesting

Click to expand...

Another great reason not to have done this. In principle this could open the door on NATO air defenses setting up across the border from western Ukraine and engaging anything that gets too close, giving NATO plenty of practice against these kinds of targets, and helping Ukraine.

This looks like an Intelligence operation.

If NATO deploys in Poland and starts spending its arsenal, "great" for Russia. If NATO starts getting live training over that sky and protecting (how far inside the country is that threat going to be shot down?) Ukraine, not that great.
What side is guessing right the move from his opponent?

T.C.P said:

This can also be a great way for the over panickers at NATO to send all AD systems earmarked for Ukraine to Poland. Now that angle makes sense.

I can easily picture, skyrangers, NSMs and even Patriot systems being diverted to Poland.

Click to expand...

Perhaps better for drones & missiles to be engaged first over Ukraine, rather than waiting until they reach the border.

NATO could also offer to defend Belarus's airspace against Russian drones & missiles.

swerve said:

Perhaps better for drones & missiles to be engaged first over Ukraine, rather than waiting until they reach the border.

NATO could also offer to defend Belarus's airspace against Russian drones & missiles.

Click to expand...

That last one is risky. Belarus would likely object, and is under Russia's nuclear umbrella, including apparently now being involved with Russian tactical nukes. The potatoes aren't worth it. On the other hand airspace in western Ukraine could be open.

It would also create problems for the future. What happens when Russia smacks a NATO SAM battery inside Poland, that's busy engaging Russian inbounds over Ukraine? Article 5 and straight down the path to a nuclear stand-off? One thing we can say confidently is this, if Russia wants to tickle or slap NATO SAMs in Poland, they absolutely can. Whether this would be wise is another question of course. But nobody is NATO is prepared to deal with an 800 Shahed wave, accompanied by 50-100 missiles. This would also be a good time for all airbases in NATO countries to make sure they have enough shelters for all their aircraft.

I wasn't being entirely serious.

But Belarus has claimed to have shot down some of the Russian drones that overflew it en route to Poland, so an offer could make the Belarusians look rather silly.

I didn't suggest NATO SAM batteries in Poland engaging Russian inbounds over Ukraine. I was saying it was better for them to be engaged over Ukraine, meaning better for the weapons earmarked for Ukraine to be used by Ukraine than diverted to Poland.

swerve said:

I wasn't being entirely serious.

But Belarus has claimed to have shot down some of the Russian drones that overflew it en route to Poland, so an offer could make the Belarusians look rather silly.

Click to expand...

Would it? There's no evidence they did anything really, other then put jets in the sky to accompany the drones, though I suppose they could have. I don't think anyone believes them either way. And I certainly don't think they would view Russian drones in their airspace as hostile.

I didn't suggest NATO SAM batteries in Poland engaging Russian inbounds over Ukraine. I was saying it was better for them to be engaged over Ukraine, meaning better for the weapons earmarked for Ukraine to be used by Ukraine than diverted to Poland.

Click to expand...

It seems I misunderstood. However, would a former NATO SAM asset in Ukrainian hands prioritize light Gerbers heading for Poland over heavy missiles heading for Ukrainian industrial targets in Dnepropetrovsk or Krivoy Rog? I somehow doubt it. So if your goal is make sure nothing falls on your head, not even the small stuff, then you might want to hang on to the SAMs. Targeting priority is a big part of Ukraine's air defense efforts. It's part of why Russia's Gerber decoys normally carry a real payload.

Sikorsky finally saying publicly and loudly what I have been saying all along. And while they are wasting time discussing this “coalition of the willing” and security guarantees nonsense, they are distracted from looking for real solutions. Perhaps, this is by design, which I tend to heavily lean towards these days.

From Ukrainian via Google translate:

Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski said that he did not believe in the effectiveness of any guarantees for Ukraine, and proposed to abandon this deadline.

He said this in a speech at the annual meeting of the Yalta European Strategy in Kyiv, the correspondent of "European Truth" reports.

Sikorsky said that Ukraine, in his opinion, "already has guarantees, even if they are called "assurances" in the Budapest Memorandum." If other, more specific guarantees are provided, they will not work, he is convinced.

The minister recalled that the purpose of the security guarantees for Ukraine, which are being discussed, is to deter Russia from new aggression: "They say, if you attack the one who is given guarantees (i.e. Ukraine - EP), we will start a war in his defense."

That is, if we provide security guarantees to Ukraine, we say that we can start a war against Russia. And I don't think it's convincing that there's trust in it. Who wants to fight with Russia can start it right now. But I don't see anything willing," he shared his thoughts. "But there is nothing worse in international relations than providing guarantees that have no trust."

Sikorsky called for recognition that we are not talking about guarantees for Ukraine.

"Now we are not talking about guarantees, but about monitoring peace and strengthening Ukraine," he said.

Sikorsky also called for a focus on military assistance to Ukraine instead of negotiating security guarantees. "I am afraid that this self-absorbing discussion destroys and demobilizes politicians from the more urgent task of finding money for Ukraine for 2026 and 2027," he explained.

Sikorsky's speech forced the diplomat of the President of Ukraine, deputy head of the OPU Ihor Zhovkva to publicly oppose him. "Please, let's forget this shameful Budapest Memorandum. This is not the best example, or rather, it is one of the worst examples of agreements on Ukraine's security," he said, noting that he was confident in the effectiveness of the ideas about guarantees for Ukraine that are currently being discussed.


This also comes after the Russian drones flying all over Poland. I completely fail to understand wtf people are thinking.

Edit: Recommending this on the subject as well (by former Lithuanian FM):


Another add:

It makes (a perverse) sense to not use sparse and very expensive AIM-9 or AIM-120 to shoot down a single drone in Romania, especially if it moves over to Ukraine where they are much better equipped to deal with such a threat at the moment.

