[Continuation] The Russian Invasion of Ukraine (3) - Page 91

theprestige · 20th May 2022, 12:18 PM

Originally Posted by eerok

I'm wondering if the additional arms and materiel that should flow from the US following their lend-lease act could make the difference in pushing back the Russians, or are there other factors apart from supply?

For example, Ukraine is reportedly losing fewer troops, and their morale and motivation are definitely higher than the Russians, but is it even remotely plausible for the Russians to persist until the Ukrainian forces are exhausted? They can throw a lot of fodder into this war, whereas Ukraine's population is a limited resource.

I think ultimately the answer to this question is "accurate long-range artillery informed by high-quality reconnaissance."

The more Russian formations Ukraine can destroy without putting more troops in harm's way, the better it is for them. NATO* can certainly supply world-class recon, on top of whatever else the Ukrainians have going on in that area. The west is also supplying more artillery pieces and ammo. Perhaps also aircraft. Airstrikes also being a kind of artillery, the next level would be for NATO* to start conducting airstrikes of its own.

Captain_Swoop · 20th May 2022, 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by crescent

Russia apparently pushed 10 km yesterday outside Popasna. That's more than just incremental. The last Ukrainian forces at Avozstal have been taken into custody, most of the remaining Russian forces in Mariupol will be pushed north.

Perhaps not time to panic, but probably time to be concerned about the situation there. Ukraine really is losing ground in Donbass. It's true that it is just one region - but it is the region with the highest concentration of Ukrainian forces. Any loss there would be a major blow.

Did they push or were they allowed? For example If ground is not good for defence then don't defend it, if your line has a 'bulge' then straighten it, if there is a natural defence line then move to it etc.
If we learned anything from WW2 it is that fighting blindly for every inch of ground is a waste of men and resources.

The Great Zaganza · 20th May 2022, 01:02 PM

It might be time for Ukraine to invade Russia.

Doubt · 20th May 2022, 01:02 PM

Originally Posted by eerok

For example, Ukraine is reportedly losing fewer troops, and their morale and motivation are definitely higher than the Russians, but is it even remotely plausible for the Russians to persist until the Ukrainian forces are exhausted? They can throw a lot of fodder into this war, whereas Ukraine's population is a limited resource.

Russia does not really have the fodder to throw at Ukraine. They just don't have the population that the Soviet Union had to throw at Germany.

On top of that, Ukraine is fighting in a total war situation. They are mobilizing as much as is practical since they are fighting a war of national survival. Russia is fighting a limited war and cannot afford it even now. If they tried for a total war situation they would feel more than enough economic pain at home that would make the sanctions placed on them looks like a joke. That will remove the propaganda blitz effect on their own people and they will be forced to recognize that they are not winning.

The technology used on both sides, even though the Russian stuff appears to suck, is still enough to make a war of attrition undesirable for both sides. But the Russian casualty rates are not sustainable and they are now stuck in an attrition loop. If they start throwing in under trained reservists and people taken off the street they won't get any better results.

The Ukrainians need to work on bleeding the Russians dry. Retaking territory is secondary to that. But the do need to still hold the Russians back.

Jimbo07 · 20th May 2022, 01:21 PM

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

Did they push or were they allowed? For example If ground is not good for defence then don't defend it,

The line I heard is that this is deliberate, and that Ukraine is trading ground for time.

Originally Posted by Doubt

The Ukrainians need to work on bleeding the Russians dry. Retaking territory is secondary to that. But the do need to still hold the Russians back.

This.

So long as Russia is in Ukraine, they can always counter attack. One small piece of land goes one way, then the other. Rather than occupying a particular piece of ground, Ukraine needs to degrade Russia's ability to wage war (not because I want them to, but because they'll literally never be free if they don't).

Dr.Sid · 20th May 2022, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

It might be time for Ukraine to invade Russia.

Not really. Major advantage of Ukraine is morale. That could change fast.

Klimax · 20th May 2022, 02:16 PM

Originally Posted by Aridas

Kharkiv, not Kherson. The Kherson front's been relatively stable, despite apparent efforts to change that from both sides.
...

How did I got Kherson tehre and not Kharkiv I don't now. It wasn't even recent topic.

Originally Posted by eerok

I'm wondering if the additional arms and materiel that should flow from the US following their lend-lease act could make the difference in pushing back the Russians, or are there other factors apart from supply?

For example, Ukraine is reportedly losing fewer troops, and their morale and motivation are definitely higher than the Russians, but is it even remotely plausible for the Russians to persist until the Ukrainian forces are exhausted? They can throw a lot of fodder into this war, whereas Ukraine's population is a limited resource.

