The Russian Invasion of Ukraine Part 4

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Then Perun is an idiot. The US can't possibly deploy a full spectrum, totally integrated supreme battlespace instantaneously all at once. Sometimes the Marines are going to want to pop off with anti tank and anti air while they wait for the rest of the stuff to settle in and start getting busy.

Under what scenario would we possibly need to? When would we need to deploy marines instantly into an environment where they face heavy armor and close air support, but we can’t get aircraft carriers there at the same time or we don’t already have air bases in range? I can’t think of any. Neither Iraq nor Afghanistan would have qualified. If we were directly involved in Ukraine, it would not qualify.

The closest scenario I can think of would be a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, where we need to deploy fast and hard and the enemy would have both heavy armor and close air support. But even there, it’s not marines we would need, but the Navy. Taiwan has enough boots on the ground, it’s additional naval and air assets to interdict Chinese forces before they even land that would be needed.

[Reformed Offlian]

Originally Posted by Drewbot

T-62 tanks?

* Kennedy was president when the T-62 was introduced.
* They are really a modified T-55, which was introduced post- ww2
* Time to get some A-10 Warthogs over there.
* Any modern Anti Tank weapon will tear these apart.

(Since you mentioned the A-10)
115mm smoothbore go boom!

[Cosmic Yak]

Originally Posted by SpitfireIX

Italy has also given MILAN to Ukraine, so apparently they are.

Was there a referendum?

[Captain_Swoop]

Russian media is now warning that food insecurity will lead to cannibalism in Britain

https://twitter.com/SamRamani2/statu...71798324498435

[The Great Zaganza]

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

Russian media is now warning that food insecurity will lead to cannibalism in Britain

https://twitter.com/SamRamani2/statu...71798324498435

There is no cannibalism in the British Navy.
Absolutely none.
And when I say none, I mean there is a certain amount.
More than we are prepared to admit, but all new ratings are warned that if they wake up in the morning and find tooth marks at all anywhere on their bodies, they're to tell me immediately so that I can immediately take every measure to hush the whole thing up.
And, finally, necrophilia is right out.

[Drewbot]

There isn't even a link the the Russian article in that Cannibalism tweet.

[Drewbot]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

There is no cannibalism in the British Navy.
Absolutely none.
And when I say none, I mean there is a certain amount.
More than we are prepared to admit, but all new ratings are warned that if they wake up in the morning and find tooth marks at all anywhere on their bodies, they're to tell me immediately so that I can immediately take every measure to hush the whole thing up.
And, finally, necrophilia is right out.

Insert the GIF of the old people clapping.

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by SpitfireIX

First, Perun is not an idiot, which you'd know if you watched his videos. Second, please explain the scenario you posit where the US sends in ground troops without first establishing air supremacy. Note that a single carrier battle group significantly overmatches the air forces of nearly every potential US adversary.

Additionally, as Perun also explains, Stinger is obsolete, nearing the end of its storage life, and in need of replacement. But the US military is in no rush to adopt a successor, such as the UK's Starstreak, because of the perceived lack of need.

I suspect that the issue of drones should start to concentrate minds.

[Stellafane]

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

Russian media is now warning that food insecurity will lead to cannibalism in Britain

https://twitter.com/SamRamani2/statu...71798324498435

Should make for an interesting upcoming season of The Great British Bake Off. When you get eliminated you don't simply go home, you make an encore appearance on next week's menu.

[Mike!]

These cannibalism jokes are completely without taste.
.......................................Signed, The Donner Party

[Jimbo07]

Originally Posted by Mike!

These cannibalism jokes are completely without taste...

Especially if you have a poor cook!

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by jimbob

I suspect that the issue of drones should start to concentrate minds.

Stinger seems overkill for most drones. You are correct that anti-drone weapons are a looming need. There's a number of possible solutions in the works, such as:
https://www.asme.org/topics-resource...ot-down-drones

[crescent]

I found this Github thing a few days ago. It's got lots of charts comparing losses in the war.