It demonstrates that European NATO countries urgently need to address the issue of long range drones.

My best advice: European NATO countries must urgently work with Ukrainian defense companies, invest heavily in them and help them open additional manufacturing lines in other countries. This will assist Ukraine in their fight against the invading war criminals, and will speed up European NATO countries adaptation to the drone threat.

I haven't had time to do another update, I will try to closer to the weekend, but things are moving. Russian forces are steadily gaining ground in Kupyansk, and it's starting to look like that town will fall. There's unconfirmed information of another gas pipeline being used as a transport artery to put troops into the town. In the Oskol front, on the southern portion, things are steadily moving towards cutting off logistics for Krasniy Liman from both sides, Russian forces approaching Novoselovka and Yampol'. The fall of those villages would leave one MSR open towards Slavyansk, canalizing Ukrainian logistics. This also impacts Seversk, where Russian troops are now approaching the town from the south and the north. Seversk itself lies in a lowland, so it might turn into a no-man's land for a while. In the Konstantinovka area Russian forces are continuing to slowly creep up on the town, but so far there's no clear threat of encirclement, though we do have extra Russian strikes coming down on Druzhkovka, which is now the logistics hub to that area. Around Pokrovsk Ukraine continues to counter-attack the salient north of the conurbation and is currently threatening to cut off the top of it at Nikanorovka. It remains to be seen how this plays out. Russian forces meanwhile continue to expand their area of control inside Pokrovsk itself, and assault teams are now entering Mirnograd outskirts, though no confirmed control as of yet. On the Dnepropetrovsk axis Russia's offensive is developing at an uncomfortable pace with Russian troops now holding about a dozen villages in the region, and pushing westward along a front north of Zaporozhye. This is coupled with a Russian push in the eastern part of Zaporozhye. It's interesting to see that the northern part of this combined push is roughty on line with the northern part of Zaporozhye region (the administrative border veers northward further west). Were one to project another several months of this, and Russia would be approaching Zaporozhye city along a wide front from the east. It's unclear if this is in fact the intent. Lastly around Stepnogorsk Russia seems to have overcome Ukraine's counter-attacks and is now storming the village with neighboring Plavni fully under Russian control.

EDIT: Almost forgot, there are unconfirmed reports of a new Russian push between Melovoe and Stroevka, on the international border in Kharkov area. This is a logical step and personally I'm surprised it took this long for something like that to happen. It would make more sense to me for Russia to have pushed on Velikiy Burluk before assaulting Kupyansk, so they could threaten it with complete encirclement, but this isn't the case.

Feanor said:

I haven't had time to do another update, I will try to closer to the weekend, but things are moving. Russian forces are steadily gaining ground in Kupyansk, and it's starting to look like that town will fall. There's unconfirmed information of another gas pipeline being used as a transport artery to put troops into the town.

Click to expand...

I read that it is confirmed that the 3rd Assault Brigade (Azov) is being moved to Kupyansk to “put the fire” out. So we will probably see the Russian advances speed up elsewhere, as a rule, it seems.

I also read, unconfirmed, however, that Ukrainians flooded the said pipeline. Not sure what is true.

Feanor said:

Around Pokrovsk Ukraine continues to counter-attack the salient north of the conurbation and is currently threatening to cut off the top of it at Nikanorovka. It remains to be seen how this plays out.

Click to expand...

There is a lot of confusion there. No clarity whatsoever and everyone seems to make up their own stuff (the only RU sources I see nowadays is in your updates, so I don’t know what they are saying). This is a good post on the situation at the salient:


This one too (under 5/) and has a couple of maps:


This is excellent too (screens below, translated by Grok from Polish):






Of course, David D has his own ideas as well (one of the replies to the Molin’s thread (the first one) cited above):



EIGHT, I TELL YA!!! Laughing. The guy is insane. And has the biggest arrows (slapped on other people’s map).



An article on the Russian Rubicon drone unit worth reading:


Maybe some are interested in this conversation. It’s not bad. Some good points, but some rubbish as well, in my opinion. Worth a listen, nonetheless. Different (but the same) perspective on what is victory for Ukraine. Timothy Snider, Niall Ferguson, and Serhii Plokhii are the participants. It’s from Pinchuk Foundation, so don’t expect anything balanced, but I do not believe balance is of requirement in this particular discussion.


A fresh poll from Kyiv International Institute of Sociology:


The most interesting findings (bolding theirs):

Among Ukrainians (both men and women aged 18+), 54% respond that they are rather or definitely ready, if necessary, to join the Defense Forces and defend Ukraine with weapons in their hands. Of them, 23% are definitely ready, and another 31% are rather ready.

Rather not ready – 15%, definitely not ready – 23% (i.e. 38% are not ready in general, although only some of them categorically reject such readiness).

For comparison with other countries - according to Gallup (2023), for example, in Poland 45% are ready to fight for their country, in the USA - 41%, in Germany - 23%, in the UK - 33%, in the EU countries in general - 32% (although not all countries were surveyed) (for the same period in Ukraine, according to this formulation, it was 62%).

At the same time, it should be taken into account that for Ukrainians this question is not hypothetical and abstract, it is quite real, that is, from Ukrainians we can expect an answer that is closer to real behavior.

Imagine! I guess “if necessary” has different meaning for different people. The addition of “comparison with other countries” only adds to the legitimacy of the poll. I believe basically everything that is coming out from the Ukrainian institutions and absolute majority of media outlets is 100% propaganda that has nothing to do with reality. Everything is for the lemming consumption and no substance. The cited article is in English, by the way, so you can scroll through it yourself.