No. Phase 2 mobilization of Ukraine yielded about million of soldiers. First divisions should be already in Donbas. Compare that to Russian numbers.

crescent · 20th May 2022, 02:22 PM

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

Did they push or were they allowed? For example If ground is not good for defence then don't defend it, if your line has a 'bulge' then straighten it, if there is a natural defence line then move to it etc.
If we learned anything from WW2 it is that fighting blindly for every inch of ground is a waste of men and resources.

This is a big bulge into Ukrainian lines, putting the main supply route into Severtdoneskt under Russian artillery fire. This isn't Ukraine pulling out of a salient, this is Russia pushing a big one deep into Ukrainian territory.

Its true that Ukraine didn't contest those towns. It contested Popasna very hard though. There's a word used when enemy forces get past a strongly contested line and into an area where they face little resistance - breakout. It seems possible that Russia has broken through the line of Ukrainian defense and is now pushing forces through that gap.

Here's one person suggesting concern:

Quote:

Should know more in the next 72 hours or so. If 🇷🇺 quickly continues its advance, 🇺🇦 will likely need to pull the majority of its forces out of Severnodonetsk. If not, there will be likely be a major fight for Bakhmut as both sides funnel remaining reserves into the area.

another:

Quote:

POPSNA SALIENT /2045 UTC 20 MAY/ After weeks of relative quiet, in the last 48 hrs RU forces register & expand significant gains west of Popsna. UKR loss of the heights above of Trypillia Volodymyrivka will significantly hamper defensive operations.

NBC news:

Quote:

the location of this advance is also important, he said, with the Russian forces now closer to encircling and cutting off the key city of Severodonetsk, the last major city under Ukrainian control in the Luhansk province — something they have been attempting to do for weeks, Horowitz said.

There is some genuinely worrisome news here.

Agatha · 20th May 2022, 03:56 PM

Please go to the continuation thread here.

Posted By:Agatha

20th May 2022, 12:18 PM	#3601
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: The Antimemetics Division Posts: 60,325	Originally Posted by eerok I'm wondering if the additional arms and materiel that should flow from the US following their lend-lease act could make the difference in pushing back the Russians, or are there other factors apart from supply? For example, Ukraine is reportedly losing fewer troops, and their morale and motivation are definitely higher than the Russians, but is it even remotely plausible for the Russians to persist until the Ukrainian forces are exhausted? They can throw a lot of fodder into this war, whereas Ukraine's population is a limited resource. I think ultimately the answer to this question is "accurate long-range artillery informed by high-quality reconnaissance." The more Russian formations Ukraine can destroy without putting more troops in harm's way, the better it is for them. NATO* can certainly supply world-class recon, on top of whatever else the Ukrainians have going on in that area. The west is also supplying more artillery pieces and ammo. Perhaps also aircraft. Airstrikes also being a kind of artillery, the next level would be for NATO* to start conducting airstrikes of its own.
	__________________ There is no Antimemetics Division.

20th May 2022, 12:57 PM	#3602
Captain_Swoop Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 43,373	Originally Posted by crescent Russia apparently pushed 10 km yesterday outside Popasna. That's more than just incremental. The last Ukrainian forces at Avozstal have been taken into custody, most of the remaining Russian forces in Mariupol will be pushed north. Perhaps not time to panic, but probably time to be concerned about the situation there. Ukraine really is losing ground in Donbass. It's true that it is just one region - but it is the region with the highest concentration of Ukrainian forces. Any loss there would be a major blow. Did they push or were they allowed? For example If ground is not good for defence then don't defend it, if your line has a 'bulge' then straighten it, if there is a natural defence line then move to it etc. If we learned anything from WW2 it is that fighting blindly for every inch of ground is a waste of men and resources.
	Last edited by Captain_Swoop; 20th May 2022 at 01:01 PM.

20th May 2022, 01:02 PM	#3603
The Great Zaganza Maledictorian Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 18,369	It might be time for Ukraine to invade Russia.
	__________________ "When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord doesn't work that way so I stole one and asked Him to forgive me." - Emo Philips