Russia/Ukraine War Charts

Russia has certainly churned through a lot of equipment in the past week.

Nothing else for me to add, just another interesting information source that ISFers might find interesting.

[Captain_Swoop]

Moscow is ready to make a "significant contribution" to avoiding a global food crisis if the West lifts sanctions imposed on Russia over Ukraine, President Vladimir Putin has said.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/worl...ost_type=share

[shemp]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

There is no cannibalism in the British Navy.
Absolutely none.
And when I say none, I mean there is a certain amount.
More than we are prepared to admit, but all new ratings are warned that if they wake up in the morning and find tooth marks at all anywhere on their bodies, they're to tell me immediately so that I can immediately take every measure to hush the whole thing up.
And, finally, necrophilia is right out.

And that's only Monty Python's third best cannibalism sketch!

[shemp]

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

Moscow is ready to make a "significant contribution" to avoiding a global food crisis if the West lifts sanctions imposed on Russia over Ukraine, President Vladimir Putin has said.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/worl...ost_type=share

Well, I certainly don't want to be paying $7 for a loaf of bread or a box of cereal! Abandon Ukraine!

[The Don]

According to the BBC, the messaging from the Ukrainian government has taken a turn towards being more pessimistic (and perhaps more realistic )

Quote:

Speaking on Radio 4’s Today programme, he says the Ukrainian messaging has changed in recent weeks – with optimism over the situation in the Donbas giving way to a tone that’s “a bit more pessimistic – a bit more realistic maybe”.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/worl...ost_type=share

The BBC are saying that after they have finished in Donbas, then the Russians will switch to Kharkiv. IIRC a couple of months ago I linked to a CNN video where a retired US general said it was inevitable that Russia would seize, and hold, everything East of the Dnieper river. At the time I thought he was being ridiculously pessimistic, now I'm not so sure.

For all the talk of Russia taking heavy casualties, having low morale and having to resort to using ancient equipment, they seem to be advancing inexorably. Maybe their losses are being vastly overestimated, maybe their reserves run far, far deeper than first assumed, maybe they're much better at regrouping and re-equipping units or a combination of all three, but they seem to be getting more, not less, effective.

[Lplus]

Originally Posted by The Don

According to the BBC, the messaging from the Ukrainian government has taken a turn towards being more pessimistic (and perhaps more realistic )



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/worl...ost_type=share

The BBC are saying that after they have finished in Donbas, then the Russians will switch to Kharkiv. IIRC a couple of months ago I linked to a CNN video where a retired US general said it was inevitable that Russia would seize, and hold, everything East of the Dnieper river. At the time I thought he was being ridiculously pessimistic, now I'm not so sure.

For all the talk of Russia taking heavy casualties, having low morale and having to resort to using ancient equipment, they seem to be advancing inexorably. Maybe their losses are being vastly overestimated, maybe their reserves run far, far deeper than first assumed, maybe they're much better at regrouping and re-equipping units or a combination of all three, but they seem to be getting more, not less, effective.

Possibly, though getting "more realistic" might also include giving up the Donbas with a view to hardening resistance further west. Are the Ukrainians giving up land they think already lost, or are they being forced back despite their every effort?

[Aridas]

Originally Posted by The Don

According to the BBC, the messaging from the Ukrainian government has taken a turn towards being more pessimistic (and perhaps more realistic )



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/worl...ost_type=share

The BBC are saying that after they have finished in Donbas, then the Russians will switch to Kharkiv. IIRC a couple of months ago I linked to a CNN video where a retired US general said it was inevitable that Russia would seize, and hold, everything East of the Dnieper river. At the time I thought he was being ridiculously pessimistic, now I'm not so sure.

For all the talk of Russia taking heavy casualties, having low morale and having to resort to using ancient equipment, they seem to be advancing inexorably. Maybe their losses are being vastly overestimated, maybe their reserves run far, far deeper than first assumed, maybe they're much better at regrouping and re-equipping units or a combination of all three, but they seem to be getting more, not less, effective.

It's worth remembering that, while Russia is taking heavy casualties, has low morale, and is increasingly using older equipment, what they brought/conscripted certainly is quite significant. They're moving forward at the moment, yes. It would actually be more surprising if Severodonetsk didn't fall eventually, honestly, given the location. Lysychansk is notably less likely, given that it's on the other side of the river, but still possible. Given the way things have been going, Slovyansk and Kramatorsk are highly unlikely to end up falling, though.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by Aridas

It's worth remembering that, while Russia is taking heavy casualties, has low morale, and is increasingly using older equipment, what they brought/conscripted certainly is quite significant.

Well that's certainly what were being told, but the advancing Russian forces seem to contradict that somewhat. If morale is so low, why are they still pressing forward ? If casualties are so high, how are they still gaining ground ? If the equipment is so bad and so old, why aren't they slowing down?

I've been watching the news stories and I understand why we in the UK have been focusing on the Ukrainians gallant defence but it does mean that there's a risk that we all start to believe the propaganda. As long as the "real" decisions are made based on accurate information then I don't have too much of a problem with better news being sent out for public consumption. During the Battle of Britain, pilots' claims of German planes shot down were publicised despite being greatly overinflated. British military planning OTOH was based on accurate figures. The Germans OTOH allegedly took their pilots' claims at face value and therefore fatally underestimated Fighter Command's strength.

Originally Posted by Aridas

They're moving forward at the moment, yes. It would actually be more surprising if Severodonetsk didn't fall eventually, honestly, given the location. Lysychansk is notably less likely, given that it's on the other side of the river, but still possible. Given the way things have been going, Slovyansk and Kramatorsk are highly unlikely to end up falling, though.

I really hope that this is the case. My fear is that the Russians will reopen another front near Kharkiv and that the forces released from Mariupol will press up from the South.

edited to add....

From ISW's assessment from yesterday:

Quote:

Russian forces have made several gains in the past week, but their offensive operations remain slow. Russian forces are heavily degraded and will struggle to replace further losses.

https://www.understandingwar.org/bac...essment-may-26

I'll bow to their greater access to intelligence and their far superior knowledge, but if they're so heavily degraded, how come their advances seem to be accelerating ?

[Captain_Swoop]

You don't fight for ground that can't be defended, you fall back to defensible positions, you keep your line in order and make the attacker pay heavily for it.

Russia is obviously degraded, every they have a finite supply of usable equipment, they are not getting resupplied or re-equipped with new systems and weapons.

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by The Don

...
I'll bow to their greater access to intelligence and their far superior knowledge, but if they're so heavily degraded, how come their advances seem to be accelerating ?

a) Russia is heavily concentrating its forces on that Ukrainian bulge near Severodonetsk; Ukraine says the Russians have quite an advantage in number of soldiers and equipment there. They can attack from three sides
b) As the Russian advances are slow, they have some time to dig in
c) It would take a considerable numerical advantage for the Ukrainians to reclaim areas where the Russians are dug in

That bulge (small at the moment) may eventually fall in a few days or weeks, and let's hope the Ukrainians can pull out of it before it closes.

After this, Russia gets to choose a next bit of territory to take.

You say Kharkiv. Why? Is that because of supply routes? The Russians have fared ill in urban warfare before. All they can hope for is to advance close enough to Kharkiv to bring the center of city into reach of artillery, and just destroy it. Which yeah, sounds like something Russia would do. Barbaric fascists and all that.

I think Russia wants to make a move on Odesa eventually, in the not-too-distant future:
- They control a large area in the South already
- They have bridgeheads on the other side of the Dnjepr already
- They want to flush Ukrainian forces and their surface-to-ship missiles away from the beaches to protect what remains of the fleet
- Oh, and they absolutely want Odesa. And give it back its missing "s"
- I don't know, but it appears that Ukraine has kept only a bare minimum of forces in the Kharson / Melitopol areas. They concentrate on Donbas and Kharkiv.