20th May 2022, 01:02 PM	#3604
Doubt Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 7,488	Originally Posted by eerok For example, Ukraine is reportedly losing fewer troops, and their morale and motivation are definitely higher than the Russians, but is it even remotely plausible for the Russians to persist until the Ukrainian forces are exhausted? They can throw a lot of fodder into this war, whereas Ukraine's population is a limited resource. Russia does not really have the fodder to throw at Ukraine. They just don't have the population that the Soviet Union had to throw at Germany. On top of that, Ukraine is fighting in a total war situation. They are mobilizing as much as is practical since they are fighting a war of national survival. Russia is fighting a limited war and cannot afford it even now. If they tried for a total war situation they would feel more than enough economic pain at home that would make the sanctions placed on them looks like a joke. That will remove the propaganda blitz effect on their own people and they will be forced to recognize that they are not winning. The technology used on both sides, even though the Russian stuff appears to suck, is still enough to make a war of attrition undesirable for both sides. But the Russian casualty rates are not sustainable and they are now stuck in an attrition loop. If they start throwing in under trained reservists and people taken off the street they won't get any better results. The Ukrainians need to work on bleeding the Russians dry. Retaking territory is secondary to that. But the do need to still hold the Russians back.
Doubt Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 7,488	__________________ 45 es un titere

20th May 2022, 01:21 PM	#3605
Jimbo07 Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 4,149	Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop Did they push or were they allowed? For example If ground is not good for defence then don't defend it, The line I heard is that this is deliberate, and that Ukraine is trading ground for time. Originally Posted by Doubt The Ukrainians need to work on bleeding the Russians dry. Retaking territory is secondary to that. But the do need to still hold the Russians back. This. So long as Russia is in Ukraine, they can always counter attack. One small piece of land goes one way, then the other. Rather than occupying a particular piece of ground, Ukraine needs to degrade Russia's ability to wage war (not because I want them to, but because they'll literally never be free if they don't).
Jimbo07 Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 4,149	__________________ This post approved by your local jPac (Jimbo07 Political Action Committee), also registered with Jimbo07 as the Jimbo07 Equality Rights Knowledge Betterment Action Group. Atoms in supernova explosion get huge business -- Pixie of key

20th May 2022, 01:58 PM	#3606
Dr.Sid Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Olomouc, Czech Republic Posts: 3,827	Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza It might be time for Ukraine to invade Russia. Not really. Major advantage of Ukraine is morale. That could change fast.

20th May 2022, 02:16 PM	#3607
Klimax NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ) Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9 Posts: 13,883	Originally Posted by Aridas Kharkiv, not Kherson. The Kherson front's been relatively stable, despite apparent efforts to change that from both sides. ... How did I got Kherson tehre and not Kharkiv I don't now. It wasn't even recent topic. Originally Posted by eerok I'm wondering if the additional arms and materiel that should flow from the US following their lend-lease act could make the difference in pushing back the Russians, or are there other factors apart from supply? For example, Ukraine is reportedly losing fewer troops, and their morale and motivation are definitely higher than the Russians, but is it even remotely plausible for the Russians to persist until the Ukrainian forces are exhausted? They can throw a lot of fodder into this war, whereas Ukraine's population is a limited resource. No. Phase 2 mobilization of Ukraine yielded about million of soldiers. First divisions should be already in Donbas. Compare that to Russian numbers.
	__________________ ModBorg Engine: Ibalgin 400

20th May 2022, 02:22 PM	#3608
crescent Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Colorado Posts: 4,951	Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop Did they push or were they allowed? For example If ground is not good for defence then don't defend it, if your line has a 'bulge' then straighten it, if there is a natural defence line then move to it etc. If we learned anything from WW2 it is that fighting blindly for every inch of ground is a waste of men and resources. This is a big bulge into Ukrainian lines, putting the main supply route into Severtdoneskt under Russian artillery fire. This isn't Ukraine pulling out of a salient, this is Russia pushing a big one deep into Ukrainian territory. Its true that Ukraine didn't contest those towns. It contested Popasna very hard though. There's a word used when enemy forces get past a strongly contested line and into an area where they face little resistance - breakout. It seems possible that Russia has broken through the line of Ukrainian defense and is now pushing forces through that gap. Here's one person suggesting concern: Quote: Should know more in the next 72 hours or so. If 🇷🇺 quickly continues its advance, 🇺🇦 will likely need to pull the majority of its forces out of Severnodonetsk. If not, there will be likely be a major fight for Bakhmut as both sides funnel remaining reserves into the area. another: Quote: POPSNA SALIENT /2045 UTC 20 MAY/ After weeks of relative quiet, in the last 48 hrs RU forces register & expand significant gains west of Popsna. UKR loss of the heights above of Trypillia Volodymyrivka will significantly hamper defensive operations. NBC news: Quote: the location of this advance is also important, he said, with the Russian forces now closer to encircling and cutting off the key city of Severodonetsk, the last major city under Ukrainian control in the Luhansk province — something they have been attempting to do for weeks, Horowitz said. There is some genuinely worrisome news here.