I think the Russians would be smart to open their next front where the Ukraine forces are weakest, and where the most gains are to be made. If UIA wins back a bit of territory in the North of Donbas - so what? Only adds to the destruction there. At this point, there is not much of a strategic difference in where you draw the next line of control in Donbas. If Russia however links up to Transnistria and leaves Ukraine entirely landlocked...

I read today in ticker news that Ukraine intelligence has spotted Iskander missiles being hauled to Belarus, indicating that more attacks on Western Ukraine are in the making.

[a_unique_person]

Originally Posted by The Don

According to the BBC, the messaging from the Ukrainian government has taken a turn towards being more pessimistic (and perhaps more realistic )



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/worl...ost_type=share

The BBC are saying that after they have finished in Donbas, then the Russians will switch to Kharkiv. IIRC a couple of months ago I linked to a CNN video where a retired US general said it was inevitable that Russia would seize, and hold, everything East of the Dnieper river. At the time I thought he was being ridiculously pessimistic, now I'm not so sure.

For all the talk of Russia taking heavy casualties, having low morale and having to resort to using ancient equipment, they seem to be advancing inexorably. Maybe their losses are being vastly overestimated, maybe their reserves run far, far deeper than first assumed, maybe they're much better at regrouping and re-equipping units or a combination of all three, but they seem to be getting more, not less, effective.

IMHO they have a virtually endless supply of artillery shells and have no qualms about leaving their local separatist supporters with an uninhabitable wasteland to live in.

[jimbob]

The West needs to salami slice up the aid. Not only long range anti shipping missiles which are coming, but also MLRS and now is the time to improve the Ukrainian air force as well.

In the future, I don't know what the impact of loitering munitions with say an 80km range would have on artillery battles.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

You don't fight for ground that can't be defended, you fall back to defensible positions, you keep your line in order and make the attacker pay heavily for it.

The Russians don't seem to mind the price.

It's been mentioned that this could be the equivalent of the US' Vietnam War for Russia but I think that misses a crucial point - the Russians don't care how many men they lose or the impact on the local population. In that way they're more like the North Vietnamese.

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

Russia is obviously degraded, every they have a finite supply of usable equipment, they are not getting resupplied or re-equipped with new systems and weapons.

You're right - but they don't seem to be functionally degraded in any way. In fact they seem to be accelerating their advances.

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by The Don

The Russians don't seem to mind the price.

It's been mentioned that this could be the equivalent of the US' Vietnam War for Russia but I think that misses a crucial point - the Russians don't care how many men they lose or the impact on the local population. In that way they're more like the North Vietnamese.



You're right - but they don't seem to be functionally degraded in any way. In fact they seem to be accelerating their advances.

The USSR suffered severely from its war in Afghanistan. The Russian regime is more vulnerable to losses and information than the Soviet Union was.

The thing is that three months ago, analysts were pointing out how hard it would be for Russia to *hold* Ukraine, especially the West *once* it had installed a puppet regime, given that the Ukrainian people had overthrown one in 2014.

Instead we are now talking about what Russia can do in the East. And there is partisan activity in some of the occupied areas, with at least one AFV being destroyed well behind the Russian lines, near the SE border with Russia, in fact.

Yes it is not going to be good for Ukraine, but they still have a military force that's functioning.

We do need to step up our support and pressure on Russia though.

[Captain_Swoop]

Originally Posted by The Don

The Russians don't seem to mind the price.

It's been mentioned that this could be the equivalent of the US' Vietnam War for Russia but I think that misses a crucial point - the Russians don't care how many men they lose or the impact on the local population. In that way they're more like the North Vietnamese.



You're right - but they don't seem to be functionally degraded in any way. In fact they seem to be accelerating their advances.

They do mind the price. They are still flogging themselves for very little headway.
They will reach a point where they can no longer support an advance and will have to go onto the defensive but will lack the resources to sustain it.
They will have to start to retreat.
I think it will happen fairly quickly when it starts.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

They do mind the price.

I disagree, IMO there has been no indication that Russia's leadership care at all how many Russian soldiers or Ukrainian civilians die.

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

They are still flogging themselves for very little headway.

They've been making more headway recently than they have for a couple of months.

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

They will reach a point where they can no longer support an advance and will have to go onto the defensive but will lack the resources to sustain it.
They will have to start to retreat.

That's certainly been the opinion of the majority of analysts since the first few days of the war. There were stories of BTGs in which the only people left to fight were the logistics people and we were assured that the forces which retreated from Kyiv would take weeks or months to reorganise, resupply and return to the front (if they would be able to). Instead they seem to be back in action very quickly and are being very effective.

Russia also seems to have addressed the logistics issues that were plaguing them early on. We no longer hear of vehicles running out of fuel and of soldiers eating long out of date rations. Indeed, they seem to have no shortage of ordnance.

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

I think it will happen fairly quickly when it starts.

I really hope so, but if anything it seems as if the Russians are intensifying their efforts and are once again looking to restart their advances in the South towards Odesa and attacking from Belarus.

A couple of weeks ago we had all kinds of stories about how effective the NATO-supplied 155mm howitzers were, how long-range anti-ship missiles were on the way, what a great job the anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles were doing. That's all gone very quiet now so maybe those weapons systems aren't as effective as we'd hoped against the current Russian tactics of simply laying waste to towns and cities before advancing.

[Captain_Swoop]

Originally Posted by The Don

I disagree, IMO there has been no indication that Russia's leadership care at all how many Russian soldiers or Ukrainian civilians die.



They've been making more headway recently than they have for a couple of months.



That's certainly been the opinion of the majority of analysts since the first few days of the war. There were stories of BTGs in which the only people left to fight were the logistics people and we were assured that the forces which retreated from Kyiv would take weeks or months to reorganise, resupply and return to the front (if they would be able to). Instead they seem to be back in action very quickly and are being very effective.

Russia also seems to have addressed the logistics issues that were plaguing them early on. We no longer hear of vehicles running out of fuel and of soldiers eating long out of date rations. Indeed, they seem to have no shortage of ordnance.



I really hope so, but if anything it seems as if the Russians are intensifying their efforts and are once again looking to restart their advances in the South towards Odesa and attacking from Belarus.

A couple of weeks ago we had all kinds of stories about how effective the NATO-supplied 155mm howitzers were, how long-range anti-ship missiles were on the way, what a great job the anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles were doing. That's all gone very quiet now so maybe those weapons systems aren't as effective as we'd hoped against the current Russian tactics of simply laying waste to towns and cities before advancing.

They are hollowing out formations to keep the ones at the front in the field.
Yes, they pushed the formations that retreated back in to the line but they are not properly re-equipped and rested.

They care about losses in that their formations are less effective, not that they are getting killed.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

They are hollowing out formations to keep the ones at the front in the field.
Yes, they pushed the formations that retreated back in to the line but they are not properly re-equipped and rested.

That's what we were told by people in the know, that they were put back into the fighting too soon and that they are underequipped and have poor morale. The trouble is that they're not fighting like a poorly equipped army with poor morale, they're inexorably gaining ground and taking villages, towns and cities.

If anything their combat effectiveness seems to be higher now than it was a month or two ago. The Russians seem to have found a way to get them back in the fighting and make them effective.

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

They care about losses in that their formations are less effective, not that they are getting killed.

Except that their formations seem to be more effective, they're making relentless progress on the Eastern front. It's taken them months, but they seem to have got their act together both logistically and tactically.

Quote:

Oleksiy Arestovych, adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, appears to have also confirmed that Russian-backed separatists have control of the city.

"According to unverified data, we lost the town of Lyman," Arestovych said in a video, adding that the attack had been well organised.

"This shows, in principle, the increased level of operational management and tactical skills of the Russian army," he added.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/worl...ost_type=share

The Russians couldn't stay that badly disorganised for ever.

[Captain_Swoop]

Originally Posted by The Don

That's what we were told by people in the know, that they were put back into the fighting too soon and that they are underequipped and have poor morale. The trouble is that they're not fighting like a poorly equipped army with poor morale, they're inexorably gaining ground and taking villages, towns and cities.

If anything their combat effectiveness seems to be higher now than it was a month or two ago. The Russians seem to have found a way to get them back in the fighting and make them effective.



Except that their formations seem to be more effective, they're making relentless progress on the Eastern front. It's taken them months, but they seem to have got their act together both logistically and tactically.



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/worl...ost_type=share

The Russians couldn't stay that badly disorganised for ever.

They are barely moving.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

They are barely moving.

They don't have to move quickly. If they advance a handful of Kilometres a day, as long as they do it most days, over the course of a month the front has moved a long way.

They seem to have settled into a routine of pounding an area with artillery for several days to completely flatten it and avoid the need for (expensive) urban warfare. Then they advance, rinse and repeat.

Ukraine seems powerless to stop this kind of inexorable advance.

They were very successful at disrupting mobile Russian formations and breaking vulnerable supply lines. Russia appear to have addressed this by slowing down the advance so that their supply lines are nowhere near as stretched and so armed columns cannot get isolated and destroyed.

[Captain_Swoop]

Originally Posted by The Don

They don't have to move quickly. If they advance a handful of Kilometres a day, as long as they do it most days, over the course of a month the front has moved a long way.

They seem to have settled into a routine of pounding an area with artillery for several days to completely flatten it and avoid the need for (expensive) urban warfare. Then they advance, rinse and repeat.

Ukraine seems powerless to stop this kind of inexorable advance.

They were very successful at disrupting mobile Russian formations and breaking vulnerable supply lines. Russia appear to have addressed this by slowing down the advance so that their supply lines are nowhere near as stretched and so armed columns cannot get isolated and destroyed.

They are still being degraded every day. How long do you think they can do this against an enemy that is constantly resupplied and equipped?
How much territory do you think they have taken?

[The Don]

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

They are still being degraded every day.

...and yet functionally they seem to be getting more effective.

They're gaining ground, their logistical and morale issues seem to have been addressed and they seem to be getting their tactics sorted out if Oleksiy Arestovych's comments are anything to go by.

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

How long do you think they can do this against an enemy that is constantly resupplied and equipped?

At the moment they seem to have a near-inexhaustible supply of artillery munitions and if they are losing men and materiel they seem to be able to resupply quickly enough to maintain their effectiveness.

Another month with a similar rate of progress and they'll have control over all of Donetsk, another six months and they'll be all the way to the Dnieper.

For all the talk of poor performance, they seem to be getting more effective. I cannot recall a major reverse since that BTG was destroyed in a river crossing.

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

How much territory do you think they have taken?

Looking at maps from a couple of months ago, several thousand square kilometres in the last two months.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by The Don

For all the talk of Russia taking heavy casualties, having low morale and having to resort to using ancient equipment, they seem to be advancing inexorably

I don't think "advancing inexorably" is the right term for an invasion that used to be advancing on Kiev and is now not advancing on Kiev.

It seems pretty clear that the Russian army isn't up to the grand task of conquering all of Ukraine, which they set out to accomplish in February. Now they are consolidating what's left of their forces, and "advancing inexorably" towards a much more limited and achievable goal: A further sliver of territory eastern Ukraine, captured and held from well-established jumping-off points in Donbas.

It's highly unlikely that this is going to translate into a magical depth of competence, morale, equipment, and supplies to "inexorably" conquer Ukraine.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by theprestige

I don't think "advancing inexorably" is the right term for an invasion that used to be advancing on Kiev and is now not advancing on Kiev.

True, they demonstrated that they were utterly incompetent at a fast-moving mobile war. That's why they've switched to their go-to plan of simply pounding things to smithereens and grinding slowly along.

Originally Posted by theprestige

It seems pretty clear that the Russian army isn't up to the grand task of conquering all of Ukraine, which they set out to accomplish in February. Now they are consolidating what's left of their forces, and "advancing inexorably" towards a much more limited and achievable goal: A further sliver of territory eastern Ukraine, captured and held from well-established jumping-off points in Donbas.

It's highly unlikely that this is going to translate into a magical depth of competence, morale, equipment, and supplies to "inexorably" conquer Ukraine.

I'm not sure that they need to conquer all of Ukraine, just completely neuter it as a state. If they "just" get to keep what they've conquered to date, the Ukrainian economy may never recover.

Alternatively they can keep grinding away month after month. Artillery rounds are cheap and they seem to have no shortage of them. They don't care one bit about the devastation they leave behind or the human cost and every few days they get more hostages.

[Jimbo07]

Originally Posted by The Don

True, they demonstrated that they were utterly incompetent at a fast-moving mobile war. That's why they've switched to their go-to plan of simply pounding things to smithereens and grinding slowly along.

We predicted in these threads, that the fighting in the east was always going to be harder. Even if Russia didn't improve in any appreciable way, the position was more suitable. They enjoy shorter logistics chains and entrenched positions.

Quote:

Alternatively they can keep grinding away month after month. Artillery rounds are cheap and they seem to have no shortage of them. They don't care one bit about the devastation they leave behind or the human cost and every few days they get more hostages.

This is the tragedy. Even if Ukraine 'wins', it loses. The Russian strategy almost seems like an, "If we can't have it, no one can," sort of thing. I jest, but I almost wouldn't be surprised to see Russia literally salt the earth if they faced a general rollback.

ETA:

The thing that gets me is the general sense of stability we're getting out of Russia. The Ruble is rising, interest rates are decreasing. Putin says he's taking steps to weather Western sanctions. There's no mention of widespread political unrest. Some of the earlier comments ring hollow, things like, "oh, there's vast discontent, we're just not seeing it from the repression, but people will go into the streets." That hasn't happened yet. Putin hasn't been deposed. They don't seem to mind that their units are what we would call 'degraded.' A boot gets the kids back into the meat grinder. I predict that this is going to be long and unpleasant, and I don't know the ultimate outcome.

[SpitfireIX]

The Germans gained a huge amount of territory during the Ardennes Offensive (AKA The Battle of the Bulge). It didn't mean they could sustain their attack or hold what they took.

Russia's modest gains in the Donbas are likely coming at the cost of unsustainable losses in men and materiel. The Russians have been reduced to deploying T-62s to Ukraine, and they've raised the maximum age for enlisting in the Army from 40 to 50.

Also, they are now operating on much shorter supply lines; any additional advances will only further strain their already overtaxed logistics. The idea that Russia can continue to make significant advances, or even successfully defend against the eventual Ukrainian counteroffensive, is speculative at best.

Finally, the Biden administration is likely to include MLRS in the next tranche of weapons shipments. These would greatly increase the ability of Ukraine to strike at Russian depots and supply convoys, and reduce Russia's edge in artillery.

[a_unique_person]

Originally Posted by The Don

The Russians don't seem to mind the price.

It's been mentioned that this could be the equivalent of the US' Vietnam War for Russia but I think that misses a crucial point - the Russians don't care how many men they lose or the impact on the local population. In that way they're more like the North Vietnamese.



You're right - but they don't seem to be functionally degraded in any way. In fact they seem to be accelerating their advances.

The North Vietnamese were fighting for their country. The Russians aren't.

[Delphic Oracle]

Originally Posted by Jimbo07

Especially if you have a poor cook!

If you're having the cook, who's preparing the meal?

*shudders inwardly*